Shanet Clark
-
Posts
1,604 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Shanet Clark
-
-
Al
Yes. This was provided for historical background. Procedures change. A ten year interval exists between this manual and Dallas, and that can be seen as a long time--or a short time...I didn't post the circa 1980 SOA manual because it is not really germane to 1963. In this document I am mainly interested in the terminology, "Chase," "Lost," etc., jargon which may help researchers.
JFK was chase, Oswald was lost, etc.
The witnesses who succumbed in the aftermath, their stories may also be better understood through the understanding of this declassified SOP manual.
Always appreciate your posts.
-
Poor security in Florida is no excuse for the events in Dallas.
The fact that no one took advantage of the poor security in Florida to kill Kennedy,
that has no bearing on Dallas. The security arrangements were obviously poor to the point of negligent in both cases. In Dallas the slow turn, detour, walking speed rate of motion, brakes applied in the ambush, open windows, overpass crowds directly overhead, lack of running boards and president in lead car...all these, whether precedented in Florida or not, point to co-ordinated interference in the security of the president, leading to his demise. In Dallas.
I agree with the angle that Dallas had airfields, railroads, roads and highways for escape ...and characters like Ruby and Oswald and the Dallas local police -- and all this made it a better spot for the conspirators than the isolation of peninsular Florida. If it was a pure agency operation, they would have done it overseas, SOP.
Nice Photos, Tim.
Shanet
-
Conference Participants and Researchers:
I would like to say thank you to Dr. David Mantik.
We have been a bit overwhelmed by the deluge of conference papers, but
I would sincerely urge all Forum Members to click on the link and read Dr. Mantik's paper "Autopsy Evidence" - if you have not done so already.
This paper answers many of the questions we all have about the autopsy photos, the X-rays and the clothing evidence---Dr. Mantik has thoroughly investigated these items of evidence first hand and has come to some very interesting conclusions about the fatal wounds and how they were 'interpreted' by the forensic authorities, the Warren Commission and the House Committee.
Because Dr. Mantik is not one of our "day-to-day" members, and the paper was on a hot-link, I think many of us may have overlooked "Autopsy Evidence."
This paper (with its link repeated below) is probably the most important paper presented at the conference, in my opinion.
Shanet Clark
QUOTE(David Mantik @ Nov 23 2004, 01:28 PM)
David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D.
(Editor's Note: This is an expanded and revised version of a presentation for "Solving the Great American Murder Mystery" Symposium, which was held at Duquesne University 20-23 November 2003. The speaker, who is the leading student of the death of JFK in the world today, has elaborated on the formal paper that he submitted for its appearance in this journal, while preserving the sequence of figures and photographs. The formal paper appears following the informal version as an appendix.)
-
Jim
I suspect that Maxwell Taylor is too high up the food chain to be considered Oswald's handler, although he may have been his pawn.
George DeMorenschildt or Howard Hunt, they are prime candidates for this role.
Shanet
Whoever was Lee Harvey Oswald's handler.On November 5, 1963 FBI agent Hosty reported to the State Department where LHO was working. On Nov. 8, 1963 the route past the TSBD was decided. Whatever else we may believe, Oswald had to be there for the assassination to be pulled off as it was. Access to the information was available only "IF" Oswald was more than what the Warren Commission portrayed him to be.
Find the handler and you will find the key....I suspect that Maxwell Taylor would be a prime candidate.
Jim Root
-
Thank you, Dr. Mantik.
We have all been a bit overwhelmed by the deluge of conference papers and concurrent threads the last two weeks.
I would sincerely urge all Forum Members to click on the link and read Dr. Mantik's paper if you have not done so already.
This paper will answer many of the questions you may have about the autopsy photos, the X-rays and the clothing evidence---Dr. Mantik has thoroughly investigated these items of evidence first hand and has come to some very interesting conclusions about the fatal wounds and how they were interpreted by the forensic authorities, the Warren Commission and the House Committee.
This is probably the most important paper presented at the conference.
Shanet Clark
David W. Mantik, M.D., Ph.D.(Editor's Note: This is an expanded and revised version of a presentation for "Solving the Great American Murder Mystery" Symposium, which was held at Duquesne University 20-23 November 2003. The speaker, who is the leading student of the death of JFK in the world today, has elaborated on the formal paper that he submitted for its appearance in this journal, while preserving the sequence of figures and photographs. The formal paper appears following the informal version as an appendix.)
-
John,
As you know, I attend academic history conferences and give seminars on nineteenth century political history. A typical session has about ten people listening to three presenters, and each presenter gets about twenty minutes.
For this I have driven hundreds of miles and payed hundreds of dollars.
I have spoken to as few as four people, and the largest one was about thirty people--and that was only because I was in the popular Civil War section.
My seminar here was visited by over one hundred people, and other papers show hundreds of readers....eight hundred people have visited Tim Carroll's thread....
so this was an excellent history conference by any standard.
Shanet
-
1953 Central Intelligence Agency Guide to Clandestine Murder
[Declassified, 1997]
As published online by the late Frank Olson's family:
DEFINITION
Assassination is a term thought to be derived from “Hashish,” a drug
similar to marijuana, said to have been used by Hasan-Dan-Sabah to induce
motivation in his followers, who were assigned to carry out political and
other murders, usually at the cost of their lives.
It is here used to describe the planned killing of a person who is not
under the legal jurisdiction of the killer, who is not physically in the
hands of the killer, who has been selected by a resistance organization
for death, and whose death provides positive advantages to that
organization.
EMPLOYMENT
Assassination is an extreme measure not normally used in clandestine
operations. It should be assumed that it will never be ordered or
authorized by any U.S. Headquarters, though the latter may in rare
instances agree to its execution by members of an associated foreign
service. This reticence is partly due to the necessity of committing
communications to paper. No assassination instructions should ever be
written or recorded. Consequently, the decision to employ this technique
must nearly always be reached in the field, at the area where the act will
take place. Decision and instructions should be confined to an absolute
minimum of persons. Ideally, only one person will be involved. No report
may be made, but usually the act will be properly covered by normal news
services, whose output is available to all concerned.
