Robin Unger Posted March 12, 2005 Share Posted March 12, 2005 QUOTE: Dulles: Yes. I think this record ought to be destroyed This Transcript was never meant to see the light of day.! Transcript of executive session of the President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy of January 22, 1964 Prepared by a Department of Defense stenotypist with the proper security clearance from reporter's notes among the records of the Commission in the National Archives at the request of the general Services Administration in August 1974. 1/22/64, 5:30 - 7:00 P.M. Gentlemen: I called this meeting of the Commission because of something that developed today that I thought every member of the Commission should have knowledge of, something that you shouldn't hear from the public before you had an opportunity to think about it. I will just have Mr. Rankin tell you the story from the beginning. Mr. Rankin: Mr. Wagner Carr, the Attorney General of Texas, called me at 11:10 this morning and said that the word had come out, he wanted to get it to me at the first moment, that Oswald was acting as an FBI Undercover Agent, and that they had the information of his badge which was given as Number 179, and that he was being paid two hundred a month from September of 1962 up through the time of the assassination. I asked what the source of this was, and he said that he understood the information had been made available so that Defense Counsel for Ruby had that information, that he knew that the press had the information, and he didn't know exactly where Wade had gotten the information, but he was a former FBI Agent. Ford: Who would know if anybody would in the Bureau have such an arrangement? A: I think that there are several. Probably Mr. Belmont would know every undercover agent. Q: Belmont? A: Yes. Q: An informer also would you say? A: Yes, I would think so. He is the special security, of the division. Dulles: Yes, I know. A: And he is an able man. But when the Chief Justice and I were just briefly reflecting on this we said if that was true and it ever came out and could be established, then you would have people think that there was a conspiracy to accomplish this assassination that nothing the Commission did or anybody could dissipate. Boggs: You are so right. Dulles: Oh, terrible. Boggs: Its implications of this are fantastic, don't you think so? A: Terrific. Rankin: To have anybody admit to it, even if it was the fact, I am sure that there wouldn't at this point be anything to prove it. Dulles: Lee, if this were true, why would it be particularly in their interest -- I could see it would be in their interest to get rid of this man but why would it be in their interest to say he is clearly the only guilty one? I mean I don't see that argument that you raise particularly shows an interest. Boggs: I can immediately -- A: They would like to have us fold up and quit. Boggs: This closes the case, you see. Don't you see? Dulles: Yes, I see that. Rankin: They found the man. There is nothing more to do. The Commission supports their conclusions, and we can go on home and that is the end of it. Dulles: But that puts the men right on them. If he was not the killer and they employed him, they are already it, you see. So your argument is correct if they are sure that this is going to close the case, but if it don't close the case, they are worse off than ever by doing this. Boggs: Yes, I would think so. And of course, we are all even gaining in the realm of speculation. I don't even like to see this being taken down. Dulles: Yes. I think this record ought to be destroyed. Do you think we need a record of this. A: I don't, except that we said we would have records of meetings and so we called the reporter in the formal way. If you think what we have said here should not be upon the record, we can have it done that way. Of course it might. . . Dulles: I am just thinking of sending around copies and so forth. The only copies of this record should be kept right here. Boggs: I would hope that none of these records are circulated to anybody. A: I would hope so too http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/wcexec2.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted March 12, 2005 Author Share Posted March 12, 2005 QUOTE:Dulles: Yes. I think this record ought to be destroyed This Transcript was never meant to see the light of day.! Transcript of executive session of the President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy of January 22, 1964 Prepared by a Department of Defense stenotypist with the proper security clearance from reporter's notes among the records of the Commission in the National Archives at the request of the general Services Administration in August 1974. 