Jump to content
The Education Forum
John Simkin

Who Killed JFK?: Poll and Discussion?

Recommended Posts

Clarence Douglass Dillon took Dillon, Read and Co. through the late nineteen thirties as V.P. and executive, from the Council on Foreign Relations he entered the Eisenhower Administration as a top domestic policy advisor and undersecretary of State. His interests, like Nelson Rockefeller's, in U.S. foreign policy centered on Latin America. Clarence Dillon, Douglass Dillon's father was enormously notorious in the early days of Dillon, Read and the Wall Street interests of this Republican helped embody John Kennedy's bipartisan, centrist conciliating approach.

Clarence Dillon pressed for tax cuts, and foreign export expansion. He was ambassador to France in 1950's during the Vietnamese and Algerian colonial denouement...

If the unspeakable truth of domestic American political violence is my general theme, and the theory that JFK's murder was effected by his militant reactionary opposition, I add a third plank... it was done under color of law, via secret and classified findings, ultimately authorized and implemented by Vice President Johnson and Treasury Secretary Dillon, as this is the only inductive and deductive model that explains Kennedy's administration, death, cover-up and the 25th amendment...I believe he was declared to have "incapacity" by a rising group inside the KGB, I mean the CIA, who got the support of Dillon, Johnson, and Hoover, using the plans and operations available to William Sullivan, Emory Roberts, Tracy Barnes, David A. Phillips and other high ranking US officials

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The military industrial complex is a theoretical political structure too large to act as a single agent in a murder. It is better to say that John Kennedy's Militant Reactionary Political Opposition (both in and out of offices of power) conspired on secret and spurious grounds, to carry out a coup d'etat. This has become the unspeakable truth of American Political violence and it is not a subject for polite discourse or civil society, apparently.

We now have a large number of responsible characters and we should link them in the overarching political structure described in 1965 in the Twenty-Fifth Amendment.

Edited by Shanet Clark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Question-

I read Jimmy Sutton/Files confession recently.

His story of firing a .222 Fireball mercury load from the

grassy knoll fence...badgeman...wouldn't the photos of JFK in the morgue

with the black triangle over his right eyebrow tie in with this...a black

triangle to cover the right front small caliber entry wound?

R. Groden published those photos, I believe.............

Shanet

Actually, I believe a mercury load would obliterate a small caliber entry wound. Here is the photo with the blackened triangle in the temple area, also showing what appears to be a small caliber entry wound just over the right eyebrow:

Shanet said: "......I've read Maheu's book, and the book taken from the Hughes notebooks, and if they were involved in Dallas they covered their tracks---Maheu moved in those mob/agency circles and probably knew stuff, but he wasn't a principal player, I don't think so..."

Knowing the stuff Maheu knew made him a prinicipal player, regardless of how remarkably he managed to keep his hands clean. Not only was Maheu the man sufficiently connected to both the Mob and CIA to bring them together, he was the closest person to Roselli, who spread into all aspects. When you read the years of FBI surveillance of Roselli, you see how prominant a role the Desert Inn in Las Vegas plays. By 1966, as we know, Howard Hughes was into his full-blown craziness hidden away on the top floor of the Desert Inn storing his urine in jars, with his only contact to his business empire being Maheu, who had a luxurious, air-curtained home right on the Desert Inn golf course. The FBI surveillance repeatedly records losing Roselli when he would be seen heading to the rear of the Desert Inn. During the post-Watergate disclosures, when the existence of the Glomar Explorer was revealed, the Hughes organization claimed it belonged to the CIA, and the CIA claimed it belonged to Hughes. At that point of the merger of the Mafia/CIA/Military Industrial Complex/National Security State, there was no longer a clear distinction between Hughes/Maheu and the government, while Maheu's active support for Roselli never dimmed. And don't forget that the principal reason given for the Watergate break-in was to find out what Larry O'Brien, recently retained by Hughes, and the Democrats knew about Nixon's long-term financial support from Hughes. The whole enchilada, beginning with the CIA's initial approach to the Mafia for an assassination capability, to JFK's betrayals and Roselli's alternative funding for anti-Castro efforts (including provision of Hughes' Sal Cay), to Dallas to Watergate, involved the personal relationship between Maheu and Roselli, and their mutual benefactor, the richest, craziest and probably most powerful man in the world, Howard Hughes.

Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tim

good posting...I agree with all those specifics, I had forgotten how tight Roselli and Maheu were...I'm still having trouble moving Hughes/Maheu up into a more directly causative role...just too many others ahead of them in line...and Larry O'brien/Hughes may have been a red herring thrown over the Watergate burglary.....I know Hughes PR/security man Robert Bennett had ties to Hunt and CIA (see Hougan's Secret Agenda and Colodny's Silent Coup) ... Hughes was a military contractor that benefitted from escalation in LAOS, CAMBODIA and VIETNAM, helicopters and tools, I believe, and the Glomar sunken Soviet sub hunt he participated in definitely shows a close association of CIA/MI and Hughes circa 1973...what a crazy bastard, and to be that powerful...always like your posts, thanks also for the overview on Wm. Tosh Plumlee's experience, that was very helpful.

ps. Those morgue pix are surely compromised, but thanks for refreshing my memory. Its all ambiguous, and meant to be.

Shanet

Edited by Shanet Clark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can you at least say how you get from MCone/Morales to Oswald, and how they set Oswald up?

I do not believe there is any existing evidence to take the matter above David Morales. It therefore is pure speculation on my part to say the assassination was ordered by the Military Industrial Complex. That is true of all theories concerning this aspect of the assassination.

However, there are several clues that enable us to point the finger at the Military Industrial Complex. Those involved not only killed JFK but planted information that implicated others in the conspiracy. The plotters did this for two reasons: (1) To guarantee that these people implicated would do all they could to cover up the crime. (2) To create confusion for those investigating the crime.

The plotters also left evidence that implicated LBJ, the CIA, the FBI and the Secret Service. All three organizations therefore took part in the cover up. They also implicated the Mafia by arranging for some of those who had part of Executive Action to be in Dallas that day. This strategy was very successful and since the 1970s the Mafia has been seen as the organizers of the assassination. In recent years, evidence has emerged that the people surrounding LBJ were also responsible.

There has also been evidence discovered linking the assassination to General Walker and the John Birch Society in Texas. Other information linked the plot to the American Communist Party and the Civil Rights Movement. Also implicated were the governments of the Soviet Union and Cuba. This has resulted in hundreds of books written about the case arguing strongly for different people being responsible for the assassination.

Who then ordered the assassination. The best way of finding an answer to this question is to look closely at the people and organisations implicated by the team run by David Morales. In theory, they can be eliminated from the investigation.

Another clue concerns what happened after the assassination. Those involved believed that the reason for this plot was that after the assassination, LBJ would order the invasion of Cuba. In fact, this was never the objective. It was part of the overall conspiracy to keep Castro in power. The presence of a communist state so close to the United States helped to reinforce the communist threat and the need for massive arms spending.

The Cubans would obviously feel betrayed when they realised Castro would not be toppled. Those Cubans who knew anything about the assassination had to be got rid of. In the period after the assassination of JFK the Cubans involved were sent on missions to Cuba where they were killed. (They were probably set up). This is what happened to Tony Cuesta. While in captivity he realised what had happened. A few Cubans remained. Some of these were the victims of hit men (who had no idea why they were killing them). Some managed to survive. Why? Maybe because they took out insurance. They let it be known that they had documented what happened. This information has been placed with lawyers, solicitors, etc., only to be opened in event of a suspicious death.

If it was the Military Industrial Complex that ordered the assassination of JFK, it was a great success. It achieved all its objectives. Rather than the end of the Cold War they got the Vietnam War and a rapid increase in arms spending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The military industrial complex, the CIA (rogue elements, Bush, Phillips, Lansdale, Cabell, etc), the Mafia, LBJ, J. Edgar Hoover, Texan Big Oil (Hunt, Murchison, Richardson, John De Menil, Byrd, Mecom, Bush), anti-Castro Cuban exiles, were all in this together. (Wim)

[[[[John, I am with Wim On this general picture...this is the CONSENSUS GROUP]]]]

I cannot conceive of all these organizations coming together to conspire to kill the president of the United States. They would know that it would only take one organization to betray the operation (and they all had good reason to hurt other organizations in the cabal).

[[[[i HATE TO CONCEIVE OF IT EITHER--Shanet}}}}

It is true that there is evidence to link all these groups and individuals to the assassination. ( !! ) However, that is not surprising as it was part of the original conspiracy to provide evidence that linked the assassination to these groups. This was done for two reasons: (1) to confuse the investigators and (2) to ensure that these groups participated in the cover-up.

 

{{{{TOO complex by far, a giant frame up!

Who can frame LBJ and Des Fitzgerald and J Edgar Hoover??}}}}}

This problem has been emphasised by the desire of some researchers to believe every bit of evidence that emerges that links any individual or organization to the assassination. This problem is made worse by linking all these evidence together. This results in developing a theory that says all these organizations were working together in a plot to kill JFK.

