Jump to content
The Education Forum
James DiEugenio

The KGB and the JFK case

Recommended Posts

Paul, I would indeed agree that OAS was factionalized.  It is a matter of record that one of the main elements of OAS outreach in 1963 was to the CIA and to Angleton in order to promote the view that the regime in Paris was so thoroughly infiltrated by Soviet and communist influence that it was totally untrustworthy.  Certainly that was a view that Angleton was eager to accept. That faction of the OAS was interested in gaining legitimacy and traction with the American government, focused on increasing a distance from DeGaulle. 

My concern was with the much more sweeping long term views in the article Steve posted, not in the specifics you mentioned.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 6/8/2018 at 11:02 PM, Paul Brancato said:

Did you read or watch Newman on this subject? Mr. Graves mentioned it a few times and I took his word for it. But I would like to dig in a bit. Do you have a link?

I actually have the clips archived but i converted them to audio to listen to. (I will usually, and subsequently) view the actual videos. Sorry about the late reply Paul. I have listened to all 3-4 parts about 3 times now and will even moreso.

21 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

I’ll have to revisit Destiny Betrayed. Why do you think it’s BS? It’s an odd story because it’s hard to imagine Texas right wingers meeting with DeGaulles people. Maybe with OAS. And that might be the real story.

i think Gene answered Steve’s question about Angleton and DeVosjoli. 

Well I guess it would be just as strange as Cuban Exiles meeting with extreme right wingers such as Walker, et al. Perhaps its about the common purpose in all the mess.

Edited by B. A. Copeland

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, B. A. Copeland said:

I actually have the clips archived but i converted them to audio to listen to. (I will usually, and subsequently) view the actual videos. Sorry about the late reply Paul. I have listened to all 3-4 parts about 3 times now and will even moreso.

Well I guess it would be just as strange as Cuban Exiles meeting with extreme right wingers such as Walker, et al. Perhaps its about the common purpose in all the mess.

I’ve watched part 1 and 2 and posted about it. Fascinating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

My concern was with the much more sweeping long term views in the article Steve posted, not in the specifics you mentioned.

 

Larry,

 

I wasn't saying that I agree with them, I was just trying to caution people against painting the OAS with too broad a brush.

I think the statements in the Global Research article that, "Upon learning that the intelligence groups controlled by the Division Five of the FBI in the headquarters of the NATO organization had planned all of the attempts of his life, DeGaulle was inflamed"; and,

"The Defense Intelligence Agency, the intelligence arm of all armed forces in the United States and Division Five, the counter-espionage agency for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, were both found to have been the controlling agencies in NATO directing the assassination attempts on De Gaulle’s life."

are naive and simplistic and smack of Alex Jones and Infowars.

 

I agree with Souetre. A toothless, discredited and impotent DeGaulle would have served the long term goals of the OAS far better than a dead one. Like I said, assassinations have a way of making martyrs out of people. If you are looking for assassins, I would look more to people like Yves Guillou, aka Yves Guerin-Serac or Andre Canal.

 

Steve Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand Steve but I've been running into so many excerpts from sources which have clear political agendas that I've become sort of obsessive about balance (heck, I even got into an online joust about Tilapia last night).  Its sort of humorous that anyone could assert that the DIA,  which was only legally created in October 1961, could have had its act together well enough plus have foreign assets in place  to control NATO in assassination plots against DeGaulle in 62/63.

Your more balanced take on the OAS is certainly one I support, it was more of an anti regime, pro-colonial social network than a unified operational body.  There are some great sources on the OAS and its activities in Algeria as well as its abortive military activities.  Anyone who has SWHT 2010 might want to check out what I did find on Soutre and Mertz and OAS contacts with the CIA in 1963 as well as what the context of heroin smuggling into Canada - which was part of the picture for both men.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Larry Hancock said:

I understand Steve but I've been running into so many excerpts from sources which have clear political agendas that I've become sort of obsessive about balance (heck, I even got into an online joust about Tilapia last night).  Its sort of humorous that anyone could assert that the DIA,  which was only legally created in October 1961, could have had its act together well enough plus have foreign assets in place  to control NATO in assassination plots against DeGaulle in 62/63.

Your more balanced take on the OAS is certainly one I support, it was more of an anti regime, pro-colonial social network than a unified operational body.  There are some great sources on the OAS and its activities in Algeria as well as its abortive military activities.  Anyone who has SWHT 2010 might want to check out what I did find on Soutre and Mertz and OAS contacts with the CIA in 1963 as well as what the context of heroin smuggling into Canada - which was part of the picture for both men.