1/22/64, 5:30 - 7:00 P.M. Gentlemen: I called this meeting of the Commission because of something that developed today that I thought every member of the Commission should have knowledge of, something that you shouldn't hear from the public before you had an opportunity to think about it. I will just have Mr. Rankin tell you the story from the beginning. Mr. Rankin: Mr. Wagner Carr, the Attorney General of Texas, called me at 11:10 this morning and said that the word had come out, he wanted to get it to me at the first moment, that Oswald was acting as an FBI Undercover Agent, and that they had the information of his badge which was given as Number 179, and that he was being paid two hundred a month from September of 1962 up through the time of the assassination. I asked what the source of this was, and he said that he understood the information had been made available so that Defense Counsel for Ruby had that information, that he knew that the press had the information, and he didn't know exactly where Wade had gotten the information, but he was a former FBI Agent. Ford: Who would know if anybody would in the Bureau have such an arrangement? A: I think that there are several. Probably Mr. Belmont would know every undercover agent. Q: Belmont? A: Yes. Q: An informer also would you say? A: Yes, I would think so. He is the special security, of the division. Dulles: Yes, I know. A: And he is an able man. But when the Chief Justice and I were just briefly reflecting on this we said if that was true and it ever came out and could be established, then you would have people think that there was a conspiracy to accomplish this assassination that nothing the Commission did or anybody could dissipate. Boggs: You are so right. Dulles: Oh, terrible. Boggs: Its implications of this are fantastic, don't you think so? A: Terrific. Rankin: To have anybody admit to it, even if it was the fact, I am sure that there wouldn't at this point be anything to prove it. Dulles: Lee, if this were true, why would it be particularly in their interest -- I could see it would be in their interest to get rid of this man but why would it be in their interest to say he is clearly the only guilty one? I mean I don't see that argument that you raise particularly shows an interest. Boggs: I can immediately -- A: They would like to have us fold up and quit. Boggs: This closes the case, you see. Don't you see? Dulles: Yes, I see that. Rankin: They found the man. There is nothing more to do. The Commission supports their conclusions, and we can go on home and that is the end of it. Dulles: But that puts the men right on them. If he was not the killer and they employed him, they are already it, you see. So your argument is correct if they are sure that this is going to close the case, but if it don't close the case, they are worse off than ever by doing this. Boggs: Yes, I would think so. And of course, we are all even gaining in the realm of speculation. I don't even like to see this being taken down. Dulles: Yes. I think this record ought to be destroyed. Do you think we need a record of this. A: I don't, except that we said we would have records of meetings and so we called the reporter in the formal way. If you think what we have said here should not be upon the record, we can have it done that way. Of course it might. . . Dulles: I am just thinking of sending around copies and so forth. The only copies of this record should be kept right here. Boggs: I would hope that none of these records are circulated to anybody. A: I would hope so too http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/wcexec2.htm <{POST_SNAPBACK}> QUOTE: According to Asst. DA Bill Alexander and reporter Hugh Aynesworth in Larry Sneed's No More Silence, the story that Oswald was a paid FBI informant was made up by Houston reporter Lonnie Hudkins. Waggoner Carr simply passed it along. Aynesworth claims that he himself made up the FBI number and gave it to Hudkins, though somebody gets the number wrong (Aynesworth says S-172, Rankin says 179). Hudkins's alleged purpose was to try to smoke out the FBI to see what they would say, and Aynesworth was just humoring Hudkins. There is also something about this in Hosty's book, which I don't have. Ron Ecker Thanks Ron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Root Posted March 12, 2005 Share Posted March 12, 2005 Robin They deal with this issue further in the January 27th meeting of the Warren Commission. Jim Root Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted March 12, 2005 Author Share Posted March 12, 2005 RobinThey deal with this issue further in the January 27th meeting of the Warren Commission. Jim Root <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Thanks Jim. I will check it out ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antti Hynonen Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 (edited) Jenner questioning Mr. Hutchinson, store owner in Irving. One item that came up is Lee, cashing a person to person check, worth 189 bucks. Mr. JENNER. Now, using your own words, describe the incident, commencing giving the background. Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, they line up to cash their checks. Mr. JENNER. And you were in the cage? Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; I was in the cage. Mr. JENNER. And there were people lined up to cash checks? Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; sometimes 8 to 10 line up--because we have Ling Electric, we have Temco, and we have Chance Vought. We also have General Motors people who live in Irving. And Friday is a big check-cashing day. 334 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. JENNER. Uh, huh. Mr. HUTCHISON. And I always step into the cage to cash checks and, naturally, I know most people who come in. And this was a two-party check. Mr. JENNER. What do you mean by that? Mr. HUTCHISON. A two-party check means that it was not a payroll check, but a personal check given to him. Mr. JENNER. All right. Mr. HUTCHISON. And, as best as I can remember, it was $189---which is strictly against our rules to cash. We don't cash any two--party checks over $25. Mr. JENNER. I see. Mr. HUTCHISON. And so I just merely told him, "I'm sorry; I can't cash this check." Mr. JENNER. Excuse me. If I call that a personal check--is that an apt description? You call it a "two-party" check, meaning---- Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. Mr. JENNER. It's drawn by an individual and payable to an individual? Mr. HUTCHISON. Right. That's right. An individual check payable to an individual. Mr. JENNER. As distinguished from a payroll check? Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes; as distinguished from a payroll check. Mr. JENNER. And your practice is to limit your risk on that type of check to $25? Mr. HUTCHISON. $25; yes, sir. Mr. JENNER. And your recollection is that that check was in the amount of $189. Mr. HUTCHISON. $189; yes, sir. Mr. JENNER. All right. And he finally reached the wicket, or---- Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir; the cage. Mr. JENNER. He came to the head of the line, eventually? Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. Mr. JENNER. Then tell me what happened, as best you can recall. Mr. HUTCHISON. Well, he put the check up there and, of course, that's what everyone does. They put it up there and you look at the check and you observe the check and you either make up your mind whether you're going to cash it or not. But, of course, like I say, with the rule that I have, there never was any doubt in my mind what I was going to do with it. I just handed it back to him. I said, "I'm sorry. This is a two-party check, and we don't cash this amount in a two-party check. Mr. JENNER. Did he say anything about that? Mr. HUTCHISON. Not a word. Not a word. He just looked at me and picked up the check and got out of line and walked on out. Mr. JENNER. Did he have any expression on his face that arrested your attention? Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir. Mr. JENNER. Do you think he understood what you meant by a "two-party" check? Mr. HUTCHISON. Why, I'm sure he must have because I specifically said to him, "This is a two-party check and our rules and regulations are that we don't cash this large a check---two-party check." Mr. JENNER. He didn't seem irritated? Mr. HUTCHISON. No, sir. Mr. JENNER. And he accepted your explanation? Mr. HUTCHISON. Yes, sir. Edited March 14, 2005 by Antti Hynonen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robin Unger Posted March 14, 2005 Author Share Posted March 14, 2005 (edited) Thanks Antti. It sounds as though Oswald may indeed have had help from someone, or some agency a hidell. shipping receipt and C.O.D document for a pistol Receipt for oswalds revolver: Note the $10.00 deposit. How was that paid to "Seaport Traders" in Los Angeles,and who paid it. And why didn't oswald just order it from Kliens sporting store when he ordered the rifle, S&W hand guns were in the same kliens advertisement as the Cacarno rifle. Did Oswald have a handler who was sending him money. Edited March 14, 2005 by Robin Unger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antti Hynonen Posted March 14, 2005 Share Posted March 14, 2005 So Oswald bought a 30 dollar pistol, but a 25 dollar rifle... maybe he should have used the pistol instead of the rifle for better accuracy and success in his assassination of the President. Perhaps the different sounding final shot heard by some ear witnesses on 11/22/63 was Oswald firing his revolver from the 6th floor, as a last attempt to try and hit his target. This would also explain why the last two shots sounded as if they were fired almost simultaneously.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 (edited) I've been looking at anything I can to prove that Seaport rec'd a $10 CHECK or MONEY ORDER per the coupon's instructions... There is no envelope for this order OR any evidence showing the deposit or COD amount were ever paid.... AND it was supposed to include the $1.27 for COD... I have not found anything else yet... has there been anything? thx DJ Receipt for oswalds revolver: Note the $10.00 deposit. How was that paid to "Seaport Traders" in Los Angeles,and who paid it. And why didn't oswald just order it from Kliens sporting store when he ordered the rifle, S&W hand guns were in the same kliens advertisement as the Cacarno rifle. Edited November 24, 2011 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joseph Backes Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 (edited) QUOTE: Dulles: Yes. I think this record ought to be destroyed This Transcript was never meant to see the light of day.! Transcript of executive session of the President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy of January 22, 1964 Prepared by a Department of Defense stenotypist with the proper security clearance from reporter's notes among the records of the Commission in the National Archives at the request of the general Services Administration in August 1974. 