{{{{{Super-ordinal cause, where the Cabinet and VP were responding to Intelligence Report of Incapacity by JFK? WHAT IF IT WAS POLICY...a "finding"}}}}}

One of the reasons for this confusions is the failure to separate the plot and the cover-up. It is indeed true that several organizations were involved in the cover up. However, they were not working together on this. Each organization was seeking to protect itself. The original conspirators knew this would happened. That is the reason why they were implicated in the plot in the first place.

{{{{{{too complicated, denies agency to the participants.

athey weren't tricked into complicity,

they were participants and complicit accomplices.

Why? Because they were under orders from the Cabinet level political opposition

to John Kennedy, men willing to use their political offices and power baswes

for a coup detat under color of law.}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

Wim, if you really believe all these groups were involved in the plot to kill JFK, you will need to explain how it was organized. I don’t mean I want to hear about the evidence (I know all about that), just the practical details of how it was organized.

{{{{{{{TOP DOWN, Chain of command as seen in 25th amendment, Alpha 66

zero rifle and guatamala...}}}}}}}}}

In Cronies, renowned investigative reporter Robert Bryce illuminates how Texas turned its vast energy resources into political power, and how a small group of Texas corporations, lawyers and politicians use that power to protect and defend their own economic interests. Through an absorbing narrative that moves from the days of the oil boom, through the rise and reign of LBJ, to today, Bryce profiles the Texans and the Texas corporations who have wielded-and continue to wield-great power in America's domestic and foreign policy, including the Bushes, James A. Baker III, Halliburton, Baker Botts, Ray Hunt, Bell Helicopter, and more. He shows how massive transfers of wealth from the rest of the country to Texas have allowed the state to prosper. Cronies demonstrates how George W. Bush is the living embodiment of Texas' crony networks, and how those networks continue to play critical roles in the 21st century. (Lee)

I am convinced by this theory. I think that there is a good possibility that these wealthy Texas individuals provided some of the funding for the assassinations. However, I find it difficult to believe that these individuals would come anywhere near the plot itself. They would never have compromised themselves in anyway. A leading member of the Military Industrial Complex would have employed a paymaster to deal with Morales. In turn, the paymaster would have had dealings with these wealthy individuals in Texas. The fund might have been called “The Campaign Fund to Elect a Democrat President in 1964” (shades of Watergate here). However, these individuals would not have known any details of the plot. Or if it actually involved an assassination (probably thought it was part of a smear campaign). All they knew is that it involved LBJ becoming the next president of the United States. It is not even certain that the paymaster would have known what the money was for. All he knew was that Morales was being paid a large sum of money that had some connection to LBJ becoming the next president. I would not be surprised that part of Morales brief from the person who recruited him was to arrange for the death of the paymaster. It would be an interesting exercise to see which right-wing figure linked to the Military Industrial Complex died in the weeks following the assassination.

{{{{{{{{{It happened in texas, a texan benefitted but it was not initiated for this group alone.}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

John: Congratulations on your fine web offering -- a stellar addition to the ranks. That said, I've got to cast my lot with Wim in the current discussion on who killed JFK -- there are other options to consider aside from single-element thesis (i.e. CIA or FBI or Cuban Exiles or Mafia, etc.) It has been well-documented that these organizations and factions did and do not operate independently of one another. Dulles of the CIA could put out a call to Maheu of the Mil-Ind complex, who could put out a call to Roselli of the Mafia, which could connect with the Cuban exiles, who were connected with the CIA. (Bob Cox)

{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{Exactly, acting on orders from people like allen dulles, clarence dillon and cartha deloach....}}}}}}}}}}}}}

It is definitely true that the CIA worked closely with the Mafia in the various Executive Action programmes (something that JFK tried to stop). The CIA also definitely funded anti-Castro organizations and the FBI worked closely with extreme right-wing political groups. However, I do not believe these organizations were linked together in planning the assassinations.

David Morales planned the assassination. He was a CIA agent but this was not a CIA operation.

{{{{{{{{{{That link would be hard to

substantiate today. Or rather DE-LINKING}}}}}}}}}

Morales in turn recruited men who had worked for the Mafia (Herminio Diaz Garcia, John Martino) but it was not a Mafia operation. He also employed members of the anti-Castro Cuban community (Antonio Veciana, Eladio del Valle) but it was not a Alpha 66 operation. Although we can speculate, we will never know the name of the organization behind the assassination. Morales was the cut-out. Once he died in 1978 this became impossible to know.

