Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team

Brian Schmidt

Members
  • Content count

    288
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Brian Schmidt

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

2,801 profile views
  1. Key Documents to Stay Concealed?

    Agreed, James. I've always thought there is probably something pretty damning in those reports. Maybe not a smoking gun, but with operational files of Harvey, Phillips, Morales, etc., there's probably a lot for researching to dig their teeth into. Probably even a handful of shocking things even a lay person would understand. Why else would they create this spectacle and not release everything? It's infuriating nonetheless.
  2. The Umbrella Man Feature Film

    Paul, That's been my long standing belief as well. I'm agnostic as to whether the Umbrella Man was really Louie Steven Witt. I've done a bit research on him. He just died a few years back. I've interviewed some of his coworkers and his niece. His niece said he was a strange guy who didn't talk much. He worked for the Rio Grande Insurance Company, which had connections to Carlos Marcello (which is actually referenced in the movie), at the time of assassination. I checked his criminal record but it was clean. After that, he was a warehouse manager. I found a guy who worked for him but he said he never mentioned the Kennedy assassination or that he was there at all. The guy didn't find out he was the Umbrella Man until years later during the HSCA. Also, it turns out Witt was a union representative--so much for being such a right-winger like he said during his testimony (although to be fair, back in the day before the hyper polarization, some conservatives were union supporters).
  3. Edward Lansdale

    Ron, Lansdale and Harvey ran Mongoose and knew each other well, although they didn't have the greatest relationship.
  4. Thanks, Chris. It seems they've redone the whole collection and it's less user-friendly than it used to be. I remember being able to view the documents at ease but now you have to scroll through a whole series of documents just to get to the later years' correspondences. I found an interesting letter Allen Dulles sent to Charles on December 10, 1963: "Many thanks for your note of December 2. As you know, I tried to get you to tell you of my trip to Dallas and meeting with your brother and sister-in-law. The Mayor was busy with another meeting during my brief stay in Dallas. Since then there have been new tragedies and new problems, and I shall want to talk with you about them as soon as our Commission gets really organized. Clover and I are just back from a few days in Florida, which were interrupted by the first meeting of our Commission. In any event, we had several delightful days - and I had to give an address - at a beautiful resort called Ponte Verde, near Jacksonville. Clover joins me in sending Jacklyn and you all best wishes."
  5. Where specifically did you find the correspondence with Earle Cabell? When I search the Princeton Collection's correspondence section nothing comes up; all I can find is his correspondence with Charles.
  6. The Larry and Phil Show: i.e. Sabato and Shenon

    WhoWhatWhy recently had a good piece on this as well, which you may be aware of. It links an article on Kennedys and King in it. https://whowhatwhy.org/2017/08/08/politicos-challenge-jfk-orthodoxy-isnt/
  7. This is a good article by Bill Kelly about potential ties between Collins Radio and the assassination: http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2012/02/collins-radio-connections-to.html
  8. Yeah, sorry it my wording made it seem like he was an agent or acting in that capacity for that many years. Agreed that they do not last that many years. My point was more that he was in the community for a period of several decades and therefore may be privy to some rumors and secrets. And I'm not accusing Clapper directly, I'm just using him as an example of an establishment intelligence figure.
  9. Exatly, Jim. I was thinking of this question of agents and who would still need protecting after 54 years. It's obvious that, as Jim said, no agent or operation would still be around all this time later. Then I saw James Clapper on one of those talking head shows that he's always on and my thinking took a different angle. Clapper actually did start in military intelligence in 1963 and he just stopped serving as DNI this year. Obviously he had nothing to do with the assassination himself, but think of it this way: In the interview that Larry posted a few weeks ago with Gene Wheaton, he heard stories from Jenkins and Quintero about the operation in Dallas on a fairly regular basis. Granted he was good friends with these men, but think of the stories he told about spook cocktail parties where there was a sense of hubris in the air because these were the people running the secret government. You don't think there were rumors about Dallas and that more people in the intelligence community weren't "in the know" than were directly involved? Especially decades later when things settled down a bit. It really isn't that far fetched that the assassination may be something of an open secret to the intelligence community, which may be broader than the active participants but still a very small group (and I'm talking about the upper echelon and certain cliques, obviously not the entire community at large--I suspect the vast majority know nothing about it). This brings us to the documents themselves and those the intelligence community doesn't want released. I think there's an important fallacy in public perception that is reinforced by naive journalists regarding the documents. Most people think there is a smoking gun document that the CIA is fighting to keep secret. If such a document existed, it would likely have been destroyed by now, but that's not how secret organizations work anyway (although I don't preclude there being a handful of obviously damaging documents, like some dynamite in Oswald's tax returns, for example). Instead, there are operational documents that link individuals and projects together that researchers can get a more precise understanding of the context of the assassination. These documents only have meaning to a select group of people, like ones on this forum, who know pseudonyms and have an understanding of CIA operations, timelines of events, etc. If a lay person were to read a document of particular interest to the research community, they wouldn't even know its value. It's even likely that researchers on this forum know more about which documents may be potentially explosive, just by glancing at them, than would the modern day gatekeepers in the CIA or other agencies. So let's say - like my original example - that James Clapper has a general sense of what happened in Dallas and the clique that had it done. He has a vested interest in protecting the intelligence community and himself (while none of these guys would be directly implicated, it would still be embarrassing because the intelligence community is a generally small one and he would undoubtedly be associated with some of these people, by not that many degrees of separation). He may not know which exact documents would be explosive, but I'll bet he knows which roads he doesn't want people traveling down so as to open Pandora's box.
  10. According to this article, at least two federal agencies will make formal appeals to the White House to block the release of some of the files: https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/opinions/trump-has-a-chance-to-dispel-one-of-the-greatest-conspiracy-theories-in-us-history/2017/07/25/75a6f0bc-6e57-11e7-9c15-177740635e83_story.html
  11. Yuri Nosenko

