Jump to content
The Education Forum

Greg Kooyman

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Greg Kooyman


    On 9/14/2021 at 3:13 PM, Paul Brancato said:

    Help me out - how is this document relevant? 


    I’m sorry Paul, I missed your question regarding the Roswell Gilpatric document.  You can find his reference to Ed Lansdale on pages 8 and 9 on the document.  It’s a downloadable PDF. It’s clear that Gilpatric NOT Allen Dulles was responsible for getting Ed Lansdale his promotion to General.  Roswell’s depictions of Lansdale’s reputation are very telling.  

  2. 2 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

    First, thanks Chuck, that's always good to hear and I think David and I are going to be coming up with something very interesting this Fall in regard to our Red Bird leads paper....its gone far deeper than I might have imagined and I hope that we can offer something new (and probably highly controversial) in regard to the manipulation of Lee Oswald as a Castro agent (yes that didn't play as planned but it doesn't mean it wasn't in the plan.

    Now in regard to Joe's remark, I might as well just be blunt and stop beating around the bush.  The following is strictly my personal assessment and not likely to change at this point.

    1) As previously stated I find Prouty very credible when he talks about his day job, in that regard he is a very good source on how American military support for certain covert operations was organized and carried out from a logistics stand point. So...first hand experience, good stuff and very helpful.

    2) After much research I found him not to be credible in regard to his remarks and purported insights in regard to the actual events in Dallas on November 22, which is one reason that I spent the time putting all the ARRB material (not just his interview) on a CD and making it available via JFK Lancer a long time ago.  And it was not just the ARRB, it was more work involving some of my own research on the 112th rumor.

    3) Initially I bought in to a good amount of his general geopolitical observations - over time I became a lot less sanguine about that and feel many of them were pretty speculative. That's one of the reasons I referenced some other sources on this thread, particularly in regard to Vietnam.  But that is not a dig at him per se, we simply know a lot more about such things now than he did when he was giving commentary on them - not personal experience, commentary.

    4) As to his JFK conspiracy hypothesis - its as good as a dozen others coming from people in D.C. over the years.  He was certainly not alone in being suspicious, or even seeing conspiracy in some of the directions he pointed out.  And he provided a few leads, names, groups to look at, etc.  So did others.  So his hypothesis passes the test of general credibility and actually of some consistency given others had the same suspicions.

    But to be even blunter a hypothesis is only  "a supposition or proposed explanation made on the basis of limited evidence as a starting point for further investigation."  Its very difficult to disprove a hypothesis which is essentially a suspicion.  So my problem is this - where is all the work on his hypothesis, who treated it seriously, researched it in detail and wrote about that research?  I asked once before, where is that body of work?  If you champion his hypothesis you have the task of examining it and attempting to develop it into something provable, at least a theory or scenario with as much additional detail as you can develop - at least take it to the theory level where it can be critiqued.

    So in regard to a Prouty hypothesis....great....he registered it and gave you some leads,don't just endorse it,  run with it.

    Excellent post Larry.  FWIW, I agree 1000%

  3. On 9/12/2021 at 8:44 PM, W. Niederhut said:


    I'll try one final time to engage you in an intellectually honest debate about Prouty and Lansdale.  As for the ad hominem stuff, it's not my thing.

    (Incidentally, I use the moniker "W" here instead of "William" because my full name didn't fit in the box when I registered to join the Education Forum.  That has been a life long problem, going back to my elementary school years.)

    IMO, your focus on that ARRB Prouty transcript is an old John McAdams propaganda technique to discredit Prouty's whistle blowing on the JFK assassination.  It's a lawyer's trick based on a logical fallacy -- i.e., that discrediting minor, peripheral details in someone's testimony implies that everything else the witness or whistle blower says is, some how, also discredited. 

    And, in Prouty's case, you don't even seem to know what he said about Lansdale, the CIA, Vietnam, and the plot to assassinate JFK.  You have, apparently, never read The Secret Team, or The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate JFK.  And yet, you repeatedly presume to impugn Prouty's reputation, calling him an inventor of "fables."   Why?

    As for your evidence, I already posted a detailed response to your CIA files about Prouty.   You never responded to my rebuttals.

