Who killed JFK?

[John Simkin]

I have been interested in the assassination of Kennedy for over 30 years. However, this interest has for the most part only involved watching television documentaries and reading the odd book about the case. During this time I came to the conclusion that that assassination had been carried out by the Mafia with help from rogue elements of the CIA. I suspected that it was linked to the CIA Executive Action program and part of a plan to overthrow Castro’s government in Cuba.

Three months ago I decided to dedicate a part of my history website to the assassination of Kennedy. My primary objective was the production of materials that would enable young people to carry out their own research into the case. I thought that if I could do that it might encourage teachers to cover the topic in their history lessons.

Over the last twelve weeks I have read everything I could about the case. I have also spent a great deal of time searching the internet picking up information about some of the less well-known figures in the case. Of course I found lots of evidence to support my original theory. That was to be expected and one of the dangers any historian (or detective) faces is that there is a tendency to look for evidence that supports the theory that you already have. Once this mindset has been developed it is difficult to look at the evidence objectively.

There was a couple of things that emerged that made me question my original theory. One concerned what happened after the assassination. Lyndon Johnson never gave the orders to invade Cuba. As a result the Mafia were never able to get back into the country that had proved to be so profitable before the arrival of Castro. The Mafia had made it clear to the CIA by 1963 that the assassination of Castro would not be enough to bring about the end of communism in Cuba. Only an invasion by the United States would achieve that. Had LBJ betrayed the Mafia? If so, why was he allowed to get away with it. They definitely had enough information about Johnson’s past to make life very difficult for him.

My other worry concerned the FBI. When Hoover made his first telephone call to Johnson after the assassination, he made it clear that he had enough evidence to suggest that Kennedy had been killed as part of a communist conspiracy. From the beginning Johnson was totally opposed to the whole idea of a conspiracy. He insisted that he was keen for Hoover to prove that this was the work of one man. Surprisingly, Hoover was willing to go along with this. The FBI played a central role in the cover-up. This included the FBI report that eventually was published as the Warren Report. Hoover was also willing to give Johnson the appropriate information from his files to blackmail people like Earl Warren to do as they were told.

Why was Hoover willing to do this? It is difficult to believe he did this to cover-up for the Mafia and the CIA? It has been argued that Hoover was willing to do this in order to remain in office as head of the FBI (JFK was threatening to force him into retirement). However, there was never any danger in Johnson retiring Hoover. One of the reasons that Hoover wanted Johnson as president was that he was easier to blackmail than Kennedy.

One has to ask the question who benefited most from the assassination of JFK. One person who definitely did was Johnson. The testimony being given to the Senate Rules Committee and John McClellan’s subcommittee looking into the TFX contract during November 1963 suggested that Johnson’s was likely to be impeached. The killing of JFK changed all that. Once president Johnson was able to close down those investigations that were doing him so much political damage.

Johnson was not the only one to benefit from the death of Kennedy. Johnson’s financial backers also benefited enormously from a change in presidency. The assassination of Kennedy allowed the oil depletion allowance to be kept at 27.5 per cent. It remained unchanged during the Johnson presidency. It is estimated that this resulted in a saving of over 100 million dollars to the American oil industry. Soon after Johnson left office it dropped to 15 per cent.

Therefore over the last three months I have changed my mind about the Kennedy assassination. I now consider it was a FBI/Texas Oil Industry conspiracy rather than one organized by the CIA/Mafia.

I would be interested in hearing what other people think on this issue.

[lav_azza]

John Simkin,

I am a 16 yr old from Australia, and i research conspiracys and odd murders, i have researched the JFK assassination and am currently researching the Jon Benet Ramsay Murder.

The JFK assassination, was conducted by the mafia, there were several reasons why they decided to off Kenedy, Giancana was a very different leader to Paul Ricca, Frank Nitti and the chicago mobs greatest leader, Giancana's mentor Tony Accardo. When Capone set the conduct for the mob, he tried to set a precident that the leaders and two top associates would be invisible to the public eye, as Capones powers grew, he was recognised and the papers soon owned the mafia. When Capone resigned from his power and went to prison, the papers needed a new leader and named Nitti as the succsessor to Capone. Nitti reduced the amount of public appearances he made.

When Giancana took over from Accardo, who was nearly invisible to the public never spent a day in jail or had an a hit attempt on his life, he became very public property. He was always seen and he eventually became involved with one of JFK's mistresses Marylin Munroe.

In an unknown spiral of events in the love triangle, Giancana, had Munroe over to his apartment, had sex with her, then he had her killed, his right hand man, Charles Nicoletti, took an associate over to her residence and strapped her into a chair, and overdosed her on heroine and coccaine.

Giancana took the next step of ordering the hit on JFK with the co-operation of the CIA, to help with there drug sumgling into the U.S. As the CIA was smuggling drugs into the US and having the mob distribute in the big 5 cities of the country being New York, Washington, Los Angeles, Las Vegas and Miami. The CIA was and still is a very dirty organisation.

1- The Kennedy family were/are members of "the elite" (players in international high finance circles) since the early days of Joseph Kennedy. John F. Kennedy was elected to office through monetary power and with the help of the Mafia. Without the total support of other members of "the elite" - he would not have become President.(2)

2- JFK and his brother, RFK, attacked organized crime in an effort to expose the Mafia to the public and curtail its power. JFK and Chicago mob boss Sam Giancana shared the same mistress, Judith Campbell Exner. Giancana helped JFK win the election in Illinois and on the east coast.(3)

3- Since 1942, the CIA and the Mafia have worked together in numerous clandestine operations.(4)

4- JFK refused to allow the CIA and American troops to attack Cuba thereby creating the infamous Bay of Pigs fiasco in 1961. Following that incident, General Charles P. Cabell, Deputy Director of the CIA, went around Washington calling President Kennedy a traitor. The CIA solicited the services of the Mafia to kill Fidel Castro.(5)

5- International bankers have controlled America for over 100 years.(6)

6- The Vatican Bank is one of the most powerful international financial institutions in the world. Paul Marcinkus, the sole American ever to rise to an executive position in the Vatican Bank, was from Cicero, Illinois, a legendary Chicago mob stronghold. In 1994, Marcinkus was accused of money laundering drug profits in a USA Today news report. Now a resident of Arizona, Marcinkus declined to comment.

7- CIA operatives and former covert agents using CIA planes and vehicles often control the transportation of narcotics from the source. The Mafia controls the global drug distribution network to the consumer. The defunct Nugan-Hand Bank in Australia as well as banks in the Cayman Islands and Switzerland have also participated in CIA/Mafia money laundering of drug profits.(7)

8- The public execution of John F. Kennedy was accomplished by a three man Mafia/CIA "firing squad" in association with a patsy, Lee Harvey Oswald. The CIA was aware of the attempt on JFK's life prior to 11/22/63 and flew in an "abort" team to Dallas on the morning of the "hit."(8)

9- In 1963, John F. Kennedy was preparing to amend the National Labor Relations Board statutes and various Internal Revenue Service statues that would prevent foreign flag shipping from being exempt from American income taxes. These amendments would have seriously affected Liberian shipping magnates and the assets of men such as Aristotle Onassis. Billions of dollars were at stake. President Kennedy was killed three days before he was to make these amendments public.(9)

10- In 1979, The House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded that there was a "probable conspiracy" in the murder of JFK and that organized crime members "possibly" were involved.(10)

How Giancana did it was, he sent Nicoletti to Dallas, with John Rosselli and James Sutton now James Earl Files. With Rosselli and Nicoletti in the Dal Tex Building Opposite the depository Nicoletti fired two shots one which hit the president the other hitting the officer in the front seat. Files fired his shot from the remington fireball xp 100 handgun and hit the presidents right temple, killing him instantly.

