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
Paz Marverde

Michele Metta interviews Jim DiEugenio on JFK, the CIA, Shaw, and Italy

Recommended Posts

14 hours ago, Gene Kelly said:

I will forever view the Garrison effort in a much different light. 

Gene,

Garrison was the one giving the real key to understand what's behind JFK assassination, as Jim DiEugenio says in his interview I published here, and in his beautiful book. How much Garrison was right is further demonstrated by Michele Metta's research. In fact, as said at the end of this same interview, Metta finally found out the Centro Mondiale Commerciale-Permindex papers. They show totally new, impressive evidence. They show that Clay Shaw, in CMC, was surrounded by an astonishing number of people connected to CIA's dirty works, to the so called Strategy of Tension, and to P2, a fascist masonic lodge headed by Licio Gelli and implicated in operations that killed so many innocent men, women, and children, and highly resembling the aspects of Operation Northwoods. And they show the existence of a pact between freemasonry and CIA against JFK. A pact directly involving CMC members, as you can see watching this documentary:

I please also recommend this video:

So, we all have an infinite debt towards Jim Garrison and his legacy 

Edited by Paz Marverde

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paz and everyone else reading - before I ask a pointed question I want to say that I am intensely interested in CMC Permindex as it relates to JFK. The Italians who are still searching for who was behind the strategy of tension and the terrorist acts on their soil set an example for us. As a result of recent court cases new documents have been uncovered which reveal deeper connections between CIA, Italian and European fascists, and Mossad. Garrison discovered a link between the New Orleans sojourn of LHO and Clay Shaw almost by accident. His case was thwarted at every turn, and unlike the Italians we have been unable to bring new cases to our courts.

Many of us, most in fact, do not think Oswald was guilty. So although we can see the links between our patsy, or FBI informant, or ?, and Shaw we have not drawn clear lines from Shaw and Banister and Ferrie to the actual assassins. I’d like to see this discussion move in that direction. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎29‎/‎2017 at 9:08 PM, Gene Kelly said:

Ron:

I'm not a communications expert, but my kids are, and have degrees in the subject.  Today, the idea of magazines and newspapers are all but obsolete. So are the classic venues of TV "specials" and informative news. Talk radio and reality TV are becoming old school (quickly). The new generation wants their information in short sounds "bites" (texts, tweets,  hash tags).  The stories are broken on Facebook and Twitter ... not NBC or the Washington Post.  

There is no such thing as Drew Pearson or George Lardner ... Charlie Rose, Garrison Keillor and Matt Lauer are no longer respectable.  Dan Rather, Brian Williams .... we no longer look for the "anchors" like Walter Cronkite. No longer do we blindly trust that 60 Minutes and Newsweek are infallible. The NY Times and Wall Street Journal are for our grandparents and people over 70.  I still read Rolling Stone ... but not for the philosophical truth or profound insight.  Not sure what the modern-day version of Mockingbird looks like, but its a different game today.   No one has the patience to read a book; nor do they send letters/memoranda.  No one writes (or mails) letters anymore... interviews are scripted, rehearsed and meaningless (i.e. not believable).  The truth comes to us on body cams, cell phone videos and sound bites on Action news at 11pm.  

Gene

Believe me, I understand technology and the media that it encompasses has passed me by along time ago.  I don't text or tweet.  A dinosaur.  My own daughter, a high school teacher in a big city will attest.  I realize sound bites dominate, my four year old grandson zones out on a tablet if you let him.  My point was regarding Mockingbird is that corporate media, where official "news" comes from was and still is owned and controlled by a very few who try to tell us what we think we know.  And succeed with much of the masses. 

Last year discussing the times of it with my daughter I pissed her off by putting my hand over her cell phone while I showed her this video trying to explain what I was talking about.  I think it relates to the aftermath of the JFK Assassination.  It's worth looking at once a year to keep History in perspective imho.  Happy New Year to all.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=four+dead+in+ohio&view=detail&mid=F2B1EA0873D62619565CF2B1EA0873D62619565C&FORM=VIRE

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW, I should add that if I was redoing that book in a revision I would have to include the stuff that was unearthed up in Canada through the Bloomfield archives, and also what Metta found in Italy.