    To reiterate, your two CIA transcripts confirmed that Lansdale was a decorated, highly regarded CIA official in the Phillippines and at Saigon Station-- as Prouty described in detail.

    They also indicated that Helms and Harvey resented Lansdale's management of Operation Mongoose in 1962, and viewed him as inimical to CIA interests by October of 1963, (after JFK put the kibosh on anti-Castro black ops and  Harvey was shipped off to Rome.)

    But your CIA files say nothing about Lansdale's relationship in 1963 with his old Company boss Allen Dulles, correct?

    If Dulles, Cabell, and Angleton were secretly running the JFK assassination op, how do you know that weren't using their black ops man Ed Lansdale-- as Prouty believed?


    How do I know that “ If Dulles,Cabell, and Angleton were secretly running the JFK assassination op, how do I know that (they) weren’t using their black ops man Ed Lansdale??”

    Ummm.. for the SAME reason that I don’t believe that Dean Martin, Ruth Buzzy, Sammy Davis Jr.,and Frank Sinatra didn’t all pile in to a  300hp Volkswagen Clown Car and escort Lee Harvey Oswald down to Mexico City for a fun filled vacation…😁

    I can’t believe that you seriously asked me to prove a negative... 😒 

    Now, on to your other assertions.. If I were in to the wild speculation game such as you are, I would suppose that the lack of Dulles’s man-love for Lansdale left unaccounted for by George McManus was that there wasn’t any.😒

    You keep asking me why I have impugned poor Fletcher Prouty’s reputation by calling his allegations “fables” without have read his book?

    Answer: my time is too precious to waste it on a book whose opinions and allegations about the CIA have yet to be proven.. least of all by you.  

    My time is better is spent on reading much more insightful research by authors such as John Newman, Larry Hancock, and Bill Simpich just to name a few.  🙂

    I would like to move on from this debate with you as it is crystal clear to me that neither of us are going to change each other’s opinion regarding ole Fletch..


  4. 11 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

    Regarding Dulles was the person responsible for Lansdale's promotion to General?  That's what I've read.  I don't recall where or the documentation for sure.  Likely some from David Talbot's Devil's Chessboard, and, I believe it's been discussed here on the forum before.  Dulles during his assentation from the OSS to the Director of the CIA became fond of Lansdale's philosophy and methods in the Philippines and elsewhere.  Then the story of Le May visiting Dulles office and while waiting on him searching his office, for a cigar, and Dulles not seeming to care when told.  They reputedly exchanged Christmas cards.  Supposedly Dulles petitioned Le May for Lansdale's  generalship to maximize his usefulness.  I believe there are more details if you dig around.   


     I am not sure where you read that either, but here’s a link from the JFK Library below with an oral history from Roswell Gilpatric that should clear this up..

    https://www.jfklibrary.org/asset-viewer/archives/JFKOH/Gilpatric%2C Roswell L/JFKOH-RLG-01/JFKOH-RLG-01

  5. On 9/10/2021 at 6:58 PM, W. Niederhut said:

    Try reading Prouty's books, Greg, before posting more erroneous opinions about the man.  You have, apparently, been drinking the McAdams internet kool aid targeting Prouty as a whistleblower.

    Prouty's primary source historical observations about events happening with the Joint Chiefs, Vietnam, Lansdale, and the CIA in the 1950s and during JFK's administration haven't been "discredited" at all.

    Nor has Prouty's "Lansdale Hypothesis."

    I must have missed your imaginary refutation of Prouty's hypothesis.

    The fact that Helms and Harvey had personality conflicts with Lansdale running Operation Mongoose doesn't prove that Lansdale was not involved in the Dallas op.   Does it?  You seem to be overlooking the fact that both Helms and Lansdale were favorites of their old Company boss, Allen Dulles.


    6 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:


        That mistake about Joannides and the ARRB transcript was already pointed out by Greg What's-His-Face (above.)

        It's a straw man.

         Now, pray tell us what Prouty's ARRB transcript has to do with the "Lansdale Hypothesis" outlined in Prouty's letter to Jim Garrison.   I'd love to hear your thoughts about the actual subject of this thread.

    Boy this is rich.. I provide documentation that the CIA rank and file did not have this fairytale relationship that you espouse and you continue to push a letter to Jim Garrison prior to the ARRB interview with Prouty?  Really?? Wow… talk about drinking the koolaid.   