Files walked behind the railway got into his car, picked up Nicoletti and Rosselli and drove back to Chicago, Nicolletti and Rosselli are dead, Rosselli killed Giancana, and Nicoletti killed Rosselli by stabbing him 18 times , stuffing him in a metal drum then rolling him of a cliff. Nicoletti was killed by the Russian Mob believed to be retribution for killing the current boss.

Over 40 people were killed from 63-75 and new evidence is comming to light these days.

for more evidence view www.jfkmurdersolved.com

[John Simkin]

How Giancana did it was, he sent Nicoletti to Dallas, with John Rosselli and James Sutton now James Earl Files. With Rosselli and Nicoletti in the Dal Tex Building Opposite the depository Nicoletti fired two shots one which hit the president the other hitting the officer in the front seat. Files fired his shot from the remington fireball xp 100 handgun and hit the presidents right temple, killing him instantly.

Files walked behind the railway got into his car, picked up Nicoletti and Rosselli and drove back to Chicago, Nicolletti and Rosselli are dead, Rosselli killed Giancana, and Nicoletti killed Rosselli by stabbing him 18 times , stuffing him in a metal drum then rolling him of a cliff. Nicoletti was killed by the Russian Mob believed to be retribution for killing the current boss.

for more evidence view www.jfkmurdersolved.com

It is definitely true that the Mafia had good reasons to want Kennedy dead (his refusal to invade Cuba, his persecution, via his brother of the Mafia, etc.). We do have some evidence to support this view (Frank Ragano, G. Robert Blakey, Edward Becker).

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKSinvestigation.htm

However, you are on dodgy ground when you name Charlie Nicoletti, John Rosselli and James Earl Files as the killers. This is of course based on Files’ confession to Bob Vernon while serving a 30 year sentence for attempted murder. Files, a long-term conman, was attempting to obtain money for his story (he was paid $50,000 via his sister by Dick Clark/MPI). Several investigators have shown that Files story is a fabrication. For example, Edward Jay Epstein has established from telephone records that Files was in Chicago, not Dallas, on November 22,1963.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKfiles.htm

There of course been quite a few people who have confessed to having knowledge of the plot to kill Kennedy. This includes Marita Lorenz, Jack Martin, Silvia Odio, Harry Dean, Madeleine Brown, Robert W. Easterling, Billie Sol Estes, Robert Morrow, Charles Harrelson (later retracted), Gerry P. Hemming, Chauncey Holt, Frank Ragano, Christian David, Edward Becker, Kerry Thornley, Roscoe White (via his wife), Adele Edisen and Judyth Baker. Of these, the only ones I believe are Billie Sol Estes and Silvia Odio (although I am doubtful if the people she met were really the killers). Frank Ragano’s story also makes sense but contradicts the testimony given by Billie Sol Estes.

[Chris Newton]

Who killed JFK? The question has been asked by millions in the last forty years despite the conclusions of the Warren Commission set forth in September of 1964. The official story has been that Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone, fired three shots from the Texas Schoolbook Depository and that one of those bullets struck President Kennedy and killed him.

I believe that the evidence available to the Warren Commission at the time indicated beyond any doubt that there was more than one shooter and that many more individuals were involved. Conspiracy theories and suspects are equally plentiful and my own view is that there may have been two separate conspiracies that together helped cover up the treacherous act. An act of assassination is not unlike any other military operation and military operations consist of different phases that take place in a logical order. The first conspiracy, in my assassination theory, was this "Operation Order" (OPORD) which consists of these four basic stages:

- Identifying the problem

- Assessment of the situation

- Development of the course of action

- Execution of the the course of action

The Problem - President Kennedy had recently revealed that he was pulling troops home from the Vietnam Conflict and he was expected to target an "oil depletion allowance" for reduction that gave oil companies a twenty-five percent pre-tax profit. Neither of these actions were good for what was then called "Big Oil" or for what former President Eisenhower had labeled the "military-industrial complex". The CIA was under increasing pressure from the Kennedy administration because of operational failures, executive action, working relationships with the Mafia and a general consensus that they were simply out of control. Vice President Johnson was facing at least three different investigations, any of which could impeach him, and rumors had it that he would be removed from the next presidential election "ticket".

Assessment and Development - I believe that initially "Big Oil" and the "military-industrial complex" were probably the instigators and brought in the CIA who helped assess and develop the course of action. The Dulles brothers, Edward Lansdale and Lucien Conien are at the top of the heap for CIA suspects, all had been recently been removed from posts or otherwise reduced by the Kennedy Administration. Lansdale was a master of the art of dirty tricks, had planned several assassinations and was considered quite unorthodox in his techniques. The fact that we had Oswald and the CIA, anti-Castro Cubans, southern right-wingers, the mafia, russian double agents all as possible and probable conspirators indicates that an expert hand been developing and coordinating the plan. Many researchers have suggested that the assassination planning included possible cities other than Texas. I think that Dallas, which had an openly hostile atmosphere because of civil rights resistance and right wing politics, offered a better opportunity. In Texas, Vice President Johnson controlled the courts and local government through his lawyers and because of his political background. Johnson could enlist the help of local law enforcement officials and buy whatever influence was needed in the aftermath of the assassination.

Execution - Like "blood brothers" who share a common bond all the players above brought people to participate at Dealey Plaza. The CIA may have controlled Oswald, brought in anti-Castro cubans and Mafia hit-men (and Jack Ruby) as well as their own operators such as E. H. Hunt and Frank Sturgis. "Big Oil" and Johnson may have had a hand in enlisting Mac Wallace, "The Minutemen" (racist right wingers), elements of the Dallas Police Department such as Roscoe White and JD Tippett. Johnson himself may have been enlisted by Edward Clark who had connections with "Big Oil". Johnson even went so far as to have an argument with President Kennedy the morning of the motorcade concerning seating arrangements, he did not want a friend of his sitting in the Presidents car. There are many other suspects that have been named elsewhere almost all have some tie to the above people and organizations.

The second conspiracy started at least seconds after the President's convertible passed under the triple overpass. In the United States one is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty. In this case, Lee Harvey Oswald was deemed guilty almost before the last echo had faded in the plaza. I cannot conceive of how the most professional investigative team in the history of law enforcement, the FBI, could so callously ignore evidence in the manner it did. Unless of course there was a mandate to satisfy the nation that this "silly little communist", as Jackie Kennedy called him, acted alone. There is ample evidence that witnesses testimony was changed and in some cases wholly re-written. Movies of the motorcade were altered. Photographs were cropped, suppressed and altered as well. Many witnesses died sometimes right before they were to testify. Many more witnesses were harassed or were afraid. Evidence that didn't fit was ignored. Witnesses admitted to being forced to perjure themselves such as the Parkland Hospital Staff. The CIA employed a full time staff to sow disinformation about conspiracy researchers (this may still be going on). The Warren Commission was reluctantly put together by LBJ after being pressured to do so. I invite anyone to read the proceedings to get an idea of how badly witnesses were treated.