JUSTIFICATION
Murder is not morally justifiable. Self-defense may be argued if the
victim has knowledge which may destroy the resistance organization if
divulged. Assassination of persons responsible for atrocities or reprisals
may be regarded as just punishment. Killing a political leader whose
burgeoning career is a clear and present danger to the cause of freedom
may be held necessary.
But assassination can seldom be employed with a clear conscience. Persons
who are morally squeamish should not attempt it.
CLASSIFICATIONS
The techniques employed will vary according to whether the subject is
unaware of his danger, aware but unguarded, or guarded. They will also be
affected by whether or not the assassin is to be killed with the subject.
Hereafter, assassinations in which the subject is unaware will be termed
“simple”; those where the subject is aware but unguarded will be termed
“chase”; those where the victim is guarded will be termed “guarded.”
If the assassin is to die with the subject, the act will be called “lost.”
If the assassin is to escape, the adjective will be “safe.” It should be
noted that no compromises should exist here. The assassin must not fall
into enemy hands.
A further type division is caused by the need to conceal the fact that the
subject was actually the victim of assassination, rather than an accident
or natural causes. If such concealment is desirable the operation will be
called “secret”; if concealment is immaterial, the act will be called
open”; while if the assassination requires publicity to be effective it
will be termed “terroristic.”
Following these definitions, the assassination of Julius Caesar was safe,
simple, and terroristic, while that of Huey Long was lost, guarded and
open. Obviously, successful secret assassinations are not recorded as
assassination at all. [illeg] of Thailand and Augustus Caesar may have
been the victims of safe, guarded and secret assassination. Chase
assassinations usually involve clandestine agents or members of criminal
organizations.
THE ASSASSIN
In safe assassinations, the assassin needs the usual qualities of a
clandestine agent. He should be determined, courageous, intelligent,
resourceful, and physically active. If special equipment is to be used,
such as firearms or drugs, it is clear that he must have outstanding skill
with such equipment.
Except in terroristic assassinations, it is desirable that the assassin be
transient in the area. He should have an absolute minimum of contact with
the rest of the organization and his instructions should be given orally
by one person only. His safe evacuation after the act is absolutely
essential, but here again contact should be as limited as possible. It is
preferable that the person issuing instructions also conduct any
withdrawal or covering action which may be necessary.
In lost assassination, the assassin must be a fanatic of some sort.
Politics, religion, and revenge are about the only feasible motives. Since
a fanatic is unstable psychologically, he must be handled with extreme
care. He must not know the identities of the other members of the
organization, for although it is intended that he die in the act,
something may go wrong. Will the Assassin of Trotsky has never revealed
any significant information, it was unsound to depend on this when the act
was planned.
PLANNING
When the decision to assassinate has been reached, the tactics of the
operation must be planned, based upon an estimate of the situation similar
to that used in military operations. The preliminary estimate will reveal
gaps in information and possible indicate a need for special equipment
which must be procured or constructed. When all necessary data has been
collected, an effective tactical plan can be prepared. All planning must
be mental; no papers should ever contain evidence of the operation.
In resistance situations, assassination may be used as a counter-reprisal.
Since this requires advertising to be effective, the resistance
organization must be in a position to warn high officials publicly that
their lives will be the price of reprisal action against innocent people.
Such a threat is of no value unless it can be carried out, so it may be
necessary to plan the assassination of various responsible officers of the
oppressive regime and hold such plans in readiness to be used only if
provoked by excessive brutality. Such plans must be modified frequently to
meet changes in the tactical situation.
TECHNIQUES
The essential point of assassination is the death of the subject. A human
being may be killed in many ways but sureness is often overlooked by those
who may be emotionally unstrung by the seriousness of this act they intend
to commit. The specific technique employed will depend upon a large number
of variables, but should be constant in one point: Death must be
absolutely certain. The attempt on Hitler’s life failed because the
conspiracy did not give this matter proper attention.
Techniques may be considered as follows:
1. Manual
It is possible to kill a man with bare hands, but very few are skillful
enough to do it well. Even a highly trained Judo expert will hesitate to
risk killing by hand unless he has absolutely no alternative. However, the
simplest local tools are often much the most efficient means of
assassination. A hammer, axe, wrench, screw driver, fire poker, kitchen
knife, lamp stand, or anything hard, heavy and handy will suffice. A
length of rope or wire or a belt will do if the assassin is strong and
agile. All such improvised weapons have the important advantage of
availability and apparent innocence. The obviously lethal machine gun
failed to kill Trotsky where an item of sporting goods succeeded.
In all safe cases where the assassin may be subject to search, either
before or after the act, specialized weapons should not be used. Even in
the lost case, the assassin may accidentally be searched before the act
and should not carry an incriminating device if any sort of lethal weapon
can be improvised at or near the site. If the assassin normally carries
weapons because of the nature of his job, it may still be desirable to
improvise and implement at the scene to avoid disclosure of his identity.
2. Accidents
For secret assassination, either simple or chase, the contrived accident
is the most effective technique. When successfully executed, it causes
little excitement and is only casually investigated.
The most efficient accident, in simple assassination, is a fall of 75 feet
or more onto a hard surface. Elevator shafts, stair wells, unscreened
windows and bridges will serve. Bridge falls into water are not reliable.
In simple cases a private meeting with the subject may be arranged at a
properly-cased location. The act may be executed by sudden, vigorous
[excised] of the ankles, tipping the subject over the edge. If the
assassin immediately sets up an outcry, playing the “horrified witness”,
no alibi or surreptitious withdrawal is necessary. In chase cases it will
usually be necessary to stun or drug the subject before dropping him. Care
is required to insure that no wound or condition not attributable to the
fall is discernible after death.