    Your  “Strawman”  statement doesn’t hold water Mr. W.   YOU were the one that spewed that crappola only to back pedal from it when I called you out for your it.  Who do you think you are fooling around here?

     By the way, my name is Greg Kooyman..  I guess this is what YOU stoop to when you have nothing of substance to say..

    To be clear, I don’t hide behind an abbreviation for a first name like you do.  What are you afraid of???    

    Too bad that a Harvard Medical School Education didn’t provide you with at least a 3rd grade education in common sense.

    The ARRB interview with Fletcher Prouty was his opportunity to “put up or shut up” and he failed to provide any proof to ANY of his allegations, least of which was the Lansdale Letter that you have coined.😒  Your  responses on this thread have provided zero documentation to back up your wild theories.

    Or, maybe you believe the ARRB was complicit in the conspiracy by dismissing Fletcher Prouty’s claims?  

    What’s next W??  Proclaiming that Dulles was the person who was responsible for Lansdale’s promotion to General?  

    I can patiently wait for your response… 



  6. 16 hours ago, Chris Barnard said:

    - It’s an unsolved crime. Discussion is important, so much of the information gained is because many many people have talked through theories, some valid, some not. If you think the names you mention were not influenced in their thinking by others; then you’re mistaken. If you’re not bought into this theory, it shouldn’t irk or agitate you, just scroll on past, it’s as easy as that. 

    - What were Prouty’s motivations for lying or misleading people? Book sales? Fame? 

    - Do you have some issues with Lansdale being involved, or just it just seem far fetched? What are his credentials? Is he someone who might be useful in a coup d’etat? Or, someone who wouldn’t be of use? 


     I often do just that..scroll on by.  In this case, I saw people posting on things that were in my view long ago discredited and I decided to speak my mind. If people on this forum want to state a position about a pet theory, they should be prepared to back their position up with facts.  That’s what a healthy debate is all about. Or, would you prefer to dwell in the depths of an echo chamber?

    Personally,  I would prefer that some here discuss what researchers like Larry Hancock, David Boylan,Bill Kelley,Bill Simpich, John Newman, Alan Dale, Jefferson Morley and others the merits and details of their latest works.  

    Better yet, it would be a welcome change to see a thread started about any one of the thousands of document releases from 2017/18 and have a discussion about what they entail and how they may fit or not fit on the overall case.  

    To me, that’s what moves the football closer to the goal in my view.  

    It’s what I hope the younger folks on this forum will endeavor to tackle.

  7. 1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:


         FYI.  I'm Dr. Niederhut, a graduate of Harvard Medical School (Class of '83.)  Mr. Niederhut was my late father.

        Have you ever read Prouty's books-- The Secret Team and The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate JFK?

        You never answered that question, (above) but, judging from your several erroneous comments about Prouty and his work, I'm assuming that the answer is, "no."  Correct? 

        So, to begin, it's somewhat useless to discuss Prouty's work and his theories with someone who has never even read them.   (As for the George Johannides/Prouty incident, someone mentioned it on an older thread, and I must have misunderstood the context.)

         You say that I have gone strangely silent?  Huh?  Did you read my lengthy comment to Larry Hancock from last night (above?)

         What is your understanding of Prouty's analysis of the "secret team," and of Ed Lansdale's work with the CIA and Saigon Station?  Are you suggesting that Lansdale did not work with Allen Dulles and the CIA during his storied career?  🤣

        As for General Krulak's comments to Livingstone in 1990, has it occurred to you that Krulak may have been reluctant to stick his neck out as a whistleblower on the CIA assassination op in Dallas?

        My take is that Prouty and Krulak agreed on the photo identification of their colleague Ed Lansdale in Dealey Plaza, but Krulak didn't want to be targeted for assassination by blowing the whistle.

        Meanwhile, as I requested after your original comments on this thread, please let us know which details of Prouty's "Lansdale Hypothesis" are inaccurate.

        Your answer could go here this time: _Answer: All of them.____________________________________________________________________.

       Thanks, in advance, for finally answering my questions.