I must say that I don't think J. Edgar Hoover had a role in the first conspiracy I mentioned. Maybe someone, like a close friend or neighbor, had speculated on whether he would cooperate if say a piano fell from on high and changed the administration. I think this is a more likely a scenario. Mr. Hoover would have had to have had an active role in the second conspiracy for it to be successful. LBJ, his Warren Commission and his old friend and neighbor, J. Edgar Hoover, directed the second conspiracy while most of those involved in the first part were silenced, either willingly or unwillingly.

I believe this conspiracy is ongoing. These days the American government releases documents under the Freedom of Information Act when required but there are still some circumstances under which they need not comply. In Appendix C of the ARRB report (released in 1992), section 6, states :

Disclosure of assassination records or particular information in assassination records to the public may be postponed subject to the limitations of this Act if there is clear and convincing evidence that— © any other matter currently relating to the military defense, intelligence operations or conduct of foreign relations of the United States, the disclosure of which would demonstrably impair the national security of the United States;

Is disclosing evidence of a conspiracy impairing the national security? I think there are people today that are possibly in a position of power as a direct result of this treasonous act. I also believe there are others that know that this is not just a theory but believe that exposure would shake the foundations of our present democracy. I don't think so - I think justice and truthfulness will only strengthen it.

[Larry Hancock]

John, I would maintain you were much closer on your first scenario - with the exception of using the term "Mafia" to suggest organized crime rather than focusing on the crime figures e.g. Roselli, Trafficante who had been directly involved in the CIA assassination activities directed against Castro. You've posed several issues and I can only give brief insights to each but I'll try to list sources for each:

1) One of the fundamental tactical elements of the conspiracy involved taking Oswald out of Dallas and killing him at a location and with materials which would directly associate him with Castro. This had to be done because he was not a willing participant in the conspiracy. The Tippett encounter and murder essentially aborted this plan and from then on the conspirators were forced into a variety of reactive moves to try and fram Castro after the fact - none of which worked after the cover-up moved into full play. The source for this is John Martino, an accessory to the conspiracy itself and subject of a far too superficial HSCA inquiry.

2) Johnson, while just possibly a minor accessory blackmailed into play over the Baker scandal via Black/Roselli had no Cuban agenda per se (and although he ran the cover-up he talked frequently about conspiracy of various sorts over the years) however he very quickly became embroiled in the Kostikov national security issue based on the CIA monitoring of Oswald in Mexico City and his contact with the Russian KGB officer charged with sabotage and assassination for North America. This was the major issue which was used to drive the cover-up and to convince Earl Warren that a finding of conspiracy could lead to an atomic war. This scenario is now clear in the Johnson tapes and in the CIA segragated file releases to the ARRB.

3) Hoover himself took exception with the cover-up to some extent, he wanted to pursue the Castro link primairly due to events in Mexico City, the Pedro Charles letters and the Miami investigation of John Martino who was offering up a Castro link to Oswald (and Ruby for that mattter). We have an FBI memo describing the fact that Hoover did not wish to eliminate all reference to conspiracy in the initial FBI report - however Johnson's agenda won not Hoover's. It is noteworth that we now know of Hoover meetings with JFK and RFK in 1963, the latest being an RFK meeting to discuss Ellen Rometch and that sex scandal (she had been introduced to JFK by Bobby Baker) in which Hoover had effectively gained total security for his own job as the price for not investigating the security aspects of that scandal.

You will see the case for the Cuba/Castro conspiracy scenerio in "Someone Would Have Talked".

-- Larry

[Wim Dankbaar]

"However, you are on dodgy ground when you name Charlie Nicoletti, John Rosselli and James Earl Files as the killers. This is of course based on Files’ confession to Bob Vernon while serving a 30 year sentence for attempted murder. Files, a long-term conman, was attempting to obtain money for his story (he was paid $50,000 via his sister by Dick Clark/MPI). Several investigators have shown that Files story is a fabrication. For example, Edward Jay Epstein has established from telephone records that Files was in Chicago, not Dallas, on November 22,1963. "

Very very sloppy journalism, John Simkin. You post THREE LIES, without even checking with me , while you know I am representing the accuracy of James Files.

The three lies are:

1) Files was NOT paid 50 K and NEVER attempted to get money for his story.

2) Only ONE "reseracher" has tried to show and his name is indeed Edward Jay Epstein. He is a know CIA disinfo writer and has used fabictaion and lies to discredit Files.

3) Epstein has NOT shown that Files was not in Dallas. He has put out a fabricated story under the disguise of his "authority"

I thought this forum would try to be accurate?

And with regard to Lay, I can hardly believe you are 16 years old, but I am very curious to your source that Charles Nicolett and an associate killed Marilyn Monroe.

Wim

JFKlancer Forum #20171

"BOB VERNON STATEMENT ON ED EPSTEIN AND JAMES FILES"

Mr. Wim Dankbaar of Holland has asked me to respond to the

following:

QUOTE

In brief, NBC retained me as a consultant for their planned story on

Files. I hired the detective firm of Jules Kroll. JK established from

telephone records Files was in Chicago, not Dallas, on November 22,1963. We

then placed a call to Files from Dick Clark's office (DC was producer), and

I interviewed Files about Kroll findings. He said he had a twin brother, who

no one knew about, and whom he met shortly before November 22, and who he

murdered after November 22. He said it was his twin brother in hospital with

his wife, not him. His wife, however, said there was no twin, and Kroll

confirmed there was no twin. My view then and now is that Files invented the

story for the money it would earn him.

Ed Epstein

UNQUOTE

Please allow me to be specific on a point to point basis:

Epstein: In brief, NBC retained me as a consultant for their planned

story on Files.

Vernon: To my knowledge this is true however I do not believe it. When

I was informed, by Dick Clark, personally, that NBC had a consultant coming

in and Dick told me the consultant's name was Epstein, I immediately went to

my office on the second floor of dick clark productions in Burbank,

California and I called five of, in my humble opinion, the top JFK

researchers: Prof. Josiah Thompson, Prof. Peter Dale Scott, Former CIA case

officer John R. Stockwell, Gary Shaw and, last but certainly not least, Jim

Marrs. All five men, let me repeat that..ALL FIVE MEN...told me that Epstein

was CIA and was being sent in to kill our program on NBC. Prof. Thompson

remarked that the Kroll Agency was filled with "bureaucrats" (his exact

words) and he chuckled. I was further informed that Epstein didn't touch his

typewriter for less than $500,000, not only was he CIA but he married a CIA

agent (I have no knowledge of Epstein's wife, if any, at all), and that he

was on his way to see DeMorenschilt (sic) when DeMorenschilit committed

"suicide." I immediately ran back downstairs to inform Dick and Barry

Adelman (Executive VP of dcp) what I had found out about Epstein. Dick and

Barry listened and thought about what I said. Dick's final executive

decision was that we do whatever NBC asks in order to satisfy them. A day or

so later, perhaps more, Epstein showed up with an NBC lawyer named Marge or

Margie. Our first meeting was very cordial. We met in Dick Clark's

conference room at a table underneath Elvis Presley's jeweled white cape

hanging on the wall, next to John Lennon's and Elton John's shoes in a glass

case. I was asked to show Epstein all of our findings and I did. I answered

all his questions in a clear, direct manner, no adjectives, no adverbs.