So interesting that Angleton helped the Borghese family after WW II to escape Nuremberg, and that Clay Shaw had the princess' name and address in his notebook. You know that Kennedy-WIlson-FDR liberal.  Who never worked for the CIA.  And did not know Ferrie or Oswald.  And never visited Clinton. And never used that alias Bertrand.

When you lie on the stand like that, over and over, about material points, then what is one to think?

But, I have to also say, the stuff that Garrison uncovered but could not introduce in court because Banister and Ferrie were dead was really fascinating. I mean about Ferrie calling up people in the CAP and looking for that picture of Oswald.  And Banister complaining about Oswald putting his address on the flyers. 

A good researcher named Wallace Milam, who bowed out of the field after he got married, but who had an open mind about Garrison, once asked me to meet him at a Dallas conference and bring some of the most relevant documents that the ARRB had declassified from the Garrison investigation. 

As he was reading them over lunch, he kept on looking at me, and raising his eyebrows, looking back down, he would look up again,raise his eyebrows etc etc.  Finally when he was done, he said, "Garrison had stuff like this, and he put on that weak case in court?"

I told him that 1.) Many of his witnesses were badgered and intimidated and actually physically attacked e.g. Nagell had a grenade thrown at him, and 2.) With Ferrie and Banister dead, it limited his ability to prove a conspiracy.  As many here likely know, the rules of evidence change in a conspiracy case.  It is much easier to introduce evidence and to have it stand against a co conspirator in those kinds of cases.

But clearly, Garrison could have nailed Shaw on several perjury charges, but as I show in the book, that whole hearing was turned upside down due to a couple of hidden relationships.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jim:

You read my mind ...  in that it would be excellent to see another edition of Destiny, with the latest insights and information.  Although AARB was disappointing and fell short, the release of records still holds some limited promise.   Books such as David Talbot's Devil's Chessboard are slowly exposing the myths of 20th Century personages like the Dulles brothers.  My Christmas present was the original edition, so I need to get the 2013 version with AARB information added.  My experience has been that the JFK story is one that is best told and understood by continuing to add information, for perspective.  My best analogy is one of those very large puzzles that one lays on a table and pieces together.

Speaking for myself, I get a little more knowledgeable and better informed each year ... its as though one never stops learning about the nuances and details.  The Garrison probe is a good example, where it took me a long time to see more clearly what was going on. Today, I am less impressed about Bannister, Shaw and Ferrie (who always seemed fishy and complicit) and more enlightened by the punitive media onslaught and active FBI interference (including overt falsification of evidence).  I've always been drawn to the critical political and foreign policy backdrops, and how controversial/unpopular (in retrospect) JFK's policies actually were ... so against the grain of the Cold War architects.  And the existence (even dominance) of apolitical right-wing entities like PERMINDEX.  These are not the stories one easily finds in history textbooks or the History Channel. 

There are still angles to this New Orleans saga that baffle me: who really was this Oswald character (especially in light of the information from John Armstrong's work);  why were so many prominent researchers (Weisberg, Meagher, Lifton, to name a few) alienated by Garrison, so much so that they chastised him publically; what to  make of Walter Sheridan's betrayal; why did those agencies fight so hard to protect their reputations (what were they really hiding)?  I will share a comment that a former HSCA investigator shared with me, when I asked the obvious (20 years ago), namely why not just let the story be told; he responded: "what makes you think that's the worst thing they ever did?"  I think you phrased it best, in characterizing Garrison's task.  It was the DA and people of New Orleans who were deprived of a fair trial.  He was heroic and courageous.  

Best,

Gene

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/30/2017 at 9:27 AM, James DiEugenio said:

Paul:

What do you mean when you say "that actual assassins"?

Jim - The question is who hired the shooters? We can see links between Oswald and Garrison’s cast of characters, but if Oswald was not a shooter, was it this same cast that planned the assassination and provided the fire power? What was it that Garrison uncovered? Hope the question isn’t clueless. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks again Gene, but definitely get the 2013 edition.

 

Paul, I think that as far as the plot goes, what Garrison uncovered was the ground level of the New Orleans part of the conspiracy.  Once Oswald had been set up with all that communist Castro  FPCC stuff, what was then necessary was to put together the whole MC illusion about the in transit visa from Cuba to Russia, and then send him back to Dallas.  