Falls into the sea or swiftly flowing rivers may suffice if the subject
cannot swim. It will be more reliable if the assassin can arrange to
attempt rescue, as he can thus be sure of the subject’s death and at the
same time establish a workable alibi.
If the subject’s personal habits make it feasible, alcohol may be used [2
words excised] to prepare him for a contrived accident of any kind.
Falls before trains or subway cars are usually effective, but require
exact timing and can seldom be free from unexpected observation.
Automobile accidents are a less satisfactory means of assassination. If
the subject is deliberately run down, very exact timing is necessary and
investigation is likely to be thorough. If the subject’s car is tampered
with, reliability is very low. The subject may be stunned or drugged and
then place in the car, but this is only reliable when the car can be run
off a high cliff or into deep water without observation.
Arson can cause accidental death if the subject is drugged and left in a
burning building. Reliability is not satisfactory unless the building is
isolated and highly combustible.
3. Drugs
In all types of assassination except terroristic, drugs can be very
effective. If the assassin is trained as a doctor or nurse and the subject
is under medical care, this is an easy and rare method. An overdose of
morphine administered as a sedative will cause death without disturbance
and is difficult to detect. The size of the dose will depend upon whether
the subject has been using narcotics regularly. If no, two grains will
suffice.
If the subject drinks heavily, morphine or a similar narcotic can be
injected at the passing out stage, and the cause of death will often be
held to be acute alcoholism.
Specific poisons, such as arsenic or strychnine, are effective but their
possession or procurement is incriminating, and accurate dosage is
problematical. Poison was used unsuccessfully in the assassination or
Rasputin and Kolohan, though the latter case is more accurately described
as a murder.
4. Edge weapons
Any locally obtained edge device may be successfully employed. A certain
minimum of anatomical knowledge is needed for reliability.
Puncture wounds of the body cavity may not be reliable unless the heart is
reached. The heart is protected by the rib cage and is not always easy to
locate.
Abdominal wounds were once nearly always mortal, but modern medical
treatment has made this no longer true.
Absolute reliability is obtained by severing the spinal cord in the
cervical region. This can be done with the point of a knife or a light
blow of an axe or hatchet.
Another reliable method is the severing of both jugular and carotid blood
vessels on both sides of the windpipe.
If the subject has been rendered unconscious by other wounds or drugs,
either of the above methods can be used to insure death.
5. Blunt weapons
As with edge weapons, blunt weapons require some anatomical knowledge for
effective use. Their main advantage is their universal availability. A
hammer may be picked up almost anywhere in the world. Baseball and [illeg]
bats are very widely distributed. Even a rock or a heavy stick will do,
and nothing resembling a weapon need be procured, carried or subsequently
disposed of.
Blows should be directed to the temple, the area just below and behind the
ear, and the lower, rear portion of the skull. Of course, if the blow is
very heavy, any portion of the upper skull will do. The lower frontal
portion of the head, from the eyes to the throat, can withstand enormous
blows without fatal consequences.
6. Firearms
Firearms are often used in assassination, often very ineffectively. The
assassin usually has insufficient technical knowledge of the limitations
of weapons, and expects more range, accuracy and killing power than can be
provided with reliability. Since certainty of death is the major
requirement, firearms should be used which can provide destructive power
at least 100% in excess of that thought to be necessary, and ranges should
be half that considered practical for the weapon.
Firearms have other drawbacks. Their possession is often incriminating.
They may be difficult to obtain. They require a degree of experience from
the user. They [illeg] is consistently over-rated.
However, there are many cases in which firearms are probably more
efficient than any other means. These cases usually involve distance
betweeen the assassin and the subject, or comparative physical weakness of
the assassin, as with a woman.
(a) The precision rifle.
In guarded assassination, a good hunting or target rifle should always be
considered as a possibility. Absolute reliability can nearly always be
achieved at a distance of one hundred yards. In ideal circumastances, the
range may be extended to 250 yards. The rifle shold be a wll made bolt or
falling block action type, handling a powerful long-range cartirdge. The
.300 F.A.B. Magnum is probably the best cartridge readily available. other
excellent calibers are .375 M.[illeg]. Magnum, .270 Winchester, .30 - 106
p.s., 8 x 60 MM Magnum, 9.3 X 62 KK and others of this type. These are
preferable to ordinary military calibers, since ammunition available for
them is usually of the expanding bullet type, whereas most ammunition for
military refles is full jacketed and hence not sufficiently lethal.
Military ammunition should not be altered by filing or drilling bullets,
as this will adversely affect accuracy.
The rifle may be of the "bull gun" variety, with extra heavy barrel and
set triggers, but in any case should be able to group in one inch at one
hundred yards, but 2 1/2" groups are adequate. The sight shold be
telescopic, not only for accuracy, but because such a sight is much better
in dim light or near darkness. As long as the bare outline of the target
is discernable, a telescope sight will work, even if the rifle and shooter
are in total darkness.
An expanding, hunting bullet of such calibers as described above will
produce extravagant laceration and shock at short or mid-range. if a man
is struck just once in the body cavity, his death is almost entirely
certain.
Public figures or guarded officials may be killed withgreat reliability
and some safety if a firing point can be established prior to an official
occasion. The propaganda value of this system may be very high.
b. The machine gun.
Machine guns may be used in most cases where the precision rifle is
applicable. Usually this will require the subversion of a unit of an
official guard at a ceremony, though a skillful and determined team might
conceivably dispose of a loyal gun crow without commotion and take over
the gun at the critical time.
The area fire capacity of the machine gun should not be used to search out
a concealed subject. This was tried with predictable lack of success on
Trotsky. The automatic feature of the machine gun should rather be used to
increase reliability by placing a 5 second burst on the subject. Even with
full jacket ammunition, this will be absolute lethal is the burst pattern
is no larger than a man. This can be accomplished at about 150 yards. In
ideal circumstances, a properly padded and targeted machine gun can do it
at 850 yards. The major difficulty is placing the first burst exactly on
the target, as most machine gunners are trained to spot their fire on
target by observation of strike. This will not do in assassination as the
subject will not wait.
