George Joannides

[William Kelly]

You Can Handle the Truth by Tara McKelvey for The American Prospect discusses President Obama's promise of transparency.

The article includes a brief mention of Joannides and new quotes from G. Robert Blakey.

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?articl...andle_the_truth

This article is one of the first that should be a flurry of reports on open records and government transparency for Sunshine Week, a week set aside by journalists to promote open records issues. There should be more to come, and those interested in the JFK assassination should use the popularity of the issue in the mainstream media to focus on the fact that there are many significant JFK records that remain sealed, not just Joannides.

And Obama's Day One edict on open records and transparancy calls for a summary report on the issues by May 20th.

BK

Thanks Steve.... I read the article, and was going to provide the same link for everyone.

Best Regards in Research,

Don

Don Roberdeau

U.S.S. John F. Kennedy, CV-67, "Big John," Plank Walker

Sooner, or later, The Truth emerges Clearly

For your considerations....

Visual Report: The First Impact: JFK While "Hidden Under the 'magic-limbed-ricochet-tree': Z-188, then, Z-203 to 206"

Discovery: Very Close JFK Assassination Witness ROSEMARY WILLIS Zapruder Film Documented 2nd Headsnap:

West, Ultrafast, and Directly Towards the Grassy Knoll

Homepage: President JOHN F. KENNEDY "Men of Courage" speech, and Assassination Research & Discovery Links

Dealey Plaza Professionally-surveyed Map: Detailing 11-22-63 Victims precise kill zone locations,

Witnesses, Films & Photos, Evidence, Suspects & suspected bullet trajectories, & Important

information & Considerations

Visual File: JFK Assassination Research, Maps, & Discoveries for Your Considerations

T ogether

E veryone

A chieves

M ore

National Terror Alert for the United States:

http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/

[Steve Rosen]

New article by Jefferson Morley about the Joannides lawsuit in the age of FOIA reform:

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/...obamas_foia_or/

Good read, with a new photo of a beaming George Joannides receiving his Distinguished Intelligence Medal, the specifics of which are of course withheld.

But recall that in a recent court filing, the CIA acknowledged that Joannides served "undercover" in two assignments - in 1963 at JM/WAVE and in 1978 as the Agency liason to the HSCA (!) Was his award related to this still secret service?

Let's see what happens in court this summer.

Also, there is a link to a Facebook Cause, which if you are member of Facebook, you should join the cause to spread the word about the outrageous stonewalling and obfuscation at the heart of this JFK - CIA mystery.

[Click the "extended info" link on the Facebook Cause page for more new writing on the case by Jeff Morley].

Edited May 28, 2009 by Steve Rosen

[William Kelly]

New article by Jefferson Morley about the Joannides lawsuit in the age of FOIA reform:

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/...obamas_foia_or/

Good read, with a new photo of a beaming George Joannides receiving his Distinguished Intelligence Medal, the specifics of which are of course withheld.

But recall that in a recent court filing, the CIA acknowledged that Joannides served "undercover" in two assignments - in 1963 at JM/WAVE and in 1978 as the Agency liason to the HSCA (!) Was his award related to this still secret service?

Let's see what happens in court this summer.

Also, there is a link to a Facebook Cause, which if you are member of Facebook, you should join the cause to spread the word about the outrageous stonewalling and obfuscation at the heart of this JFK - CIA mystery.

[Click the "extended info" link on the Facebook Cause page for more new writing on the case by Jeff Morley].

Hey Steve,

Thanks for that link. TPM Cafe - and what a great article by Jeff, really putting it to them.

A clear Joannides mug with Bobby Inman. They give medals for doing this stuff.

Yes, without the mainstream circulation of the WP, Readers Digest or Playboy, this article will have to be played out and promoted to get the point across.

Obama's report on secrecy and transparency should be out soon too.

BK

[William Kelly]

New article by Jefferson Morley about the Joannides lawsuit in the age of FOIA reform:

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/...obamas_foia_or/

Good read, with a new photo of a beaming George Joannides receiving his Distinguished Intelligence Medal, the specifics of which are of course withheld.

But recall that in a recent court filing, the CIA acknowledged that Joannides served "undercover" in two assignments - in 1963 at JM/WAVE and in 1978 as the Agency liason to the HSCA (!) Was his award related to this still secret service?

Let's see what happens in court this summer.