My take is that finding a questionable source which quotes from the questionable Torbitt document and then poking holes in the content of those sources does not disprove what DeGaulle and his sources uncovered. It’s a bit of a straw man argument. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since my remark was only on sources I don't think I was making an argument at all, straw-man or not, so I'll just leave it at that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Larry Hancock said:

I understand Steve but I've been running into so many excerpts from sources which have clear political agendas that I've become sort of obsessive about balance (heck, I even got into an online joust about Tilapia last night).  Its sort of humorous that anyone could assert that the DIA,  which was only legally created in October 1961, could have had its act together well enough plus have foreign assets in place  to control NATO in assassination plots against DeGaulle in 62/63.

Your more balanced take on the OAS is certainly one I support, it was more of an anti regime, pro-colonial social network than a unified operational body.  There are some great sources on the OAS and its activities in Algeria as well as its abortive military activities.  Anyone who has SWHT 2010 might want to check out what I did find on Soutre and Mertz and OAS contacts with the CIA in 1963 as well as what the context of heroin smuggling into Canada - which was part of the picture for both men.

Larry,

 

I would ask about your take on Talapia, but I don't really think I want to know.

*grin*

 

Your comment about the DIA controlling NATO is about the same way I feel about the suggestion that the FBI was running NATO.

I think the OAS was a "unified operational body" in early 1962, but after the Evian Accords in March, that kind of all fell apart.

I was just reading about the thugs in the SAC running with the Corsican mob out of Marseilles just yesterday.

Larry, what do you know about Souetre and heroin smuggling? I've studied his life a lot and never found any evidence of that.

Mertz, yeah, he was caught up with Paul Mondolini and Augustin Riccord, but Souetre???

 

Steve Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Steve, I need to revisit SWHT myself so as not to give mis-informaiton from memory but as I recall, they were working at opposites with one actively involved into setting up distribution through Canada into New York and the other actually working on busting that business relationship. As I recall the two men were definite antagonists in several areas at that point in time.  I'm off for a few hours now but will look it up an get back on it this afternoon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Paz Marverde said:

What about writing that Larry Hancock is a source with a political agenda? 

No  -  and that wasn’t at all where I was going with my comment. 

This thread morphed, maybe my doing, from asking whether KGB was behind the assassination, to examining Angleton’s POV vs KGB, to looking at DeGaulle and OAS, to Souetre/Mertz. My point was that even though I agree that we cannot say that OAS as an organization tied to kill DeGaulle, or JFK,  just like we can’t do the same with CIA or the Pentagon, we can look at factions of those organizations. I never meant to accuse Larry or Steve of making a straw man argument deliberately. We all struggle with sources and read all kinds of things looking for clues. Larry and Steve are thankfully very careful about sources. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul:

Are you really going to say the OAS never tried to kill DeGaulle?

You cannot be serious.  You can argue about the group's goals at certain times but there was a whole book written about this called Target DeGaulle.

The book enumerated over 30 attempts to kill him and clearly some of those were by the OAS.

I mean the Algeria dispute was an incredibly divisive national issue in France for a long time.  That is one reason why Kennedy made his speech in 1957.  Recall, he said in there that one goal of the USA should be not just to free Africa, but to save the French nation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This feels like a distraction but to answer Steve's question (check SWHT 2010 p. 366-368) Mertz was both actively involved in heroin networks through Canada into the US and at the same time working for SDECE against OAS plots and specifically against Souetre. It appears that his OAS counter intelligence work (which aborted a bomb attack in July, 1961) made him valuable enough for his drug dealing to be ignored (sounds very familiar somehow) inside French intelligence and he was given a pass for a period of time. One of the best books dealing all this is The Heroin Trail:

https://www.amazon.com/Heroin-Trail-Newsday-Editors/dp/0451062817/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1528832743&sr=1-1&keywords=the+heroin+trail

In contrast Souetre was actively approaching both the CIA and other US agencies in 1963, presenting himself as the "OAS Coordinator for External Affairs". In May of 1963 he offered the CIA a list of Communist penetrations within the French government and was granted special travel access so he could present those claims.  There is a good bit more detail on this and sources in SWHT but that's the gist of a very complex relationship where a long time Frency intelligence asset works both CI against OAS and heroin networking while his opponent is engaging in bomb plots and trying to sway the U.S. to support the OAS opposition to Degaulle.

The make it even worse, it appears that on occasion that on occasion, with both men being very familiar with each other, Mertz may actually used the name Souetre as an alias.

 

 

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

×