    Dr. Neiderhut,

    I addressed you as “Mr. Neiderhut” simply because your moniker on this board does not reveal your first name. You graduated from Harvard Medical School? Congratulations 🎊🍾🎈 

    I mean that sincerely.  However; it literally adds nothing to this discussion here unless by doing so you are implying that your education bonafides somehow make you an authority on the assassination. 

    My comment about your silence was regarding your non response to my last post after I had sent you documents proving that Lansdale did NOT have the confidence of senior CIA officers in 1962.   I was well aware of your posts to Larry, but I was wondering why you had as yet responded to me.   That was it.

    Frankly, I find it hilarious that you say it’s somewhat useless to engage me in a discussion if I haven’t read Prouty’s works, and then dive right in and do exactly that..(sigh)

    So, in the spirit of cooperation here are my answers to your questions:

        Have you ever read Prouty's books-- The Secret Team and The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate JFK?

    No.  But that doesn’t mean I haven’t read about Prouty and his views.  I just  never got around to buying and reading any of his books.  To be honest, when I first found out about him being Stone’s Mr. X, I was intrigued.   I did some online reading about his theories.  It’s just that after doing my own research, I have come to disagree with his allegations especially as they relate to Ed Lansdale.

    What is your understanding of Prouty's analysis of the "secret team," and of Ed Lansdale's work with the CIA and Saigon Station?  Are you suggesting that Lansdale did not work with Allen Dulles and the CIAduring his storied career?  🤣

    I think I answered what I think of Prouty’s analysis of the “secret team”, but to clarify.. I don’t buy it.  
    Now, for Ed Lansdale’s work for the CIA I am assuming you mean what he did in the Philippines and in Vietnam?

    Yes. I believe he was there and it is well documented what he did over there by sources other than that of Fletcher Prouty.  

    Do I believe that Ed Lansdale worked for Allen Dulles and the CIA during his storied career? Yes.  I am not suggesting that at all.  I believe he did contract work on assignment for the CIA in the Philippines and in Vietnam.

    You do know who put Ed Lansdale in charge of Operation Mongoose, don’t you? 🤫 Hint: It wasn’t Allen Dulles 

    It was John and Robert Kennedy.  

    You do know what the CIA’s true feelings were about some of the hair brained schemes that Ed Lansdale came up with during his 1 year reign over Mongoose was don’t you?

    Hint: It wasn’t good.  let’s just say that guys like Richard Helms, William K. Harvey, and Sam Halpern all pretty much treated Lansdale for the political appointee that he was and tried not to let Lansdale get in their way of doing things when it came to Cuba and Castro. 

    So, my humble view remains that if Lansdale didn’t command the respect of William K.Harvey, then I firmly believe that he could not have been a part of any assassination plot involving CIA assets and officers.  I do put William Harvey on my suspect list. Ed Lansdale is not on that short list..


        As for General Krulak's comments to Livingstone in 1990, has it occurred to you that Krulak may have been reluctant to stick his neck out as a whistleblower on theCIA assassination op in Dallas?

        My take is that Prouty and Krulak agreed on the photo identification of their colleague Ed Lansdale in Dealey Plaza, but Krulak didn't want to be targeted for assassination by blowing the whistle.


    Answer: No.  That never occurred to me because I take Krulak’s actual words over what Fletcher Prouty claims Krulak told him.🤥

    As for your assertion that Krulak kept quiet because he was afraid of being a target of an assassination is laughable.  Who’s the General afraid of getting hit by?  The ghost of Ed Lansdale?  (Yes, he too was already deceased by 1990)
    Just so you know a tidbit about me, I am a combat veteran that served my country with distinction for 6 years active and 4 years inactive reserves.  I can tell you that in my view that I seriously doubt General Krulak held back for fear of his own life.. most if not all of us veterans are pretty good at defending ourselves and do not live our lives in fear of our own shadow.

    Quid Pro Quo:  Now that you’ve gotten my answers, I am still waiting for your rebuttals to the 2 documents I sent you that underscore the fact that Lansdale was not well thought of within the ranks of the CIA by 1962.  (Allen Dulles notwithstanding of course)

    I am ready to wait until hell freezes over if that’s what it takes…😁


  8. 11 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

        Understood, Larry.  But wouldn't we all agree, in the end, that Fletcher Prouty was, in fact, a rare, primary-source historical witness of Ed Lansdale's career, and of special ops involving the CIA and the U.S. military in the 50s and early 60s?  He wasn't on Allen Dulles' "Secret Team," but he worked with some of them, including Lansdale.