Also, there is a link to a Facebook Cause, which if you are member of Facebook, you should join the cause to spread the word about the outrageous stonewalling and obfuscation at the heart of this JFK - CIA mystery.

[Click the "extended info" link on the Facebook Cause page for more new writing on the case by Jeff Morley].

Hey Steve,

Thanks for that link. TPM Cafe - and what a great article by Jeff, really putting it to them.

A clear Joannides mug with Bobby Inman. They give medals for doing this stuff.

Yes, without the mainstream circulation of the WP, Readers Digest or Playboy, this article will have to be played out and promoted to get the point across.

Obama's report on secrecy and transparency should be out soon too.

BK

OpEdNews.com OEN, picked up Jeff's article and reposted it in their system (with his permission), which gets a lot of reads.

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Dead-Spy-...090529-418.html

[Steve Rosen]

Jeff Morley posted on his Facebook Cause "Stop the CIA's Stonewalling on JFK Records" an announcement:

Judges and CIA

Francesca wrote, "Surely the judges can't keep siding with the CIA forever?!"

I don't think so. The Obama order will eventually force the CIA to change its FOIA position but they don't have to legally. That's because Obama's order was a statement of policy, not law.

That said, I don't think I will win this case in court. I think I will win it in the court of public opinion. That is to say, I won't get the documents because some judge will tell the CIA to release the records.

More likely, I think, is that reasonable people in the White House and DOJ and CIA will decide the agency's actions in Morley v. CIA are not in line with the president's FOIA order and direct the Agency lawyers to seek a settlement.

If we get a big enough number of people saying Stop, I think they just might. "

[Steve Rosen]

An update on Jeff Morley's lawsuit is posted on his blog:

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/...y-the-law-1.php

Jeff filed a 28 page sworn statement refuting the CIA's claims, including one that George Joannides didn't file monthly reports on the DRE in 1963 due to funding cutbacks.

We'll see what the CIA says in 30 days.

Meanwhile sign up to follow Jeff's blog on the above link, and consider joining Facebook, if only to support the Joannides records release cause.

Steve

[William Kelly]

An update on Jeff Morley's lawsuit is posted on his blog:

http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/...y-the-law-1.php

Jeff filed a 28 page sworn statement refuting the CIA's claims, including one that George Joannides didn't file monthly reports on the DRE in 1963 due to funding cutbacks.

We'll see what the CIA says in 30 days.

Meanwhile sign up to follow Jeff's blog on the above link, and consider joining Facebook, if only to support the Joannides records release cause.

Steve

This case should have an impact on Morely vs. CIA and loosen things up a bit.

Also, even though Joannides is dead, other JMWAVE characters like Porter Goss, Brad Ayers

and others could answer some of the questions Joannides would have been asked, if a legal venue can be created to require their testimony.

BK

http://www.opednews.com/populum/linkframe.php?linkid=94078

Judge: CIA committed fraud in eavesdropping case

By NEDRA PICKLER

Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal judge has ruled that CIA officials committed fraud to protect a former covert agent against an eavesdropping lawsuit and is considering sanctioning as many as six who have worked at the agency, including former CIA Director George Tenet.

According to court documents unsealed Monday, U.S. District Judge Royce Lamberth referred a CIA attorney, Jeffrey Yeates, for disciplinary action. Lamberth also denied the CIA's renewed efforts under the Obama administration to keep the case secret because of what he calls the agency's "diminished credibility" and the "twisted history" in the case.

The judge also criticized CIA Director Leon Panetta, saying he's given conflicting accounts about what should be revealed in the case. The ruling led to the unsealing Monday of more than 200 unclassified versions of classified filings in the 13-year-old case.

"The court does not give the government a high degree of deference because of its prior misrepresentations regarding the state secrets privilege in this case," Lamberth ruled.

The court case comes amid increased scrutiny and allegations of lying against the spy agency.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said in May that she believes the CIA lied to her about its harsh interrogation program in 2002. Panetta said in June that the CIA had not notified Congress about a secret program to develop hit squads for al-Qaida terrorists. And Congress is investigating whether the agency broke the law by not informing lawmakers about that and other secret activities.

The eavesdropping lawsuit was brought by a former agent with the Drug Enforcement Agency, Richard Horn, who says his home in Rangoon, Burma, was illegally wiretapped by the CIA in 1993. He says Arthur Brown, the former CIA station chief in Burma, and Franklin Huddle Jr., the chief of mission at the U.S. Embassy in Burma, were trying to get him relocated because they disagreed with his work with Burmese officials on the country's drug trade.