Lunch was sent in. Epstein had ordered a chicken salad. During the course of

the meal, Epstein got choked on a chicken bone from the salad. I was sitting

next to him and observed him start to spit and gag. His face became slightly

discolored. I slapped him on the back and the chicken bone dislodged from

his throat. He appeared grateful and thanked me.

EPSTEIN: I hired the detective firm of Jules Kroll.

VERNON: I do not know who hired Kroll. They just appeared. I do know

that we (being dcp, Truth, Truth, Truth, Inc. and Bob Vernon) paid Kroll's

fee for it was deducted from our advance from MPI and sent back to NBC as an

imbursement.or at least that is what I was told.

EPSTEIN: JK established from telephone records Files was in Chicago,

not Dallas, on November 22, 1963.

VERNON: This is an outright lie by Epstein. The final WRITTEN opinion

from the Kroll Agency was that Kroll found "NO OTHER PLACE" that James Files

was on 11/22/63. Repeat: THIS IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE BY EPSTEIN.

EPSTEIN: We then placed a call to Files from Dick Clark's office (DC

was producer), and I interviewed Files about Kroll findings.

VERNON: I do not recall Epstein interviewing James Files, at least,

not when I was present and I was the only one who could get Files on the

phone for I had a personal clearance from the Warden. I do know that several

of Epstein's questions regarding James Files were asked directly to Mr.

Files by Barry Adelman and myself from Barry's office. The answers provided

were given directly to Epstein and/or the lady lawyer from NBC. I do not

recall Epstein interviewing Files.

EPSTEIN: He (James Files) said he had a twin brother, who no one knew

about, and whom he met shortly before November 22, and who he murdered after

November 22. He said it was his twin brother in hospital with his wife, not

him. His wife, however, said there was no twin, and Kroll confirmed there

was no twin.

VERNON: This is an outright lie by Epstein. James Files never stated

that he had a "twin brother". This is an outright lie by Epstein. The story

of Files having a twin brother was fabricated by Files' daughter, ex-wife, a

Priest and a mob lawyer in Chicago to try to disillusion NBC, or anyone for

that matter, and make Files not believable. It was a nice try but it didn't

work. Houston criminal attorney Don Ervin immediately recognized it as a lie

and told me specifically that is was a fabrication and that the old mob

lawyer was part of it..before I knew the truth about the matter, I might

add. This also caused me to break a promise to James Files and that was I

was not to go "into his family" for any reason. The same afternoon I became

of aware of the "twin brother story".I spoke personally with James Files'

father, half brother (a minister) and his mother's sister, who literally

raised Files. I knew almost immediately that there was no twin brother. I

also spoke to Files. I told him what I knew and he told me the truth.that

the story HAD been fabricated by the wife/daughter, Priest and lawyer and

that he had called his ex-wife and she came to the prison at his request.

She told Files that she still loved him and that she was trying to protect

him over the JFK assassination. Files told her that if she was to be called

in front of a grand jury to tell the truth for he did not want to see her go

to jail. I asked Files if he would also tell the people at dick clark

productions the truth about the matter. He said he would. I called for my

car and driver and arrived at Dick's office within 10 minutes or so. Barry

Adelman and I called James Files. Files told Barry exactly what he had told

me less than a half hour earlier. The phone call was recorded, with Files

permission, and it is in the evidence. At no time did James Files EVER say

he had a twin brother. Kroll confirmed nothing. Repeat: THIS IS AN OUTRIGHT

LIE BY EPSTEIN.

EPSTEIN: My view then and now is that Files invented the story for the

money it would earn him.

VERNON: James Files has never asked us for one single penny nor have

we ever given James Files any money. The night before Epstein left Los

Angleles, I called him at his hotel. I asked him why NBC cancelled our

program. Epstein told me that it was because we had received "too much

press" (his exact words) and he cited a small article in the Beaumont

Enterprise. I asked if he realized that on Easter Sunday, 15,000 people

MIGHT read the Beaumont Enterprise and Epstein told me he had to pack for he

was leaving early. I told him we will meet again.

A few months later, Mike Cochran of the Associated Press (now retired)

called me to tell me that the New York Post had written a piece on us. I

knew nothing about it and called my New York attorney and had her acquire

the article. The Post had run a huge piece on their infamous "PAGE 6" gossip

page, featuring Epstein, and the piece was filled with lies and blatant

misrepresentations. I called the reporter, Richard Johnson. I talked to him

like a yard dog. I was furious. How could some hack reporter do an article

on James Files and not contact me, the producer, for my input? It doesn't

happen.

Of particular interest to me was the article featured quotes from

Epstein and Epstein had signed a confidentiality agreement with NBC, as we

did. Oh well..

The conclusion is clear and very simple: Epstein is CIA and he killed

our program.

Now, ask yourself one question: Why? If our program was NOT TRUE, what

does it matter? No one ever tried to stop Nigel Turner or Oliver Stone or

Mark Lane..they told their stories..they presented their views...why stop

the story of James Files?

So I now have experienced the full blunt force of the CIA disinfo

machine. They call it "Damage Control."

Hind sight is always 20/20. I should never have slapped Epstein on the

back and dislodged the chicken bone from his throat. I should have let the

lying son of a bitch die.

--------

Tuesday, September 16, 2003

Robert G. Vernon

[John Simkin]

"However, you are on dodgy ground when you name Charlie Nicoletti, John Rosselli and James Earl Files as the killers. This is of course based on Files’ confession to Bob Vernon while serving a 30 year sentence for attempted murder. Files, a long-term conman, was attempting to obtain money for his story (he was paid $50,000 via his sister by Dick Clark/MPI). Several investigators have shown that Files story is a fabrication. For example, Edward Jay Epstein has established from telephone records that Files was in Chicago, not Dallas, on November 22,1963. "

Very very sloppy journalism, John Simkin. You post THREE LIES, without even checking with me , while you know I am representing the accuracy of James Files.

The three lies are:

1) Files was NOT paid 50 K and NEVER attempted to get money for his story.

2) Only ONE "reseracher" has tried to show and his name is indeed Edward Jay Epstein. He is a know CIA disinfo writer and has used fabictaion and lies to discredit Files.

3) Epstein has NOT shown that Files was not in Dallas. He has put out a fabricated story under the disguise of his "authority"

I thought this forum would try to be accurate?

As I have stated earlier there have been several “confessions” from people claiming to be involved in the plot to kill Kennedy. This includes James Files, Robert W. Easterling, Billie Sol Estes, Robert Morrow, Charles Harrelson (later retracted), Gerry P. Hemming, Chauncey Holt, Frank Ragano, Christian David, Kerry Thornley, Loy Factor and Roscoe White (via his wife).

The problem with these “confessions” is that they always name people who have already been implicated by other researchers. In fact, their names can be found in just one book, Anthony Summers’ Conspiracy (1980). The other problem with their confessions is that they only name people who are dead.