1/22/64, 5:30 - 7:00 P.M. Gentlemen: I called this meeting of the Commission because of something that developed today that I thought every member of the Commission should have knowledge of, something that you shouldn't hear from the public before you had an opportunity to think about it. I will just have Mr. Rankin tell you the story from the beginning. Mr. Rankin: Mr. Wagner Carr, the Attorney General of Texas, called me at 11:10 this morning and said that the word had come out, he wanted to get it to me at the first moment, that Oswald was acting as an FBI Undercover Agent, and that they had the information of his badge which was given as Number 179, and that he was being paid two hundred a month from September of 1962 up through the time of the assassination. I asked what the source of this was, and he said that he understood the information had been made available so that Defense Counsel for Ruby had that information, that he knew that the press had the information, and he didn't know exactly where Wade had gotten the information, but he was a former FBI Agent. Ford: Who would know if anybody would in the Bureau have such an arrangement? A: I think that there are several. Probably Mr. Belmont would know every undercover agent. Q: Belmont? A: Yes. Q: An informer also would you say? A: Yes, I would think so. He is the special security, of the division. Dulles: Yes, I know. A: And he is an able man. But when the Chief Justice and I were just briefly reflecting on this we said if that was true and it ever came out and could be established, then you would have people think that there was a conspiracy to accomplish this assassination that nothing the Commission did or anybody could dissipate. Boggs: You are so right. Dulles: Oh, terrible. Boggs: Its implications of this are fantastic, don't you think so? A: Terrific. Rankin: To have anybody admit to it, even if it was the fact, I am sure that there wouldn't at this point be anything to prove it. Dulles: Lee, if this were true, why would it be particularly in their interest -- I could see it would be in their interest to get rid of this man but why would it be in their interest to say he is clearly the only guilty one? I mean I don't see that argument that you raise particularly shows an interest. Boggs: I can immediately -- A: They would like to have us fold up and quit. Boggs: This closes the case, you see. Don't you see? Dulles: Yes, I see that. Rankin: They found the man. There is nothing more to do. The Commission supports their conclusions, and we can go on home and that is the end of it. Dulles: But that puts the men right on them. If he was not the killer and they employed him, they are already it, you see. So your argument is correct if they are sure that this is going to close the case, but if it don't close the case, they are worse off than ever by doing this. Boggs: Yes, I would think so. And of course, we are all even gaining in the realm of speculation. I don't even like to see this being taken down. Dulles: Yes. I think this record ought to be destroyed. Do you think we need a record of this. A: I don't, except that we said we would have records of meetings and so we called the reporter in the formal way. If you think what we have said here should not be upon the record, we can have it done that way. Of course it might. . . Dulles: I am just thinking of sending around copies and so forth. The only copies of this record should be kept right here. Boggs: I would hope that none of these records are circulated to anybody. A: I would hope so too http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/wcexec2.htm Robin, I think you're being a little misleading with this. The record Dulles is referring to, as the one he wants destroyed, is the transcript of this Executive Session of the Warren Commission, and not records pertaining to Oswald being an FBI agent. This issue is not new. Harold Weisberg wrote about it, a whole book, based solely on this topic, Whitewash IV in 1974. He reprinting the whole transcript 37 years ago. So, I don't understand the point of this posting. Joe Backes Edited November 24, 2011 by Joseph Backes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Andrews Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 It's bad enough to want the Commission session record destroyed. Oh, terrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Kingsbury Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 It's bad enough to want the Commission session record destroyed. Oh, terrible. Dulles was so blatant , but the others just swallowed it wholesale. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now