The agency has not said in court filings whether or not it monitored Horn, but Horn claims he was monitored without lawful authority and in violation of his constitutional protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Horn says he became suspicious when he came back from a trip out of town to find his government-issued rectangular coffee table replaced with a round one.

Lamberth criticized Panetta for claiming at one point that the CIA's methods for conducting electronic surveillance are state secrets, even though the type of transmitter that Horn claims was used on his coffee table is unclassified and on display at Washington's Spy Museum.

Horn also points to a cable that Huddle sent to Washington quoting his private telephone conversation, which Lamberth labeled "highly suspicious."

Horn sued Brown and Huddle in 1994, seeking monetary damages for violations of his civil rights because of the alleged wiretapping.

Tenet filed an affidavit in 2000 asking that the case against Brown be dismissed because he was a covert agent whose identity was a state secret that must not be revealed in open court. Lamberth granted the CIA's request and threw out the case against Brown in 2004.

But Lamberth found out last year that Brown's cover had been lifted in 2002, even though the CIA continued to file legal documents saying his status was covert. The judge found that the CIA intentionally misled the court and reinstated the case against Brown.

The former acting CIA general counsel, John Rizzo, said in a court filing that the CIA's office of general counsel did not know Brown's cover status changed until 2005, three years after the fact. Rizzo said that one CIA attorney, Yeates, knew about the change but did not tell the court or his supervisors.

Brown disputes Rizzo's account. In a statement to the court, Brown says that he met personally with two other CIA attorneys, Robert J. Eatinger and John Radsan, in 2002, within a few months of the CIA rolling back his covert status and notified them of the agency's action.

While Lamberth referred Yeates for disciplinary action for intentionally misleading the court, he delayed action until he determines if others, including Rizzo, Eatinger, Radsan, Tenet and Brown himself, should face contempt charges or sanctions for failing to notify the court of Brown's change in status. He has given the five others a month to explain why they shouldn't be held responsible.

CIA spokesman George Little offered a brief response to the case, saying that the agency takes its obligation to the U.S. courts seriously. The CIA refused to confirm the employment status of the officials in the case. A spokesman for Tenet declined to comment.

Edited July 22, 2009 by William Kelly

[Steve Rosen]

Jacob G. Hornberger, attorney, writer, and founder of The Future of Freedom Foundation, wrote an article summarizing the Joannides case with a good-sense call to appoint a special prosecutor, along with links to the most recent articles by Jeff Morley.

Linked at http://www.fff.org/comment/com0908e.asp.

His bio, blog and other links: http://www.fff.org/aboutUs/bios/jgh.asp

Steve

Edited August 6, 2009 by Steve Rosen

[Steve Rosen]

This was posted on September 11, 2009 on Jefferson Morley's Facebook page at his cause "Stop the CIA's Stonewalling on JFK Records":

" CIA Due to Respond on JFK files

This afternoon I am awaiting the CIA's latest filing in my lawsuit seeking JFK assassination files. The filing is due in federal court in Washington today, Friday Sept. 11.

The CIA will be responding to my Aug. 7 motion calling for full disclosure of files of deceased CIA officer George Joannides.

I hope that by midnight I will be pleasantly surprised to learn that the CIA has decided to comply with the spirit of President Obama's executive order on the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and will announce its intention to release the long-suppressed files.

But I doubt it.

On related noted, I just got a link to a commentary by Jacob Hornberger, president of the libertarian Future of Freedom Foundation, who makes the case in a new Web ommentary that a special prosecutor should investigate Joannides' role in the assassination of President Kennedy.

(See http://www.fff.org/comment/com0908e.asp )

Hornberger notes a key point about the Joannides story:

"A common misconception regarding the law of fraud is that fraud requires an affirmative misrepresentation of a material fact. Not so. Fraud also occurs when there is an intentional failure to disclose a material fact"

Thus, Hornberger reasons, the failure of the CIA to disclose to JFK investigators in 1964 and 1978 that George Joannides had a financial relationship to Oswald's anti-Castro antagonists at the time of JFK's murder, constitutes fraud and obstruction of justice.