    And how cavalier Helms was about Nosenko's torture during his HSCA testimony. Rep. Sawyer: Well, he was a human being, wasn't he? Helms: I believe so.
  12. AMHINT and the Assassination of JFK

    I believe Noemayr is Ross Crozier.
  13. I have not seen much discussion of Kerry Thornley on here and was curious to get members’ take on him. Was he entangled with elements of the conspiracy to be used perhaps as a backup patsy or was he simply one of the many coincidences surrounding Oswald’s activities prior to the assassination? As many of you know, Thornley knew Oswald from back in 1959 when they were stationed in MCAS El Toro in Santa Ana, CA. They became close associates by talking about philosophy and politics. Thornley famously published a book about Oswald – The Idle Warriors – before Kennedy’s assassination. Like Oswald, Thornley spent the summer of 1963 in New Orleans and consequently spent time in Dallas around the assassination, leaving Dallas a week after the assassination. He testified in front of the Warren Commission in May 1964. He became of interest to Jim Garrison upon Garrison’s reading of the Warren Commission report because Thornley was one of the few people who knew Oswald that vouched for his supposed communist sympathies. Garrsion would uncover supposed evidence that Thornley was associated with the same group in New Orleans – Bannister, Shaw, Ferrie, and Cubans – and that he frequently used a PO Box associated with these same individuals. Garrison also claimed that although Thornley usually wore his hair long, shortly before the assassination, he cut it short to match Oswald’s hair and bore a striking resemblance to Oswald. Garrison went as far as initially accusing Thornley of being complicit in the assassination, but soften his stance in later years. In 1965, Thornley published a book entitled Oswald that generally supported the view that Oswald was the lone assassin. However, later in life Thornley himself would claim there had been a conspiracy and that Oswald was a CIA asset. He also acknowledged there were many coincidences he was personally involved with and he may have been used unwittingly by the conspirators. Some of the claims he made included numerous meetings in New Orleans with Gary Kirstein and Slim Brooks, who both – like Thornley – disliked Kennedy. The subject of how one might assassinate Kennedy came up repeatedly. Thornley claimed Gary Kirstein was in fact E. Howard Hunt and that he knew a lot about secret CIA activities and predicted Richard Nixon’s eventual election to the presidency, the Vietnam War, 60’s counterculture, and a Manson-like figure, which made him think the CIA was somehow involved in these activities. He also said there were mob and Nazi connections to the assassination. Another remarkable coincidence is that in the mid-60’s he became friends with Johnny Roselli, but I am unsure of the context or extent of their relationship.
  14. Cord Meyer and the Assassination of JFK

    Plus, they had completely opposite politics, with Meyer being a liberal and Hunt a staunch conservative.
  15. Gene Wheaton

    This is excellent. Thanks for posting, Larry. I'd love to hear the other interviews with the guy in Minnesota that he references at the end. Wheaton's naming Jenkins and Quintero and the motives of the ground crew corroborates some of what we already know of the hit. When he says people in power had other reasons for getting rid of Kennedy, it implies the person orchestrating the ground level crew (perhaps Jenkins) was on orders from someone higher up and it wasn't as rogue as even some of the participants thought. Of course, we'll probably never know the connecting piece between the paramilitary people and the "political elite," but if we did I think it would give us a lot more insight. It could be Phillips, Harvey, or Shackley, but someone who stuck out to me that would be well placed in all of this is Henry Hecksher. If it were Hecksher, it may imply it was more of an officially sanctioned job than simply turning the gun on Kennedy for revenge.
×