© The Submachine Gun.
This weapon, known as the "machine-pistol" by the Russians and Germans
and "machine-carbide" by the British, is occasionally useful in assassination.
Unlike the rifle and machine gun, this is a short range weapon and since
it fires pistol ammunition, much less powerful. To be reliable, it should
deliver at least 5 rounds into the subject's chest, though the .45 caliber
U.S. weaponshave a much larger margin of killing efficiency than the 9 mm
European arms.
The assassination range of the sub-machine gun is point blank. While
accurate single rounds can be delivered by sub-machine gunners at 50 yards
or more, this is not certain enough for assassination. Under ordinary
circumstances, the 5MG shold be used as a fully automatic weapon. In the
hands of a capable gunner, a high cyclic rate is a distinct advantage, as
speed of execution is most desirable, particularly in the case of multiple
subjects.
The sub-machine gun is especially adapted to indoor work when more than
one subject is to be assassinated. An effective technique has been devised
for the use of a pair of sub-machine gunners, by which a room contailning
as many as a dozen subjectgs can be "purifico" in about twenty seconds
with little or no risk to the gunners. It is illustratrated below.
While the U.S. sub-machine guns fire the most lethal cartridges, the
higher cyclic rate of some foreigh weapons enable the gunner to cover a
target quicker with acceptable pattern density. The Bergmann Model 1934 is
particularly good in this way. The Danish Madman? SMG has a moderately
good cyclic rate and is admirably compact and concealable. The Russian
SHG's have a good cyclic rate, but are handicapped by a small, light
protective which requires more kits for equivalent killing effect.
(d) The Shotgun.... [end of available text]
“Murder is not morally justifiable”
“assassinations in which the subject … is aware but unguarded will
be termed ‘chase’”
“…no papers should ever contain evidence of the operation”
“Blows should be directed to the temple”
Frank Olsons’s body was exhumed and a forensic investigation was
performed in 1994, three years before the CIA’s 1953 assassination
manual (which recommended a blow to the head before dropping the
subject) was declassified and released in 1997.
The 1994 forensic investigation discovered a hematoma over the left
eye of Olson’s skull that had resulted from a blow to Olson’s head.
According to the findings of the forensic team, this blow must have
occurred before Frank Olson exited the window.
“the
contrived
accident is
the most
effective
technique”
“The most
efficient
accident,
in simple assassination,
is a fall of
75 feet or
more onto a hard surface.”
“…no alibi or surreptitious withdrawal is necessary…”
“In chase cases it will usually be necessary to stun or drug the
subject before dropping him.”
“Care is required to insure that no wound or condition not
attributable to the fall is discernible after death.”
“In all types of assassination except terroristic, drugs can be very
effective.”
“If … the subject is under medical care, this is an easy and rare
method.”
.............your tax dollars at work............
Published online by the Frank Olson Legacy Project : frankolsonproject
-
AHA!
Just when I thought I was in over my head and had nothing to contribute, this Douglas Caddy character comes up.
Fred Emery, (Watergate; Touchstone 1994) had this to say about Caddy:
"(immediately after the burglary arrests)...Hunt and Liddy left an amazing haul of easily traceable material behind in [Howard Johnson hotel] Room 214. More was in Room 314, the key to which was also seized from the break-in team ['Macho' i.e., Bernard Barker]. This blunder wrecked whatever strategy they had for maintaining deniability.... Liddy recalled one further detail: Before parting he told Hunt to get in touch with "Caddy" and use the money. Douglas Caddy was a lawyer who had worked at Mullen with Hunt... Hunt drove to Caddy's apartment and related what had happened. Caddy was a very right-wing young man, according to Hunt's associate Robert Bennett. He, too, had worked for Mullen but Bennett arranged Caddy's transfer to the law firm where he was now working...
[at the jail after fingerprinting] "Frank Carter" turned out to be Bernard Barker; "Jene Valdez" was Eugenio Rolando Martinez; "Raoul Godoy" was Virgilio Gonzalez. Two of those arrested carried fake CIA identification "Edward J. Hamilton" (one of Hunt's old aliases) and "Joseph di Alberto" were the same man, Frank Sturgis, and "Edward Martin" was McCord, who also carried Hunt's alternative "Edward Warren"...
{Later Caddy withdrew from the defense of Liddy and Hunt and refused the $25,000 in hush money which then went to Hunt's new lawyer, William Bittman.}
Small world, ain't it?
-
Don
Some other questions about your impressive research chart.
One, how firm are the names of the people on the overpass?
Were they really all RR employees? They look like police/detectives.
Two, how elevated was Nix relative to Moorman?
They had similar point of views, but the classic gunman and carhood show up clearly in the Nix motion picture but not in Moorman's polaroid...also,
where do you think the car (the carhood near classic gunman figure) was?
Could the car have been up close to the retaining wall? It looks like it in Nix.
Has anyone identified the car behind the wall?
Do you agree that the limousine had slowed to eight miles an hour?
Were the brake lights on?
Thank you for all your efforts.............
-
John,
Are you familiar with XLIBRIS, the new print-to-order publishing company? They take your digital text, and for less than $900 will put a legitimate cover, artwork and trade-listing package together, then print to order one copy at a time, with no overhead or inventory... I'm sure this collection would break even and have a sustained tangible impact if published in this exciting new format...
Thank you for the opportunity to present my thoughts on the nature of the twenty fifth amendment to the Constitution in relation to the Dallas murders. Due to the theoretical nature of my new "incapacity of the President" hypothesis, I had no footnote references to offer at this time, but in future seminars, I will footnote in the professional style, as the others did so magnificently.