Garrison, BTW, as I say in the 2013 version of the book, was the first critic to point out how important the MC part of the plot was.  He compared it to Hamlet capturing the conscience of the king with his play within the play.

But you can go to many other things also that JG was the first with, e.g. the whole Vietnam angle for starters.

As far as the mechanics of the plot, it was as stated above. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Jim - The question is who hired the shooters? 

The shooters, Anti-Castro Cubans, did the ground work and the shooting for free. Their payback was supposed to be a Cuban invasion. Conspiracy was buried and they got double-crossed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also say that -- as I read more and learn - the FBI seems hopelessly compromised.  Their extensive manipulation of the evidence (and witnesses) comes across as fighting for their agency lives.  I sense that they, too, were double-crossed, and put in a very embarrassing position.  After the fact, they had to play a double role of investigating (their conventional role) while also fiercely protecting themselves, for fear of exposing the true nature of and close relationship to Oswald.  I recall a comment about the Mauser-Carcano controversy, that this cheap and unreliable Italian carbine was introduced into the plot in order to "embarrass" the FBI.   In the context of PERMINDEX, this rifle somehow has some underlying significance or symbolism that I haven't yet figured out.   The official designation in Italian is simply called "Modello"  and the symbolic murder weapon was used extensively by Italian (and German) troops in WW II and among other places Algeria ...and that the CE 2766 weapon was a kind designed for the elite units of Mussolini.  Shades of SIFAR, Harvey and Clair Booth Luce.  And, who was it that stated that the key to the plot was to be found in Montreal, and Empire Wholesale Sporting Goods LTD?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Century Firearms Manufacturing co. In Vermont was, I believe, linked to the Montreal gun smuggling and importation business, and somehow linked to the assassination.

I think it was Gerry Patrick Hemming who claimed the key to the assassination would be found in Montreal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly right, Mike ... form a July 2012 Forum thread by Accogli Claudio:

The information about Empire Wholesale Sporting Goods coincides with information that the late Gerry Hemming emailed to a researcher. Hemming told him that - to discover where Oswald's pistol and rifle actually came from - he needed to forget about Klein's and Seaport Traders, and instead concentrate on a single source in Montreal.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

Century Firearms Manufacturing co. In Vermont was, I believe, linked to the Montreal gun smuggling and importation business, and somehow linked to the assassination.

I think it was Gerry Patrick Hemming who claimed the key to the assassination would be found in Montreal.

In Franklin County, a Global Arms Dealer Quietly Makes a Killing 

https://www.sevendaysvt.com/vermont/in-franklin-county-a-global-arms-dealer-quietly-makes-a-killing/Content?oid=2242701

 

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/gunrunners-mexico/vermont/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_International_Arms

https://www.centuryarms.com/

http://jfklancer.com/carcano_twin.html

 

 

Edited by Roger DeLaria

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Jim - The question is who hired the shooters? We can see links between Oswald and Garrison’s cast of characters, but if Oswald was not a shooter, was it this same cast that planned the assassination and provided the fire power? What was it that Garrison uncovered? Hope the question isn’t clueless. 

Of course the question isn't clueless, Paul.

There is a widespread un-examined assumption that the personnel assigned to sheep-dip and assassinate Oswald were the same guys who arranged the military style ambush in Dealey Plaza.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Thanks again Gene, but definitely get the 2013 edition.

 

Paul, I think that as far as the plot goes, what Garrison uncovered was the ground level of the New Orleans part of the conspiracy.  Once Oswald had been set up with all that communist Castro  FPCC stuff, what was then necessary was to put together the whole MC illusion about the in transit visa from Cuba to Russia, and then send him back to Dallas.  

Garrison, BTW, as I say in the 2013 version of the book, was the first critic to point out how important the MC part of the plot was.  He compared it to Hamlet capturing the conscience of the king with his play within the play.

But you can go to many other things also that JG was the first with, e.g. the whole Vietnam angle for starters.

As far as the mechanics of the plot, it was as stated above. 

 

Which plot?  The one to kill Kennedy or the one to kill Oswald?

Do you believe that if Oswald had stayed in bed 11/22/63 Kennedy wouldn't have been shot?

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

×