        Prouty was spot on in his description of the events leading up to JFK issuing NSAM263, and its puzzling reversal after 11/22/63.  He smelled the rat.

        Secondly, as I posted last year, Prouty appears to have been a highly credible, honest character-- the opposite of a sociopath.  For example, he was deeply troubled by JFK's assassination, and appropriately skeptical of the Warren Commission narrative.  That's why the McAdams type propaganda impugning Prouty's character and credibility rings so hollow.  It doesn't fit at all with the measure of the man that emerges from a careful reading his writings.

        Didn't someone also point out that Prouty's responses to the ARRB may have been influenced by the fact that he saw George Johannides in the room, and may have been concerned about the prospect of committing suicide with a CIA shotgun?”

        In his books, Prouty describes details about Ed Lansdale and his associates that he witnessed firsthand-- e.g., Lansdale joking about throwing Vietnamese guys out of helicopters, and staging false flag ops in Vietnam and the Philippines.  Many of his observations of Lansdale don't fit with Lansdale's official biography.

        Finally, how many dark details about Ed Lansdale's black ops career are likely to be found in documents?  Surely, the man must have been careful to cover his tracks.   And, if there are insufficient documents, does that, necessarily, invalidate Prouty's firsthand observations and theories about Lansdale?”


    Mr. Neiderhut, by your comments  highlighted by me above; are you seriously implying that the Ghost of George Joannides was actually in the room quietly intimidating poor Fletcher Prouty into holding back his evidence to support his wild claims?  Seriously?😂

    Apparently you either believe in the supernatural, or are completely oblivious to the fact that George Joannides was long since dead by the time Prouty was interviewed by the ARRB having Died in 1990.

       (By the way, you have gone strangely silent since I have sent you the documents you asked for.)   

    But please, explain away about how Lansdale could have possibly planned  and executed an assassination plot without the full support and contacts of the CIA? 

    Question for you.. have you listened to researcher Harrison Livingstone’s phone interview with General Krulak in 1990?  I have.  Let’s just say that General’s own words do not back up Prouty’s claims of the supposed Lansdale photo in Dallas.

    Simple common sense dictates that Prouty’s allegations in his letter to Garrison cannot be supported by the facts.  If you have any facts that refute my assertion, by all means please enlighten me.    


  9. 12 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:


         One thing that I have observed is that Prouty's detractors are people who never read his book, The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate JFK.  Have you read it?

         I'm not familiar with the details you mention about Lansdale's poor relationship with William Harvey and Richard Helms.  My impression, though, was that Lansdale was very popular with Allen Dulles after the stunningly successful Magsaysay coup.  Do you have a source I could study regarding Lansdale and Helms?

         The Lansdale/Dallas info from John Newman and David Lifton was posted recently by me on Jim Hargrove's thread about Dulles as the mastermind of the JFK assassination.

         As for Prouty's credibility and the ARRB interview, we've already discussed this at considerable length here on an Education Forum thread that ran to 24 pages last year -- with informative commentaries by Larry Hancock, James DiEugenio, Jeff Carter, and others on the forum.*

         In fact, I asked Larry Hancock on that thread about his opinion of Prouty's theories about Lansdale and the JFK assassination.  Larry did not have a definite opinion about Prouty's theories about Lansdale's possible involvement in the JFK assassination.



    Larry Hancock

    • Larry Hancock Explorer
    • Members
    • Gender:Male
    • Location:Oklahoma USA

    I don't know that I disagree at all about Lansdale's activities in that period, I actually thought I had said that earlier but maybe not....what I do find questionable are Prouty's remarks about presidential protection, about the activation of the 112th and its then being shut down etc...the points he appears to me to have recanted in his ARRB remarks.

    That has little to nothing to do with his identification of Lansdale in Dallas or of his speculation about Lansdale and a conspiracy.  I'm ambivalent about that; if somebody can prove that it was Lansdale in Dallas (I did dabble in that for a time, fruitlessly) and in the photo that would be very interesting...but then you need to take that and work it into a full hypothesis on his role, his contacts, the larger picture of the conspiracy.