Hornberger is right. There is compelling evidence of criminal misconduct in Joannides' actions related to JFK's assassination. He is right that the Obama administration needs to take some action to clarify the record. Hornberger's commentary is welcome and deserves wider circulation.

But I'm not prepared to endorse the special prosecutor remedy--at least not yet. Joannides is dead, leaving no obvious suspect for such a special prosecutor to investigate.

On there other hand, there are living people who have first-hand knowledge of Joannides' covert operations in 1963. Their testimony could shed light on criminal activities related to JFK's assassination. My view that we may need a JFK "truth commission."

I'll keep you posted on what the CIA says.

Thanks for your support and interest. Get your friends to join this FB Cause and we will prevail.

best,

Jeff "

Edited September 12, 2009 by Steve Rosen

[John Simkin]

On related noted, I just got a link to a commentary by Jacob Hornberger, president of the libertarian Future of Freedom Foundation, who makes the case in a new Web ommentary that a special prosecutor should investigate Joannides' role in the assassination of President Kennedy.

(See http://www.fff.org/comment/com0908e.asp)

Hornberger notes a key point about the Joannides story:

"A common misconception regarding the law of fraud is that fraud requires an affirmative misrepresentation of a material fact. Not so. Fraud also occurs when there is an intentional failure to disclose a material fact"

The Jacob Hornberger link does not work. Try this one:

http://www.fff.org/comment/com0908e.asp

[John Simkin]

Jefferson Morley on Facebook:

"I have read the CIA's latest motion in my lawsuit. It is disappointing but revealing.The defiance of the spirit of Obama's executive order on FOIA is blatant and startling. But the CIA motion, in its defensiveness, indicates where some of ...the Agency's most sensitive JFK records are located. Thus the lawsuit, while it faces huge obstacles, is shedding new light on the JFK story. I'll be writing about this soon."

[Steve Rosen]

Recently there was an anti-climatic coda to David Talbot's lawsuit against the CIA and Jeff Morley's lawsuit against the State Department.

See Michael Doyle's Suits and Sentences blog at: http://blogs.mcclatchydc.com/law/2009/09/s...ey-for-you.html

As discussed in prior posts within this thread, Talbot and Morley jointly sued for passport records for David Morales and George Joannides, along with code names and pseudonyms for the two deceased covert operatives. The information was ruled properly withheld as protected "sources and methods".

Talbot sought the recovery of about $400 in attorney fees. Judge Richard Leon - who currently presides over Morley's unrelated lawsuit against the CIA for Joannides service records - emphatically denied the request, using an exclamation point to underscore his decision.

Judge Leon's decision: https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_p...c?2007cv0277-48

- Steve

[Steve Rosen]

The New York Times picked up the tale of George Joannides today with a story titled C.I.A. Still Cagey About Oswald Mystery by Scott Shane.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/17/us/17inq...tml?_r=1&hp

It's a good summary of the issues, with new quotes from Jeff Morley, Judge John R. Tunheim, G. Robert Blakey, Dan Hardway, Gerald Posner, Max Holland, and CIA spokesman Paul Gimigliano.

This is undoubtedly the widest publicity for the case so far.

- Steve

[Robert E. Cox]

This is undoubtedly the widest publicity for the case so far.

- Steve

A coup for Jeff Morley and Jim Lesar, who have been pounding on this case for years. It should not go unnoticed, however, that the New York Times and other supposed watchdogs of the American democracy should have reported this story FIVE years ago.

It should also be noted that the first two words of the second paragraph of the Times' story, assuring us that the CIA "probably not" is covering up "some dark secret" about the JFK assassination, are not supported in any way in the subsequent story.

In other words, the Gray Lady has admitted, finally, that there is a very serious question about the CIA's continuing secrecy about the JFK assassination, but takes its first opportunity to assure us, without any supporting evidence at all, that it's "probably not" a very important question.

Sheesh.

[Mark Knight]

As Ollie North demonstrated when Iran-Contra hit the fan, often just the suggestion of public scrutiny sends the government paper-shredders into overdrive. Nothing incriminating will be exposed if and/or when any CIA documents become available...because, if there ever was a smoking gun in the CIA files, it was disposed of long ago. I'm convinced that the CIA stonewalling is simply a teaser, something akin to the magician's assistant who draws your eyes from what's really important to keep your focus away from the realities behind the illusion.

But I still support Jeff Morley because there MIGHT actually be a clue in those files.

Edited October 17, 2009 by Mark Knight