Jump to content
The Education Forum
Sign in to follow this  
George Sawtelle

Daniel Sheehan flow chart of the Kennedy assassination

Recommended Posts

www.youtube.com/watch?v=jU3FcEdCl0w

Forces, organizations, and men aligned against Kennedy in 1963. Covers almost all entities whose interests were in conflict with Kennedy's efforts for peace. 

Notice all the lines emanating from Allen Dulles. According to Sheehan Dulles was the man the elite selected to do difficult projects because he could get things done. IMO, the man who originated the plot to kill Kennedy can be narrowed down to Dulles. Sheehan provides a good explanation of the flowchart in the youtube video.

For your information

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It would be interesting to analyze which names and powers would be on and off this board a decade before and a decade after.  A study of power and its conduits.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, George Sawtelle said:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=jU3FcEdCl0w

Forces, organizations, and men aligned against Kennedy in 1963. Covers almost all entities whose interests were in conflict with Kennedy's efforts for peace. 

Notice all the lines emanating from Allen Dulles. According to Sheehan Dulles was the man the elite selected to do difficult projects because he could get things done. IMO, the man who originated the plot to kill Kennedy can be narrowed down to Dulles. Sheehan provides a good explanation of the flowchart in the youtube video.

For your information

Dulles slept-walked thru the Bay of Pigs, totally clocked out.

Who would set up family friends of their girlfriend as handlers of a Presidential assassin?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Dulles slept-walked thru the Bay of Pigs, totally clocked out.

Who would set up family friends of their girlfriend as handlers of a Presidential assassin?

Agreed, Cliff, 

Your point agrees-well with Dulles being sheep-dipped rather than complicit in the Assassination. Thus he was forced into the cover-up, and therefore complicit in that. 

I believe that Dulles, and Angleton, were stovepiped out of, and insulated from, the assassination operation. Yet both were, through intrigue, facing the possibility of being implicated in that operation, thus ensuring their participation in the cover-up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/1/2017 at 10:57 PM, Cliff Varnell said:

Dulles slept-walked thru the Bay of Pigs, totally clocked out.

Who would set up family friends of their girlfriend as handlers of a Presidential assassin?

I've said this elsewhere: don't forget that after the war, Dulles sent protege Noel Field on a liberal-politics fool's errand to Moscow, a Dulles experiment that got Field arrested and imprisoned for several years.  Dulles failed to discourage Field's family from going to Moscow to plead for his release, and they ended up imprisoned also.

I think David Talbot's recent book, among other sources, demonstrated that Dulles did anything but "sleepwalk" in the months after his resignation, and on the assassination weekend.  Someone had to direct CIA's covert policy-making during the remainder of the Kennedy administration, and the money powers dictated that it wouldn't be the puppet McCone, nor yet the future regent Dick Helms.

I believe that when Dulles snickered that "that little Kennedy" had imagined himself to be a "god" in this anti-democratic universe, Dulles was challenging and dismissing Kennedy's right to usurp the power of the true money gods of the age, and of ages past in the twentieth century, whom Dulles served more pragmatically than JFK.  Dulles, who declared that no substantial body of Americans would read the Warren Report, may have felt an omniscient security in using the Paines, who would have a position to protect - and in Ruth's case, have a blind loyalty to the system that prospered her family - as handlers for the Oswalds.  Dulles may have felt also that the Paines were the most trustworthy and obedient operatives under these circumstances.  Perhaps he also looked at Michael Paine as another Noel Field - worthy of being used and duped because of his suspect political stance, and in the end disposable if he caused any friction.

It is telling that as soon as Dulles could no longer physically rule, his long-suffering wife threw a party in their home while he languished upstairs in his own filth and developing pneumonia, until the guests sensed something was amiss and forced open the locked bedroom door to get him to the hospital.  I wonder how Clover Dulles was repaid for giving him his comeuppance -- nobody has researched that.

The Oswalds, the Paines, the Dulleses (and Allen's siblings), the Kennedys, even the Fieldses -- players in a behind-the-scenes tragedy of families, high and low.

Edited by David Andrews

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Daniel Sheehan has my profound respect for the good work he has done and continues to do. Anyone have a different take on him?

George - I wish you YouTube link was an actual link, but thanks for posting it. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Michael. I’ve seen a few of these classroom presentations by Sheehan, and they are long but interesting. I wish I could remember which Iran Contra lecture blew my mind. I’m sure I posted it here at some point. The main hing Imremember about it was that there was a direct link between Miguel Nazar Haro of the DFS and a South American Nazi compound. Sheehan adds his personal interactions in the halls of power to his stories.