A great, great series of scholarly papers were presented...
-
Dawn
Did you see the CSPAN Conference Session by David Wimp?
Software engineer. He showed that the ZAPRUDER film shows Kennedy's head moving forward slightly simultaneously with the headshot only
BECAUSE the 1963 Secret Service driver (Greer) was braking the vehicle down to eight miles an hour at that moment...
the application of the brakes made BOTH JFK AND Agent Kellerman's heads bob forward together at the crucial film frame.
Wimp noted that a heavy limousine on a downhill grade, with an automatic transmission, will COAST at over fifteen miles an hour...it was definitely braking to "eight miles an hour" for the ambuscade, after the throat shot and initial rounds were already fired and had been heard by the security detail.........
You know what I think of scientific evidence like that....
Agent Greer never would have done this without the explicit command traceable to one
Clarence Douglass Dillon, President Kennedy's disloyal Secretary of Treasury,
the 1963 Secret Service's Cabinet Executive
as described in the 25th amendment.......
Shanet
-
Good Paper
Ties in with LEGEND, the book that shows the intricacy of DeMorenschildts' relationship with the Oswalds. A reasonable conclusion is that DeMorenschildt was the CIA handler appointed to watch Marina Oswald, who was in the family of a colonel in the GRU (KGB?)... then DeMorenschildt damn near adopted Oswald.
The basic point is so clear....ANYONE who could leave the Marines and defect into Russia only to counter-defect back to the States was obviously either an intelligence asset for the USA, an intelligence asset for the USSR, or both.
The fact that Oswald did classified U-2 related radio/radar work at Atsugi shows that he was a Naval Intelligence asset. The fact that over 100,000 doses of MK/ULTRA CIA LSD was in the safe at Atsugi shows that he was in immediate contact with MK/ULTRA Manchurian Candidate programmers while still in the Marines. (Colby documents @ frankolsonproject.com)
He was interrogated in Dallas, no report was released.
He was murdered before trial, therefore becoming a "lost" alleged assassin.
His own papers were filled with ridiculously self incriminating photos and documents, and he was in contact with FBI agent Hosty and CIA domestic WH agent Howard Hunt.
His palm print was found on the Mannlicher Carcanno after it was known not to be there.
Is this suspicious? Evidence of a conspiracy?
Of course it is.........
Shanet
-
The current President Bush made these two statement recently:
"...another thing that is interesting is that my grandfather was a United States Senator. And I vividly remember visiting him as a little guy. He lived in Georgetown. And I can remember him taking me to a cocktail party where he introduced me to Lyndon Baines Johnson. And I got to see other political figures of the time up close..."
"...take for example Vietnam. it was a war that was at times fought from the White House, by the civilians in the government. It was a war where politics sometimes intervened and affected military decisions---in other words, affected the commanders on the ground. I think that is a very important lesson for any Commander in Chief to look at..."
{Even within the context of a puff piece softball interview, these are illuminating.}
Interview with Carl S. Anthony, May 13, 2004 White House
American Heritage Magazine, November 2004
-
Great thread.
Not much to add, except that the point is clear that the MI guys knew too much and got caught covering up, a typical scenario.
As far as a further search, remember that the MK/Ultra operational files were destroyed by Helms but the program was exposed when the financial records were unearthed.
Shanet
-
Thanks
Clarence Douglass Dillon, Wm. Draper, the Union Bank (Brown Bros. Harriman); Sullivan and Cromwell (the Dulles international law firm); Mr. Robert Lovett and Dillon-Read all coagulated into a giant octopus of internationalist (by that I mean their loyalties were not at all limited to the best interests of the USA) fascist shadow government in the US and abroad after 1945...
The interpenetration of these pro-fascist organizations help us to explain operation PAPERCLIP, the activities of Frank Wisner, Secretary Forrestal's madness and death, and other inexplicable and provocative events in 20th century US history. The US, because of the Cold War, never really de-mobilized or dropped its wartime censorship, or security clearances, etc., and in fact used these wartime cloaking devices to paper over US/Nazi relationships like the postwar Gehlen Org/Allen Dulles relationship, the postwar IG Farben/Dupont/Standard oil relationships and the postwar US rocketry boom (made possible by Nazi scientists on US agency and corporate payrolls). Of course assassinations and manchurian candidates (MK/ULTRA) followed on these "anti-communist" relationships being allowed to thrive, and these institutions claimed the 'MIC' and removed JFK.
This forms the background for JFK's loss of security clearance, executive sanction, the Warren Commission and the ex post facto legitimization attempt inherent in the 25th amendment...this is just a continuation of the research of Carl Oglesby and Fletcher Prouty, I add only the theoretical capstone, offering a new interpretation of the constitutional amendment circa 1965-1967........
Read it, Lyndon Johnson and C.D. Dillon are the main characters!
Shanet
-
I know who he is talking about.
What's the angle?
Shanet
Jim,
Now you've really nailed me with my ignorance. I can't recall ever even hearing of a William Draper. Please fill me in.
Tim
-
Very interesting and often overlooked problem with the Oswald/Lone Gunman theory. He was facing the President from the sixth floor when the 1963 Secret Service presidential limosine rounded the corner. Hoover's explanation is very weak. The delay and longer shot range from rear was part of a triangulated ambush out in the open with shooters on the Knoll (n/s) using the overpass RR tracks for escape routes, and rear shooters (Brading? Rooftop man?)
This postioning of JFK for the kill probably has to do with Point of View of Zapruder as well and expected echo distortion.
Oswald is so utterly discredited as sole assailant, this is just another coffin nail.
Thanks, Al, you add a lot to our group, excellent posting....
Shanet
-
Thanks Jack
Any line of research leading into John Kennedy's medical history, whether behavioural, psychological, psychosexual -- or strictly corporeal and pharmaceutical -- will lead to the Incapacity Pretext and Rationale. His adrenal condition was unknown and could have played a role in the 1964 election.