One has to ask why they are making these confessions. A false confession is not an unusual occurrence in high profile murder cases. The police always complain about how too much time is taken up with these false confessions. Apparently, certain individuals have a strong desire to obtain their moment of fame by confessing to murder.

In the Kennedy case there is another strong reason for people to confess to their role in the assassination. You can make a lot of money by telling your story to a journalist. This is an attractive proposition to someone who is currently serving a life-sentence (Files was given a 30 years prison sentence in 1991). Files has constantly argued he has not received any money for this information. However, John R. Stockwell has claimed that Files’ daughter was paid $50,000 immediately after the video project was sold to Dick Clark/MPI.

Evidence has also emerged that Files read a copy of Anthony Summers’ book Conspiracy before he made his confession. Files claims he did not finish the book because he found it boring. However, it appears to be no coincidence that all the people mentioned in Files’ story also appears in Summers’ book (including information that they were dead by the time the book was published).

Files does not provide any documentary evidence that proves he was definitely involved in the assassination. He claims that he does possess this evidence but he will only make it available to researchers after he is released from prison (an unlikely event considering his 30 years sentence in 1991).

Several researchers have spent a great deal of time investigating Files claim. They have accumulated a great deal of evidence to show that his testimony includes several lies. Even Bob Vernon has admitted that Files has been guilty of telling several lies (he also has some unpleasant things to say about you):

http://www.jfkresearch.com/forum/index.php...t=1276&linear=1

It could be argued that it is not important that Files has lied about his service in the 82nd Airborne in Laos. Or that he was simply mistaken about when Sam Giancana took over the Mafia family from Tony Accardo (although he does raise serious doubts about the truth of his relationship with Giancana).

His claimed relationship with David Atlee Phillips is also difficult to believe. As it is pointed out: “Phillips was a propaganda specialist. Not a paramilitary man. It is very doubtful that he would be the controller of a Mafia shooter who was training Cubans.” Even if Phillips did organize the assassination he is unlikely to have given his real name to someone like Files. It seems to me that the only reason Phillips is added to the story is because he is named in Summers’ book as being a CIA agent that was possibly involved in the plot.

The main argument against Files’ confession is that it bears little resemblance to what we know about a Mafia contract killing. Why would a Mafia killer leave forensic evidence (the famous bitten shell) at the scene of the crime? For a discussion of this issue see:

http://www.jfkresearch.com/forum/index.php...&t=275&linear=1

We also know that Mafia hits are meticulously well-planned. Yet Files tells us that two hours before the assassination the following conversation took place: “He (Nicoletti) asked me then were do you think would be the best place for me? "I said, well, I think the Dal-Tex building...." This in itself makes the whole story preposterous.

There is of course some important evidence that indicates that Files is lying about his involvement in the killing. This includes the research of Edward Jay Epstein. He established from telephone records that Files was in Chicago, not Dallas, on November 22,1963. Your reply to that Epstein “is a know (sic) CIA disinfo writer and has used fabrication and lies to discredit Files.” We know nothing of the sort. Epstein is a respected journalist who helped undermine the Warren Commission Report with his book, Inquest: The Warren Commission and the Establishment of Truth (1966). Epstein in fact does believe that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK. He has also argued that the CIA were probably involved in the cover-up of the conspiracy (hardly the views of a CIA disinformation agent). It is just that Epstein, like virtually all other serious researchers into the assassination, does not believe that Files was part of this plot.

It is of course a common tactic of some people to describe writers as CIA agents when they provide information that undermines their own particular conspiracy theory. Maybe I will be described as one after reading this posting. There is of course another way of looking at the situation. Maybe the CIA/FBI are using people like James Files, Robert W. Easterling, Robert Morrow, Charles Harrelson, Chauncey Holt, Kerry Thornley, Loy Factor, etc. to discredit those involved in researching the death of JFK. If that is the case, it has been a highly successful operation.

[Wim Dankbaar]

As I have stated earlier there have been several “confessions” from people claiming to be involved in the plot to kill Kennedy. This includes James Files, Robert W. Easterling, Billie Sol Estes, Robert Morrow, Charles Harrelson (later retracted), Gerry P. Hemming, Chauncey Holt, Frank Ragano, Christian David, Kerry Thornley, Loy Factor and Roscoe White (via his wife).

[I]Fist of all: I pointed out that your statements were based on three LIES. Whether you are aware they were lies or not, I corrected them and you don't even take the trouble to acknowledge or apologize. I resent that. As the main face and promoter of this forum, you have a responsibility to check your sources before you speak. Secondly, you leave the suggestion as if every single one of these individuals is not credible and had nothing to with the assassination. This is a false suggestion. At least Charles Harrelson, Frank Ragano, Chauncey Holt have had enoogh corroboration to deem them credible. Besides, James Files is the FIRST and ONLY one of these people who has confessed on actually having SHOT at JFK.[/i]

The problem with these “confessions” is that they always name people who have already been implicated by other researchers.

[I]Why would that be a "problem"? What do you mean to say? That the people implicated by other researchers, had nothing to do with the assassination? This is like saying that James Files canot be truthful because he implicates people that have already been implicated by others. David Atlee Phillips for example has been implicated by other reserachers. Should Files therefore better not mention that Phillips was his CIA controller, even if this were true? Sorry, I don't get it.[/i]

In fact, their names can be found in just one book, Anthony Summers’ Conspiracy (1980). The other problem with their confessions is that they only name people who are dead.

This is not true, there are clear discrepencies between Summers' book and the account of James Files. In fact, Summers is very skeptical about James Files. Files has admitted that he STARTED to read Summers' book but put it away after 10 pages because it was all wrong. Hardly a book on which to base your story, I would say. So again, you leave a false and manipulative suggestion.

One has to ask why they are making these confessions. A false confession is not an unusual occurrence in high profile murder cases. The police always complain about how too much time is taken up with these false confessions. Apparently, certain individuals have a strong desire to obtain their moment of fame by confessing to murder.

This is all true of course and therefore any confession in high profile cases should be subject to extreme (and honest) scrutiny. So far, Files has withstood such scrutiny. You are conscious of the fact that the JFK assassination is a game of smoke and mirrors and a lot of CIA disinfo. You seem to fall prey for it. I wonder what it would take for you to actually believe a confession in this case. A crystal clear picture of the man with a smoking gun behind the picket fence?

In the Kennedy case there is another strong reason for people to confess to their role in the assassination. You can make a lot of money by telling your story to a journalist. This is an attractive proposition to someone who is currently serving a life-sentence (Files was given a 30 years prison sentence in 1991). Files has constantly argued he has not received any money for this information. However, John R. Stockwell has claimed that Files’ daughter was paid $50,000 immediately after the video project was sold to Dick Clark/MPI.

[I]As with Epstein, there is a rebuttal of Stockwell''s and Perry's claims on my website, right here:

http://www.jfkmurdersolved.com/files1.htm

Why don't you post that on your page about James Files? And why do these gentlemen not mix in this discussion here? I'll take it up with them any time!

You can also read there about the $ 50,000:

P19, 42:17 Nobody has paid me any money for this interview and I have asked for nothing. In fact, I understand that Files's daughter was paid $50,000 immediately after the project was sold to Dick Clark/MPI.