Edited by Paul Brancato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

Agreed, Cliff, 

Your point agrees-well with Dulles being sheep-dipped rather than complicit in the Assassination. Thus he was forced into the cover-up, and therefore complicit in that. 

I'm  having a hard time with this for one reason...Kennedy fired him. How in the  world was an ex CIA employee brought back to work on the commission  overseeing the investigation of his ex bosses murder?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, David Andrews said:

I've said this elsewhere: don't forget that after the war, Dulles sent protege Noel Field on a liberal-politics fool's errand to Moscow, a Dulles experiment that got Field arrested and imprisoned for several years.  Dulles failed to discourage Field's family from going to Moscow to plead for his release, and they ended up imprisoned also.

I think David Talbot's recent book, among other sources, demonstrated that Dulles did anything but "sleepwalk" in the months after his resignation, and on the assassination weekend.  Someone had to direct CIA's covert policy-making during the remainder of the Kennedy administration, and the money powers dictated that it wouldn't be the puppet McCone, nor yet the future regent Dick Helms.

I don't buy it.  Looks to me the powers that be in the Kennedy administration were Robert Lovett and Joe Kennedy -- both hardcore enemies of Allen Dulles.

Robert Lovett got Dean Rusk and McGeorge Bundy their jobs, and those two guys guaranteed the failure of the Bay of Pigs.

Looks to me like they wanted Dulles out, and Richard Helms in.

And that's exactly what happened.

Talbot describes Dulles sleep-walking thru the BOP.

Quote

I believe that when Dulles snickered that "that little Kennedy" had imagined himself to be a "god" in this anti-democratic universe, Dulles was challenging and dismissing Kennedy's right to usurp Dulles' own position a servant to the true money gods of the age, and of ages past in the twentieth century.  Dulles, who declared that no substantial body of Americans would read the Warren Report, may have felt an omniscient security in using the Paines, who would have a position to protect - and in Ruth's case, have a blind loyalty to the system that prospered her family - as handlers for the Oswalds. 

And so he put only one degree of separation between himself and the handlers of an alleged Presidential assassin?

What if Oswald had been gunned down soon after Kennedy and portrayed as a Red agent?    Imagine the scrutiny the Paines would have gone thru.

You think Dulles volunteered to put himself that close to such a potential mess?

Nah...

 

Edited by Cliff Varnell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

Agreed, Cliff, 

Your point agrees-well with Dulles being sheep-dipped rather than complicit in the Assassination. Thus he was forced into the cover-up, and therefore complicit in that. 

Looks that way to me.  They put the old bird on the back-up patsy chain along with the Paines.

Quote

I believe that Dulles, and Angleton, were stovepiped out of, and insulated from, the assassination operation. Yet both were, through intrigue, facing the possibility of being implicated in that operation, thus ensuring their participation in the cover-up.

I think Angleton was a top perp in the Oswald Assassination, not the Kennedy Assassination.

Separate operations coordinated from on high.

Edited by Cliff Varnell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

I don't buy it.  Looks to me the powers that be in the Kennedy administration were Robert Lovett and Joe Kennedy -- both hardcore enemies of Allen Dulles.

Robert Lovett got Dean Rusk and McGeorge Bundy their jobs, and those two guys guaranteed the failure of the Bay of Pigs.

Looks to me like they wanted Dulles out, and Richard Helms in.

And that's exactly what happened.

Talbot describes Dulles sleep-walking thru the BOP.

And so he put only one degree of separation between himself and the handlers of an alleged Presidential assassin?

What if Oswald had been gunned down soon after Kennedy and portrayed as a Red agent?    Imagine the scrutiny the Paines would have gone thru.

You think Dulles volunteered to put himself that close to such a potential mess?

Nah...

 

I'll take your first point under consideration and give it further study.

As far as the Paines - whoever might have directed them later, they would have been brought in as Dulles-Bancroft associates.  If they continued under other guidance, it's for the same reasons they got in.  Michael was a political adventurer and something of a climber.  Ruth was a blind patriot - a past thread on this forum discussed someone at CIA categorizing her as such, and she proved it with her Central America stoolie act.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, George Sawtelle said:

Cliff

Sorry, no disrespect towards you,  but I'll take Talbot's word over yours as to Dulles being the CEO of the Kennedy assassination.

George, your faux demure to Cliff is weak. It was an unnecessary and disrespectful stab at Cliff. Your belief that Dulles was the "CEO" of the assassination is clear to anyone who pays any attention to your plentiful surmises. Indeed you have said as much in this thread. To say that you accept a published researcher over a forum member is unnecessarily disrespectful. Hell, I would accept a conclusion arrived-at by DVP over anything that you offer.

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
Sign in to follow this  

×