As the KGB officers that had infiltrated the CIA were controlling Senator Barry Goldwater, an intelligence officer that they had targeted for political office, it made it look very much like the Military Industrial Complex was culpable. This is not a theory, it's a fact. (Tony Frank)

I would be very interested in hearing about these facts. I think it would be highly unlikely that Goldwater was a KGB officer. There is no evidence that the KGB worked in this way. The best evidence for the way the KGB worked concerns the UK. The KGB recruited left-wing, idealistic students in the UK in the early 1930s. They were then ordered to cease all left-wing activity. These men renounced their left-wing beliefs and then joined neo-fascist organizations. The did this because they knew how MI5 recruited its agents. They liked people from an establishment background who held neo-fascist views. They thought they were particularly safe with men who had flirted with left-wing ideas at university (they were the ones who appeared to be the most passionate in their hatred of communism). This is how they got people like Harold (Kim) Philby, Guy Burgess, Donald Maclean and Anthony Blunt into the British secret service.

I assume the KGB would have taken a similar approach in the United States. That is why is utterly ridiculous when right-wing political leaders have pointed figures at left-wing figures in the United States and accused them of being KGB agents. The real agents would have been people who appeared to have been non-political (although their would have been evidence of them being active in right-wing politics in their youth).

There is no evidence that Goldwater did not really believe what he said. In fact, if one looks at his background he had good reason to believe what he said. It would have been impossible to have “turned” Goldwater. They would have concentrated on the type of figures they recruited in the UK. Although, it has been said, that the KGB viewed the USA different from the UK. It was claimed that the best way to recruit KGB agents was via money rather than ideology. However, that was a risky business, as this sort of spy sells himself to the highest bidder. I don’t think Goldwater was in any need of money.

{{{{{{{{{{{{{Ive stated the same elsewhere, }}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

Can you also answer my question in the thread on Harrelson? (Wim)

As you know, we have this discussion several times about James Files. However, I will address it again.

My information is that James Files might well have been involved in the cover up of the assassination of the JFK. We also know that the conspirators successfully implicated his close friend, Charlie Nicoletti, in the assassination. However, I am told that Files was not recruited by David Morales to take part in the actual assassination. That involved Herminio Diaz Garcia (and others I am not allowed to mention). When it come down to it, you will believe your informants, and I will believe mine. However, my informants are not attempting to seek fame and money from their exploits. Nor are they in prison. These are some of the many reasons why I find their information more believable than of others so keen to confess their role in the assassination of JFK.

{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{{Herminio Diaz Garcia and David Morales are not the top of the chain of command they are at the bottom!

Even if you know who this team is  it doesn't change all the other co-ordinated

events, this was a large and lengthy project, with highest authority, short of the Oval Office, by self appointed keepers of the Oval Office.

I respect John simkin very much, but my comments are along the lines of Ron Ecker, Wim, AJ and many other interested critical thinkers, this goes up, up, up

and involves many, many people both criminal and clearanced, following orders.

shanet}}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

If Barr McClellan can seriously charge Lyndon Johnson with this assassination, I would hasten to add three significant points-

Lyndon Johnson participated and benefitted, but did not initiate or co-ordinate the murder in Dallas, it was brought to him as a fait accompli which he accepted - which is different from a plan to save Lyndon from the Bobby Baker and Billie Sol Estes scandals...

If Lyndon Baines is seriously engaged, I insist on reviewing Clarence D. Dillon's actions as Treasury Secretary and behaviour as the top of the 1963 Secret Service's command structure.

When I say militant reactionaries killed John F. Kennedy, I don't mean low level criminals and mercenaries: I am talking about people in high offices, like Douglas Dillon, J.E. Hoover and Maxwell Taylor, men like Robert Lovett and Allen Dulles...

The 25th amendment sheds light on the VP and Cabinet secretary's role.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PR/security man Robert Bennett had ties to Hunt and CIA (see Hougan's Secret Agenda and Colodny's Silent Coup (Shanet)

Shanet, this being Sen Bennett the conservative from Utah?

Edited by Chris Cox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PR/security man Robert Bennett had ties to Hunt and CIA (see Hougan's Secret Agenda and Colodny's Silent Coup (Shanet)

Shanet, this being Sen Bennett the conservative from Utah?

Chris, I have wondered the same thing but never tracked it down.

They have similar agendas, age and profiles, but I am not sure they

are one and the same. This is a lame answer, but I'll look into it more.