What Files said was true. He asked for nothing, he received nothing. Files's daughters did receive $50,000 OUT OF THE KINDNESS OF MRS. WEST'S HEART for she was worried they would suffer from their father's confession. Mrs. West was right for one daughter (the oldest) was threatened and she used the money to relocate. The cash to the daughters had NOTHING to do with James Files. In fact, the daughter didn't even want the money and was reluctant in taking it.

So why do you take Stockwell's claim at face value and say that FILES was paid the money? This is a LIE. You should at least point out that, even when you choose to endorse Stockwell, there are people (like me) refuting his claims.[/i]

Evidence has also emerged that Files read a copy of Anthony Summers’ book Conspiracy before he made his confession. Files claims he did not finish the book because he found it boring. However, it appears to be no coincidence that all the people mentioned in Files’ story also appears in Summers’ book (including information that they were dead by the time the book was published).

Again, a suggestion that this evidence has emerged much later. In fact, Files admitted reading the book at the time of his confession. He was asked if he read books on the assassination. He said he had started reading this one but put it away when he found it was not right.

Files does not provide any documentary evidence that proves he was definitely involved in the assassination. He claims that he does possess this evidence but he will only make it available to researchers after he is released from prison (an unlikely event considering his 30 years sentence in 1991).

Files has never claimed that he would produce documentary evidence if he is released from prison. Where did you get that from? He has only claimed that he has it (in the form of Nicoletti's diary). In fact he will not produce it for it would compromise some of his mafia friends.

Several researchers have spent a great deal of time investigating Files claim. They have accumulated a great deal of evidence to show that his testimony includes several lies.

What are the lies? Name them! Don't just take other people's claims that have already been refuted. "A great deal of evidence"? Then at least you should be able to point out some of that evidence.

Even Bob Vernon has admitted that Files has been guilty of telling several lies (he also has some unpleasant things to say about you):

http://www.jfkresearch.com/forum/index.php...t=1276&linear=1

I will not comment on the behaviour and motives of Bob Vernon here. You are right about the fact that he has recently ventilated that Files has made up fabrications and lies. However, you should have noted that he failes to specify them. He has made similar statements about Tosh Plumlee and Chauncey Holt, much to the dismay of his own attorney, who also happens to represent the Holt family.

It could be argued that it is not important that Files has lied about his service in the 82nd Airborne in Laos. Or that he was simply mistaken about when Sam Giancana took over the Mafia family from Tony Accardo (although he does raise serious doubts about the truth of his relationship with Giancana).

Files has not lied in any way about his service in the 82nd Airborne. Why would he? It has no bearing on his JFK confession anyway. It is just sad to see that you take over the lies of others and (probably involuntarily) are obfuscating what is really the truth in this case.

Accardo put out Giancana as his front man to run his operations. Accardo himself always stayed the man in charge, pulling the strings behind the scene. Any organised crime expert and/or FBI agent working on the Chicago mob, can tell you that. Despite what the Stockwell's and Perry's of this world may want you to believe. In fact, many argue that Accardo stayed on top of everything even untill Giancana's death. If you need proof, I am happy to furnish it. Start here:

In the mid-1960's however, Nicoletti's luck began to sour. In 1965, Giancana was jailed for contempt of court for refusing to testify before a grand jury. When he was released the next year, mob powerhouse Tony Accardo officially dethroned Giancana and Nicoletti's stature began to decline, even though Battaglia and Alderisio had two-year-runs at the top.

Source: http://www.ganglandnews.com/column80.htm

His claimed relationship with David Atlee Phillips is also difficult to believe. As it is pointed out: “Phillips was a propaganda specialist. Not a paramilitary man. It is very doubtful that he would be the controller of a Mafia shooter who was training Cubans.” Even if Phillips did organize the assassination he is unlikely to have given his real name to someone like Files. It seems to me that the only reason Phillips is added to the story is because he is named in Summers’ book as being a CIA agent that was possibly involved in the plot.

David Atlee Phillips has been implicated as early as during the HSCA in the late 1970''s. HSCA investigator Gaetton Fonzi who authored the book "The last investigation"is a much stronger and direct source on that. Fonzi himself was and is convinced that David Atlee Phillips was "Maurice Bishop, although Veciana would not admit it under oath. It was finally proven beyond any doubt with the release of clasiisfied files from Cuban State Security. I recommend you to read ZR-Rifle by Claudia Furiati, especially her interview with general Fabian Escalante. The claim that David Atlee Phillips was just and only a propaganda specialist is truly hilarious. He became the head of COVERT OPERATIONS for the Western Hemisphere. Does that give you any clue?

And besides being a mafia shooter, Files was first and foremost a CIA asset. Phillips stayed his controller untill the late seventies. The truth is that Phillips was a COVERT OPERERATION SPECIALIST before and after the Kennedy assassination.

The following is known of David Atlee Phillips by now: He was one of the masterminds for the CIA staged coup by Pinochet in 1973, as well as the overthrow in 1954 of the Guatemala regime headed by Jacobo Arbenz. He was working closely with CIA officer E. Howard Hunt, another suspect in the plot to kill JFK and the leader of the infamous Watergate burglar team. In the 1950's and 1960's, Phillips was the CIA case officer for the anti Castro Cubans in Havana and Mexico City. The star of David Atlee Phillips rose to CIA director of Special Operations for the Western Hemisphere.

David Atlee Phillips died of cancer on 7th July, 1988. He left behind an unpublished manuscript. The novel is about a CIA officer who lived in Mexico City. In the novel the character states: "I was one of those officers who handled Lee Harvey Oswald... We gave him the mission of killing Fidel Castro in Cuba... I don't know why he killed Kennedy. But I do know he used precisely the plan we had devised against Castro. Thus the CIA did not anticipate the president's assassination, but it was responsible for it. I share that guilt."

According to his nephew Shawn Phillips, who is quite a famous musician, David Atlee Phillips confirmed to his brother James Atlee Phillips that he was in Dallas the day Kennedy died. To read Shawn's email: click here.

The main argument against Files’ confession is that it bears little resemblance to what we know about a Mafia contract killing. Why would a Mafia killer leave forensic evidence (the famous bitten shell) at the scene of the crime? For a discussion of this issue see:

http://www.jfkresearch.com/forum/index.php...&t=275&linear=1

Don't refer me to links that require a login and password. I have been denied access there by the forum administrator Rich della Rossa, for whose forum policies I have no respect whatsoever. He claims that I resgined, which is not true.

Files cannot help that the truth maybe difficult to believe for you or anyone else. It is not his job to make it easy to believe. All we asked for is to give use the facts as he knows them.