His reactions to cortiso-steroids of the period would have been idiosynchrous, but certainly the above cited scenario is reasonable, and leads to the Incapacity Pretext and rationale. Care must be used in demonstrating the contextual proof of the Incapacity Rationale and Pretext, as Mr. Kennedy's health and private personal issues, as addressed by the security clearance granting community and militant right wing political oppposition tend to tarnish JFK's earned elected and defended Legacy.
Your support appreciated, I am still learning from the massive amount of information available here and on the internet in general. That wasn't a comprehensive list, but I was trying to bring the Cabinet level and secret intelligence authorities into the light of day. Based on what has been posted recently, I would add Maxwell Taylor, William Bundy and McGeorge Bundy to the list of characters in a postion to strip JFK of his security clearances and push for his sanction on grounds of "incapacity." Jim Root and John Korienek have shown the power of Maxwell Taylor and Robert Lovett, and Lovett helps explain Clarence Douglass Dillon. The 1963 Secret Service is the key to the whole thing, along with the Naval and Armed Forces post mortems, this is what the 25th "exonerated" and where they left their guilty fingerprints, on the US Constitution... When you read the Twenty Fifth Amendment, notice a couple of things: the cold introduction "In the event the president is removed" sounds like a live report from Dallas, you could punctuate it "In the Event: The President IS removed" etc. By setting up the VP and Cabinet as arbiters of Presidential "Capacity," it strengthened the Executive Branch at the expense of the House and Senate, and is obviously an ex post facto rationalization for the events of 1963.
I believe this approach will be vindicated in 2039, and be common knowledge thereafter.
The assassination was "legal" for the militant reactionaries is power, those with a stranglehold on the Oval Office....hence the puzzlingly large and ambitious conspiracy we are confronted with in "faces in the crowd" the medical evidence, the FBI and Warren "investigations" etc.
Shanet
Shanet rightly rit:But in 1963 the Republican Treasury Secretary C.Douglass Dillon was a responsible party. Lyndon Johnson was a responsible party. John Edgar Hoover was in authority. Alan Dulles and the Cabell brothers were responsible. Ed Clark was implicated. Tracy Barnes was implicated. William Harvey was implicated. Dave Morales was implicated. Clint Murchison was implicated. H.L. Hunt was implicated. David Attlee Phillips and Desmond Fitzgerald were involved in the murder, and they were gung-ho patriotic Americans.
Good going, Shanet...you are definitely on the right track. The above is not all inclusive or 100% accurate, but includes many of the major players.
Jack
-
Wim and James
You two guys are miracle workers.
Every time something interesting comes up, you have names, memos, photos, etc.
All I can say is that I remember that report and have always thought it rang true.
Shanet
Wim,From my understanding, the son of the guy who found the shell, Dean Morgan, claims the shell casing dates from 1953 and was made at the Twin Cities Arsenal. How he knows that I don't know.
The casing is also supposedly still in Morgan's possession.
FWIW.
James
-
Reasonable Post.
You should get a real name, bio and picture, though, you will be taken more seriously.
Short answer, they don't know and don't want to know. About the last thing a Bill Clinton or a Jimmy Carter is going to do is call in the CIA chief and say tell me everything you know about the assassinations. They have their suspicions and don't rock the boat. Power in the stock market doesn't add up to political power in the secret classified environment. Soros and Buffett don't know and don't want to know. A certain kind of blindness affects the senses of the elites, a lack of curiosity, an unwillingness to risk present advantage for future truths...the Ford Slip, the Blakey conclusions, thats about all you will get....the general sense that it is past and should stay buried, these are the essence of PATRIOTIC NATIONALIST SELF INTEREST:
see no evil
hear no evil
speak no evil
My country right or wrong, the past is behind us, let sleeping dogs lie. That is the essence of the moderate political elite's mindset. Critical thinkers, investigative reformers and fearless folk ((like us)) refuse to bend to such cultural dogma, and we break free of our nationalistic indoctrination, rejecting the false paradigm in favor of ruthless quests for truth and satisfactory explanations of the evidence.
Shanet
-
-
James
The Kolby photo and the Florer photo look very similar, a convincing case here.
I am quite certain "Florer" and "Braden" gave scripted disinformation after the shooting concerning what they were doing around the Dal-Tex, a ballistic point of origin. What do you have on Kolby? Who was he again?
Shanet
Sorry guys, but Florer is clearly not Shackley. (Wim Dankbaar)I believe Wim is correct here. The question is, could Edmund Kolby be our mysterious Larry Florer?
James
-
Dawn
Some people have no biography and have no face: and they are the ones who know the truth about the Kennedy assassination!
Seriously, I am quite proud of the level of discourse here.
The wingnuts have been tamed and the "cream rises to the top..."
Thanks to everyone for participating fully and taking some small risks
by identifying yourselves .... Shanet
-
History, one thousand years hence, will see a shorthand record of the state-approved coup d’etat.
The future’s historians will see a group of World War II-era presidents, followed by the assassination of President Kennedy and right then, almost simultaneously, the rapid ratification of the twenty-fifth amendment to the United States Constitution. Then the futile Southeast Asian land war, the Civil Rights Acts and urban race riots.
Other details about the decades will recede, one thousand years from now, the Beatles, maybe, a walk on the Moon - just shorthand survives - in the future historians’ understanding of our United States history.
I won’t dig out my T.B. MacCaulay, my Thomas Carlyle, my Tott, Elton, or my dusty old Edward Gibbon for you, but suffice it to say, as one who has read political history, that kings and emperors wrote and re-wrote the record of their illegitimate ascensions, at will and after the fact, thoughout all of our recorded history, across the world.
To believe in them makes you a positivist, a sucker, a naïve believer in progress and the State’s eternal accuracy, honesty and diligence.