Keep posting,

Shanet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was rhetorical q, unless I'm confused by my own scattered research-which is often! Google the Senator and "deep throat"--there's a Washington Post article on same. I think you will find he's the same guy. Interesting, isn't it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whoever was Lee Harvey Oswald's handler.

On November 5, 1963 FBI agent Hosty reported to the State Department where LHO was working. On Nov. 8, 1963 the route past the TSBD was decided. Whatever else we may believe, Oswald had to be there for the assassination to be pulled off as it was. Access to the information was available only "IF" Oswald was more than what the Warren Commission portrayed him to be.

Find the handler and you will find the key....I suspect that Maxwell Taylor would be a prime candidate.

Jim Root

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim

I suspect that Maxwell Taylor is too high up the food chain to be considered Oswald's handler, although he may have been his pawn.

George DeMorenschildt or Howard Hunt, they are prime candidates for this role.

Shanet

Whoever was Lee Harvey Oswald's handler. 

On November 5, 1963 FBI agent Hosty reported to the State Department where LHO was working.  On Nov. 8, 1963 the route past the TSBD was decided.  Whatever else we may believe, Oswald had to be there for the assassination to be pulled off as it was.  Access to the information was available only "IF" Oswald was more than what the Warren Commission portrayed him to be.

Find the handler and you will find the key....I suspect that Maxwell Taylor would be a prime candidate.

Jim Root

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
George DeMorenschildt or Howard Hunt, they are prime candidates for this role.

Find the handler and you will find the key....I suspect that Maxwell Taylor would be a prime candidate.

George DeMorenschildt handed Oswald off to David Phillips in April, 1963, IMO. DeMorenschildt leads in every direction, much like Maheu. The relationship between Angleton and Allen Dulles is written all over these others. Phillips was Bishop to Hunt's Knight. Some of this latest secret society stuff strikes me as paranoid, but the Yale presence in all of this, including with Bissell, the initiator of Executive Action, is very strong.

Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The "deep throat" angle is quite interesting, in that if any of the three leading suspects were exposed by Woodward, it would send major ripples through the Republican Party, which has conveniently forgotten that Nixon WAS a crook. Bennett is currently a right-wing Senator from Utah, of all places. Haig was Nixon's chief of staff and Secretary of State under Reagan. Fred Fielding was Reagan's attorney, adviser to the current President, and member of one of the 9/11 Panels. I suspect it was Haig.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The "deep throat" angle is quite interesting, in that if any of the three leading suspects were exposed by Woodward, it would send major ripples through the Republican Party, which has conveniently forgotten that Nixon WAS a crook.  Bennett is currently a right-wing Senator from Utah, of all places.  Haig was Nixon's chief of staff and Secretary of State under Reagan. Fred Fielding was Reagan's attorney, adviser to the current President, and member of one of the 9/11 Panels.  I suspect it was Haig.

Recent research shows that Woodward cooked up a cinematic character from a composite of sources when it became clear Hollywood was interested in All the Presidents Men, the DT references are mutually exclusive and apparently fictional. I believe he was getting information from Haig and possibly Mark Felt at FBI (Sullivan? Colby? Buchanan? who knows what tidbits flowed his way).

The Final Days is almost all Haig material. Haig was apparently protecting his role as Kissinger's wiretapper #1. Woodward was a top executive briefer when he was in the Navy and had murky ties to intelligence. The whole Admiral Moorer/Yeoman Radford spy case (where the Joint Chiefs were stealing National Security Advisor Kissinger's paperwork) ties in with this. (Secret Agenda, Silent Coup)

I totally agree with Tim's post, Bishop (Phillips) played a role, and Dulles was obviously involved. SInce Oswald was Marines, the ONI played some role in all this as well...........but DeMorenschildt was on him like stink on S#@$......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shanet

Being at the top of the food chain allows you digest the most infromation....and to choose your meals.

Jim Root

Jim

I suspect that Maxwell Taylor is too high up the food chain to be considered Oswald's handler, although he may have been his pawn.

George DeMorenschildt or Howard Hunt, they are prime candidates for this role.

Shanet

Whoever was Lee Harvey Oswald's handler. 

On November 5, 1963 FBI agent Hosty reported to the State Department where LHO was working.  On Nov. 8, 1963 the route past the TSBD was decided.  Whatever else we may believe, Oswald had to be there for the assassination to be pulled off as it was.  Access to the information was available only "IF" Oswald was more than what the Warren Commission portrayed him to be.

Find the handler and you will find the key....I suspect that Maxwell Taylor would be a prime candidate.

Jim Root

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×