James Files says he left the shell casing from the bullet that he fired at John F. Kennedy in Dealey Plaza. He put it on top of the picket fence on the grassy knoll, after he had bitten down on the shell casing, because he liked the taste of gun powder. This shell casing was found in 1987 by garden service man John Rademacher at some distance from the spot where Files said he left it. The casing was in the ground some 5 inches deep, consistent with a deposit of 24 years ago. The .222 casing was manufactured before 1971, as could be determined from the headstamp. The local press gave only very scant coverage on Rademacher's discovery and NO mention was made of any marks on the shell casing. It is very unlikely that James Files could have known of this discovery, but there is certainly no way he could have known about the indents on the shell casing. Even Rademacher was guessing what they could be, he thought they were "ejection marks". No one had thought about dentmarks until James Files came forward with this information. He said: "If the casing is mine, you can recognize it for my teethmarks are on it. The end will be oval, not round." It was then verified by a number of independent dentists (among others, a professor in orthodontology Paul Stimpson) that the marks were indeed made by human teeth. When Mr. Stimpson was asked to examine the casing he was not aware of a connection with the Kennedy assassination. All he was told was that is was used in a murder. James Files could not have known these marks were dentmarks, unless he put them there himself or heard it from someone that put them in the casing. However, it is simply unlikely that any other assassin would have been so unprofessional to leave this incriminating evidence on the scene of the crime. James Files, at that time only 21 years of age, said he felt "cocky" about his deed. He now recognizes that he should never have done that. The shell casing is therefore a crucial piece of physical evidence for his credibility.

We also know that Mafia hits are meticulously well-planned. Yet Files tells us that two hours before the assassination the following conversation took place: “He (Nicoletti) asked me then were do you think would be the best place for me? "I said, well, I think the Dal-Tex building...." This in itself makes the whole story preposterous.

Since when do we know that mafia hits are meticulously well planned? You are dealing with people and people make mistakes. Everyone assumes this was a perfectly and meticulously planned hit, but in fact many things went wrong. Nicoletti and Holt arrived only that morning from Arizona. They had car trouble and a storm causing their delay. They could have been too late as well. And if it would have rained the whole party was off, the bubble top of the limousine would then have been on. The shot of Files was in fact one big screwup. Nicoletti was actually angry with Files, he thought that Files had fired too soon. Because of that, the Zapruder film had to be put lock and barrel, because everyone would see clearly that Kennedy was hit from the front. Other films have been taken by the FBI. But that could not happen with the Zapruder film. That’s why it was kept from the public for 14 years. It was bought by Time Life. You would expect the film would be big news and go all over the world. But no, they put it in the vault. It’s so clear, looking back. If the film would have gone public, no one would have believed the Warren Commission. This also illustrates the power of the CIA with the media. When you have the media you can make the public believe what you want them to believe. What else went wrong? Well, the fact that Oswald was captured alive. The original plan was most likely to kill him as the “fleeing assassin”. So something went wrong there. Oswald could have blown off the lids and spill the beans. Maybe he has done so, but the records of his interrogations dissapeared. How much clearer do you want it? Thus Ruby was ordered to silence Oswald. Furthermore it was not intended that Holt, Harrelson and Rogers to be captured. But when you have the highest authorities to cover up the mistakes, then you can get away with a lot.

There is of course some important evidence that indicates that Files is lying about his involvement in the killing. This includes the research of Edward Jay Epstein. He established from telephone records that Files was in Chicago, not Dallas, on November 22,1963. Your reply to that Epstein “is a know (sic) CIA disinfo writer and has used fabrication and lies to discredit Files.”

Maybe you missed it:

VERNON: This is an outright lie by Epstein. The final WRITTEN opinion

from the Kroll Agency was that Kroll found "NO OTHER PLACE" that James Files

was on 11/22/63. Repeat: THIS IS AN OUTRIGHT LIE BY EPSTEIN.

We know nothing of the sort. Epstein is a respected journalist who helped undermine the Warren Commission Report with his book, Inquest: The Warren Commission and the Establishment of Truth (1966). Epstein in fact does believe that there was a conspiracy to kill JFK. He has also argued that the CIA were probably involved in the cover-up of the conspiracy (hardly the views of a CIA disinformation agent). It is just that Epstein, like virtually all other serious researchers into the assassination, does not believe that Files was part of this plot.

You might be surprised how many reserachers believe that Files was part of the plot. All it takes is a true indepth look at the evidence.

Stilling, who was a supervisory special agent in Chicago for 22 years, said it is important to be cautious and thorough when dealing with projects about Kennedy’s assassination, because it was a defining moment in history.

“I personally feel the day Kennedy died, a certain essence, a certain quality, a certain feel of what it means to be an American, died,” he said. “I think most Americans feel the same way.”

He believes because there is sufficient evidence and probable cause for a conspiracy, a “fresh look” at the murder is warranted.

“After many hours of going over this, it’s my professional opinion that this definitely screams out for a further in-depth analysis,” Stilling said.

Epstein's cover is that he is a critic of the Warren Commission. His standard position is that their investigation was sloppy, but their conclusion that Oswald alone killed JFK is nevertheless RIGHT. If you don't believe that, you can literally see and hear him say that in the documentary "The Warren Commission". He may say he believes in a conspiracy. That's how you get information IN ORDER TO DISCREDIT it. It is a classic disinfo method. He therefore did NOT undermine the Warren Comission. He helped endorse their treacherous conclusions. Epstein may say whatever conspiracy theorists may like to hear, he never offers any irrefutable proof for CIA involvement. And how does his conclusion that the Warren Commission was right, coincide with his professed belief in a conspiracy involving the CIA. Tell me that! And if you don't have the answer, get one from him, before defending him. About respect, there are many many people who respect for example former WC member and president Gerald Ford. Even though he has admitted to altering the Warren Report by moving up kennedy's backwound 5 inches. The significance of this cannot be overstated. For with a wound in the original location, there cannot be a single bullet theory and without a single bullet theory there cannot be a lone gunman. Last time I looked, this was called "tampering with evidence", which is a federal crime and in such an important case as the death of a president it is also TREASON. The man should be in jail, and even if I am a minority of one, I will say that, despite his rehearsed repetitions that the commission "found no evidence of a conspiracy, foreign or domestic". There was a time that many respected Hitler. We now know that respect was a function of time and (wrong and manipulated) information or lack thereof. The point is: I don't look at what the general concensus is at a certain point. It might distract you from what the FACTS are.

It is of course a common tactic of some people to describe writers as CIA agents when they provide information that undermines their own particular conspiracy theory. Maybe I will be described as one after reading this posting. There is of course another way of looking at the situation. Maybe the CIA/FBI are using people like James Files, Robert W. Easterling, Robert Morrow, Charles Harrelson, Chauncey Holt, Kerry Thornley, Loy Factor, etc. to discredit those involved in researching the death of JFK. If that is the case, it has been a highly successful operation.

As long as you believe that people like James Files, Charles Harrelson and Chauncey Holt are phonies being used by the CIA to muddy the waters, then indeed the CIA does not even need to put out hoax stories or work otherwise on a succesful disinfo campaign.

[John Simkin]

John,  I would maintain you were much closer on your first scenario - with the exception of using the term "Mafia" to suggest organized crime rather than focusing on the crime figures e.g. Roselli, Trafficante who had been directly involved in the CIA assassination activities directed against Castro. 

The evidence available seems to point in two directions. I suspect that the guilty group has been responsible for planting information to cover-up its own role in the assassination. Ad they appear to have destroyed most of the hard evidence concerning the crime, it is a very difficult problem to solve.

I agree that John Martino’s evidence is very convincing. There does not seem any reason why Martino should have lied when he talked to Newsday reporter, John Cummings in 1975. Do we know much about Cummings? Is he considered a reliable witness?

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmartino.htm

I have a couple of problems with the CIA/organized crime/anti-Castro theory.