I will not footnote or add a bibliography to this piece. The information you all are aware of, it is public and the facts are well known. I believe the theme, the thesis, the theory I present here follows from the facts, both inductively and deductively. Inductively, it makes sense of all the specifics, all the questionable government acts - and deductively it follows from this general principle: People in power tend to cover their tracks when they arrive illegitimately.
Historically, however one got into office, if he was finally. Emperor or King or President, it was legal. It had to be “legal.”
Now in the civil republic that we call the United States, in fall of 1963, certain forms were followed and certain associations were formed.
Acts were committed that were apparently crimes, but they were actually quite “legal,” under the secret regulations and security clearances then in existence, inside the Pentagon and White House, and then made legal again -
The trace of the actions and the identities of the actors are found in a few paragraphs of Constitutional forgiveness, the Twenty-Fifth Amendment, written in 1965 and ratified in 1967. A kind of ‘killing under color of law’ theory emerges from the study of the period, from the biographies and history of the U.S. leadership in the 1960s.
Much hinges on the Cabinet. The 25th amendment tells us that all or part of the Cabinet majority, with the Vice President also on board, shall have the power to decide on the incapacity of the sitting president. This means the role of Treasury Secretary C.D. Dillon becomes crucial in the deed and the aftermath. By deed and aftermath I mean principally, the Dealey Plaza ambush and the Warren Commission’s investigation. Read the twenty-fifth amendment, Vice President Lyndon Johnson is in there, and so is Treasury Secretary C. Douglass Dillon.
The Treasury Secretary is the top of the chain of command for the Secret Service. If Occam’s Razor points to too many suspects, then a unity forms from that, a super-ordinate explanation, an over-arching scheme, both simple and comprehensive. All is explained by the scenario described, in 1965, in the Twenty-Fifth Amendment.
The subsequent rationale, or ex post facto legislation - which ratifies a change in government after the fact, this technique is as old as the written language.
Lyndon Baines Johnson, Douglass Dillon, J. Edgar Hoover, the powerful Dulles brothers, these cabinet members and cabinet-level advisors to Kennedy and Johnson. I think they are mentioned in the U.S. Constitution. They could decide upon the President’s incapacity to perform as commander.
The militant reactionary political enemies of John Kennedy formed powerful nodes of power in the web of secret defense interests. It is the unspeakable reality of American political violence which is at historical issue. In 1963 mercenaries and Mafiosos were engaged full-time in the Caribbean and along the Gulf Coast of the U.S., that traditionally unstable US tropical southern border (since Dutch, Spanish and French times, and the war of 1899). Cuba, a right wing mob casino paradise, was lost to the radical, Fidel Castro. John Kennedy failed to initiate the armed air invasion plans the CIA had hoped for and the Bay of Pigs failed miserably.
Now we all know that John Kennedy was a charismatic and intellectually bright man, but he had a strong egocentric aspect, and orgies of all kinds generally followed closely on his person and his staff. After spending a lifetime considering critically the scope and magnitude of what I know and what I know I know, through both cognition and metacognition, deductive and inductive reasoning, published and private sources:
I find it was an inside job, it was a government job, and it was put up to important people as a fait accompli, “a done deal.”
The assassination was presented to Lyndon Johnson, C.D. Dillon, J. Edgar Hoover and Richard Nixon, as a done deal, a fait accompli, before and after the fact.
This was done by the spies, Kennedy’s enemies. The militant force used the security mechanisms in place to declare John Fitzgerald Kennedy unfit for security clearances and sensitive positions of authority.
Someone in defense intelligence or the CIA circa 1963 took this type of intercepted intelligence to a higher level, 'Well, Jack’s now takin’ the Sandoz doses with Cord Meyer’s wife, LSD thing they’re on now, he’s crazy now, totally mentally unfit do to anything as commander in chief, now he’s clinically, criminally, chronically insane, according to Caption b subsection A, paragraph E, and so on …'
I paraphrase, and form a theoretical scenario. My theory doesn’t hinge on Jack Kennedy using LSD, or having syphilis, or even suffering from Addison’s adrenal deficiency. My theory hinges on the willingness of the spies, his enemies, to declare him incompetent, and I think the theory is a reasonable conclusion.
And so that was that, from the Plans Directorate and 111th they scrambled to work, and the angry Cuban Alpha 66 group did the heavy lifting, with their partners, the mob. Douglass Dillon, Kennedy’s inexplicable choice for Treasury secretary, was the ultimate head of the Secret Service in 1963. The fix was in, and it was “legal,” due to incapacity.
Why Jack Kennedy made Clarence D. Dillon the head of the U.S. Treasury, no one will ever know. Robert Lovett had turned it down. Dillon, Reed & Co. was a Wall Street institution and C.D.Dillon was a sort of late model Andrew Mellon for President Kennedy. An attempt at bipartisan Cabinet leadership, and a sop to the right. Anyway, C.D. Dillon ran the 1963 Secret Service, a branch of Treasury then, and he and the intelligence paramilitary put the thing into place, and then they covered up the assassination with the Warren Commission and the Twenty Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.
Nothing else explains the route, the failure to prepare, the lack of running boards on Jack’s presidential limousine. Why no running boards, why drive at walking speed, why the slow detour? We can’t blame a building or a fence or a knoll, people did this. They think they committed no crime. But they implicated themselves in the apologia, which is the 25th Amendment.
Lyndon Baines Johnson, who was elevated to the now compromised (or politically constrained) Presidency, was sitting in the Oval Office while the 25th Amendment went through. After that Cabinet members and a V.P. had the power to incapacitate the President.
This organic legislation, a fundamental addendum to the republic’s Constitution, implicates Clarence Douglass Dillon (whose name was on the currency in the 1960’s), the amendment indicts Vice President Johnson and other cabinet level advisors in the defense and domestic security web, it explains the acts of Johnson’s friend and protector, J. Edgar Hoover, and possibly Sect. Robert MacNamara, and possibly Maxwell Taylor, the 1964 ambassador to Saigon.
This top-down scheme allows for the coordinated order of events seen in the event and its aftermath. The amount of troubling illogic in the murder and all the bizarre aftermath points to a Program, a Program approved by at least a few heads of Cabinet.
Jack was a playboy, a movie star, a total wild man. The people that lived up his rear-end, taping him, snapping pictures and listening in, they caught him being very naughty, and they took the case upstairs. Incapacity. Dulles got on board with all his baggage. The plan came off the books, the plane was off down the runway, and at Dealey Plaza the deal went down...
In the future, this will be the conventional wisdom, and all the rough consensus about a government conspiracy points toward this explanation, the “legal” model.
Sources? The Twenty-fifth amendment, that’s about as primary as you get, and the Warren Commission, and all it suggests, and neglects, that is primary, that is substantive, that is contemporary.
Affidavits of the assassins and the assassin’s helpers, and the investigative reporting of Seymour Hersh, and the late Mary Pinchot Meyer, and Dorothy Kilgallen, and the behavior of the 1963 Secret Service in the primary document, a color film by Abraham Zapruder, and the photos of the railroad overpass crowded with people over Kennedy’s bloody head…is that a primary source, a film of a walking speed open-car ambush?
The top guys did it. Those that control the FBI, the Naval Hospital, military intelligence, and secret service would never have co-operated without orders from higher-ups. I present a coherent, compelling, cohesive hypothesis, a theory to explain the facts.
In Dallas, Mr. Barnes was there, and Mr. McCord, Eugene Brading and Jimmy Files, Niccolletti the hit man, Howard Hunt, Frank Sturgis, Johnny Roselli, and Dave Morales, Lansdale the ugly American, he was there, and all together, so it looks like a government job, with mob contractors participating, similar to what was planned for Castro.
I’m a patriotic American and I wish the current officeholders of the Secret Service, Pentagon and the Treasury well, I really do.
But in 1963 the Republican Treasury Secretary C.Douglass Dillon was a responsible party. Lyndon Johnson was a responsible party. John Edgar Hoover was in authority. Alan Dulles and the Cabell brothers were responsible. Ed Clark was implicated. Tracy Barnes was implicated. William Harvey was implicated. Dave Morales was implicated. Clint Murchison was implicated. H.L. Hunt was implicated. David Attlee Phillips and Desmond Fitzgerald were involved in the murder, and they were gung-ho patriotic Americans.
The team of mercenaries and hitmen that had worked under federal control in the late 50’s were also implicated; Sam Giancanna, Mr. Marcello, Mr. Trafficante, the infamous Johnny Rosselli, Mr. Niccoletti and his driver Jimmy Files, they were all implicated. And the medical crews, and the FBI, and the Dallas police, who failed to protect the suspect. Oswald, who was lost to history, made one substantive statement “I am a patsy.” His career in counter-intelligence is evidence for my theory.
A highly-classified document once existed, it was the authorization for the executive action. Incapacity (with the eye dotted and the tee crossed) of the Commander in Chief; JFK was stripped of his security clearances, and his removal was officially authorized.
But in the Constitution itself is another rapidly written, but after the fact, rationale. This is an ex-post facto, presidential ascension, legitimacy rationale, a document like the ones we have seen so many times in British and Roman history. It was a national security crisis…and John Kennedy was clinically insane, from drugs. Kennedy was declared clinically incapacitated and was stripped of his security clearance, because he had indulged in the psychedelic LSD-25, which the CIA had introduced for mind control and human experimentation in the Chemical Warfare Program MK/ULTRA. The same agencies had spied on Kennedy and discovered this mistake.
The Twenty-fifth amendment gives cover to the events of November, 1963; especially since the Vice President and some of his Cabinet level advisors were still in power in 1965 when it was composed, and even in 1967, when it became law, ratified in “the summer of love.”
Why this sudden rush to radically re-write the rules for a Presidential succession? Dallas and the unusual ascension of Lyndon Baines Johnson was the motivation.
What laws or rules drive good historical theory? Theories explaining evidence must be concise, compelling, coherent, cohesive. The simplest scheme possible to explain all the known facts and misunderstandings. Occam’s razor, or the law of parsimony should drive theory derived from evidence. Keep it simple stupid. No bells and whistles.
So with the Kennedy assassination, a simple answer, an explanation, at last. But damn it is hard to swallow, despicable murder…like Julius Ceasar, or Alexander II.
This was a story of top-down orders, from the VP and a Cabinet bloc. The Commander-in-chief had suffered “incapacity.” During the Cold War, involving the Cuban mercenaries, and secret nuclear operations…
Johnson, Hoover, C.D. Dillon, Alan Dulles, the Warren Commission and the Twenty-Fifth Amendment to the Constitution, how does all this fit together? A top down, top level security crisis, an executive action, a non-crime, a “legal” event.
May God in Heaven bless our martyred leader, John F. Kennedy, and God protect us all.
L. Fletcher Prouty
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
Prouty, who I respect for his courage, is not always wholly rigorous.
He apparently believes the stand down order occurred because HE was sent away, and because his immediate reaction to the assassination was "they weren't following procedures!" which is of course broadly true.
If anyone knows of more specific documentation of a MI stand-down, please post it. He is one of the key supporters of the throat Flechette theory, which is not widely supported. The most interesting part of the Prouty story to me is the time lag between the murder in Dallas and the New Zealand newspapers about Oswald--which just simply came out too fast, in a very fishy and programmed manner, a frame which came off the shelf too quickly. He was near the south pole reading about Oswald's biography much too fast for journalistic technology of the day.
Prouty is also the source for the man in the tramps photos being Ed Lansdale, Prouty's associate.
Prouty should be read for background information and general context, and sometimes his perceptions of events are no longer on the leading edge of research.........
Is that a fair statement? He is a real leader in this field......
Shanet