(1) I am surprised that so much information has emerged linking these organizations to the assassination. If the CIA wanted to set-up Oswald as the patsy, would they not have done a better job at it?

(2) The second one concerns the motive for the assassination. If this group was involved the long-term motive was to get the USA to invade Cuba in order to oust its communist government. People like Trafficante and Johnny Roselli were right to argue that by 1963 the assassination of Castro would not result in the fall of the communist government in Cuba.

If that is the case, the conspirators had to be fairly confident that LBJ would order an invasion of Cuba after he became president. However, it is clear from the telephone conversations with Hoover and Russell after the assassinations that LBJ had no intentions of doing this. His view was that this action would result in a world war that would “kill 40 million Americans in an hour”. The invasion never took place and Castro remains in power. How did the conspirators get it so wrong? Surely they must have found out what LBJ’s policies would have been towards Cuba if he ever became president.

To solve the case I think it is necessary to look very closely at what happened after the assassination. LBJ did not order the invasion of Cuba but he did bring an end to the investigations into his corrupt activities in Texas. He also kept the oil depletion allowance at 27.5 per cent. It remained unchanged during the Johnson presidency. According to McClellan this resulted in a saving of over 100 million dollars to the American oil industry. Soon after Johnson left office it dropped to 15 per cent.

[Larry Hancock]

John, let me tackle your four points separately.

First, certainly there is now ample evidence of a cover-up, much now available due to the work of the ARRB, however it is also clear that the cover up was a combination of three elements: a) an official directive to eliminate indications of conspiracy especially relating to medical and other primary evidence such as the Presidential limo and coming largely from the new President the standard Agency response to avoid exposing assets and process (such as the Mexico City bugs and human sources relating to Cuba and Russia) and just plain old CYA relating to contacts and surveillance by the FBI and CIA relating to Oswald. One of the most interesting examples of item a) is Doctor Burkley's offer to the HSCA to reveal information suggesting that Oswald was not the sole shooter. The manipulation of the medical evidence in particular suggests it was more in the manner of "managing" the material that entered the official record so that it would not obviously contradict the "lone nut" scenario.

As to Martino sources, one of the most compelling things about his remarks is that he first made every effort to maintain a Castro/Oswald conspiracy (public stance) but only very privately described the real conspiracy shortly before his death. And clearly he never indended his remarks to become public. Cummings is reliable in terms of having had Martino's confidence due to being one of the first people to really show an interest in his Cuban imprisonment after Martino's release but there is a second corroborative source, Fred Claasen, close to Martino in his later years and a business partner of his in South America, who also relates virtually identical remarks by Martino just before his death.

Third, I myself would in no way offer a "CIA/Organized Crime/Castro" scenario since I belive the evidence points to individuals acting primarily at their own inititative and with no "permission". It can be shown that Morales and Phillips had a long joint history in waging their own private wars against Communism, often very much outside of Agency control. As to Roselli, he made it very clear that even when he took the initial CIA offer to assist in the Castro assassination he had no sanction from the organization, only from Giancana and they did it thinking it might buy them points to reduce the heat from the Justice Department crack-down.

Finally, as to misjudging the situation as to triggering an invasion. They may indeed have mis-judged Johnson although we now know that Johnson was up to using a single incident (and a false one at that, with only marginal data when he made the decision e.g. the Tonkin Gulf incident) to order a major military response.

However Martino makes the situation very clear in his statement that the plan was to take Oswald out of Dallas and eliminate him in a place and with evidence that would be totally compelling as far as pointing to Castro. When Oswald was arrested it essentially blew the whole plan and left the plotters with limited possiblities for pointing at Castro - they did try in many ways but by that time the national security mechanism had kicked in and they were unable to carry it off even with Mann and most of the agency people in Mexico City agitating on a Castro conspiracy and Hoover trying to get Johnson to let him pursue the possiblity that Oswald had been used by the Cubans. A view still maintained

today by James Hosty to this day.

-- Larry

[John Simkin]

During your research have you come across the names of the people who might have carried out the assassination. So far different researchers have put forward various names including James Files, Robert W. Easterling, Charles Harrelson, Gerry P. Hemming, Kerry Thornley, Loy Factor, Roscoe White, Jim Brading, Loran Hall, E.Howard Hunt, Charlie Nicoletti, Charles Rogers, Johnny Roselli, Lucien Sarti, Jean Souetre, Frank Sturgis, Eladio del Valle, Mac Wallace and Dave Yarras. Is there any real evidence to link any of these men to the actual killing of JFK?

[Larry Hancock]

John, I'm happy to correspond by email about possible suspects but honestly I've found that it gets pretty unproductive in a forum so I tend to keep my opinions to myself or at least on a one to one basis. Except of course for those individuals I can present a case for myself and with one exception their names are not on that list.

The name that is and that can definitely be linked to the planning, coordination and possibly even the cover-up is John Roselli (or John Roselli, Stratigest as his business cards read). Lots of evidence there.

-- Larry

[Jack White]

On 11-22-63 I was certain it was LBJ and cronies. For the next 30 years I read every book and watched every TV show, and considered... the CIA, the Mafia, the Cubans, the Russians, the Secret Service... you name it, I considered it. But I knew it was not a lone nut kid named Oswald. By about 1990 I was back where I started. I was certain it was LBJ and

friends.

Over the years, logic prevailed. Who benefited most? Who had the motive, means, opportunity? Who could cover up the crime? Who could control the autopsy? Who could control the investigations and the investigators? Who could control the evidence and suppress or change it? Who could fabricate evidence in the hands of the FBI? Who could control the media? Who could control the public? Who could control the patsy? Who could fabricate the Zabruder film? Certainly not Dulles... Giancana... Castro... Kruschev... etc.

ANSWER: THE POWER OF THE PRESIDENCY.... especially a venal and corrupt president and his friends, backers, and cronies. Lyndon Baines Johnson. He controlled Texas. He controlled Dallas. He controlled Hoover. He controlled Dulles. He controlled the military. He controlled Warren and the commission. He had alliances with the mafia and the media. He and Hoover used BLACKMAIL and murder to control those he could not control. Hoover fabricated evidence for him. Hoover was his next door neighbor. He allied himself with Hoover, Dullles, Nixon and his backers in the oil/military industrial complex/CIA/military to carry out the murder.

That is the truth. It was so obvious all along. One of the most corrupt men in all of history... LBJ.

[Wim Dankbaar]

Hey, Good Post, Jack. Too bad we still differ on the identity of the three tramps (although not on the involvement of Sturgis and Hunt)

Wim

[Wim Dankbaar]

Please correct this in Charles Nicoletti's bio

"According to Chauncey Holt and James Files, Nicoletti was one of the gunmen who took part in the assassination of John F. Kennedy. Holt claims that the other gunmen were Charles Harrelson and Charles Rogers"

Holt does NOT claim that "the other gunmen were Charles Harrelson and Charles Rogers". He claims that he met both men on the grassy knoll and hid with them in the boxcar, were they were found by the Dallas Police, escorted to their office and released thru the back door later that afternoon. He therefore claims that he and the two men wrere ther infamous three tramps photographed in Dealey Plaza. Chauncey Holt did not know whether Harrelson and Rogers were shooters. He knew Rogers only as "Montoya".

Wim

Edited May 4, 2004 by dankbaar