    Which is why I don't really have anything to contribute beyond that point other than personal opinions...when I hit that point in a thread it seems a good time for me to move on.

    You asked me for some documentation on Lansdale’s relationship with senior members of the CIA so I will give you a couple to read…

    here’s a link to a document on the MFF website: 



    It’s dated 1975 from the Director of the Office of Security to the CIA Inspector General.


    Below is a pdf of a Memo to Fritz Schwartz of the SSCIA from Paul Wallach who had recently interview former CIA employee George McManus regarding his time serving as special assistant to DDP Helms regarding Cuban affairs and in specific; Operation Mongoose.





  10. 6 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

    Interesting Greg, 81 posts in 16 years.  You've not been really involved in the conversation.  Five of them in the last few hours about Prouty.  I still find him credible.  He was there and spoke truth.

    Ron, what you say is true.  I have not been an active conversationalist here over the years.  On the other hand, I posted only when I felt strongly enough about something to voice my opinion.  Prouty was indeed there but I believe he embellished his story. To me, it seems pretty clear that the ARRB came to that same conclusion as well.  

  11. 28 minutes ago, David Andrews said:

    We've all pretty much seen that doc since the last time it was posted by some revisionist.  Jeremy Gunn and Doug Horne have revealed that the ARRB, for its merits, was not out to solve the JFKA, and dismissed the input of those who were.

    I agree that the ARRB could have done a lot more in the time they had to get records made public.  However, it was pretty clear that when they interviewed Prouty it was the purpose of determining if he had any documentation or files to back up his claims.  When it was determined that he had no actual documentation/evidence, they came to the conclusion that everything Prouty had published and including his statements to the ARRB could not be substantiated with any documentation whatsoever.  
    That’s not revisionist, it’s merely conclusions based on the facts and the lack thereof by Prouty.

  12. 18 minutes ago, David Andrews said:

    Greg, this presentation on Prouty and Lansdale was posted here the other day:



    That’s a 29 year old interview with John Newman.  I doubt that John still advocates the views of L Fletcher Prouty today.  Did you see the link to the finds of the AARB in 1996 that I posted in response to W.Neiderhut?

    Its pretty revealing.  

    https://ia601809.us.archive.org/8/items/wray-tim-and-jeremy-gunn-christopher-barger-joan-zimmerman.-interview-with-l.-fl/Wray%2C Tim%2C and Jeremy Gunn%2C Christopher Barger%2C Joan Zimmerman. Interview with L. Fletcher Prouty. Summary prepared by Christopher Barger on October 23%2C 1996. (Assassination Records Review Board%2C September 24%2C 1996).pdf



  13. 13 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

    Newsflash, Greg.    Col. Fletcher Prouty was not a "first generation researcher" or a teller of "fables."  He was a primary source and "Deep State" insider in 1963-- the Chief Liaison of the Joint Chiefs to the CIA for Special Ops.

    Your assertion that Prouty was a teller of fables sounds like re-cycled John McAdams propaganda.

    If you have any valid information debunking Prouty's "Lansdale Hypothesis," (excerpted from his famous letter to Garrison) I'd love to see it.  Let us know.

    On the conrary, JFKA "researchers" like John Newman and David Lifton have, apparently, found evidence supporting Prouty's primary source "Lansdale Hypothesis."

    Oh boy. .. where do I start?  First, I never stated that Fletcher Prouty was a 1st generation researcher.  Please re-read what I wrote.   Do I believe that Fletcher Prouty worked as a liaison to facilitate Air Force assets for the CIA?  Yes I do.  Do I believe his theories about who was behind the Assassination?  Absolutely not.  All anyone needs to do is look at the historical facts with regard to Ed Lansdale. His short lived responsibilities for Operation Mongoose was an absolute failure.  His relationship with the CIA was extremely tempestuous.  William Harvey and Richard Helms detested Lansdale and that is putting it mildly.  If you think for a minute that Ed Lansdale could have put an Assassination plan together using CIA assets then you and I will need to agree to disagree.  You regard John Newman and David Lifton as researchers who have found primary evidence to support Prouty’s Lansdale Hypothesis.  I respect both of these gentlemen for their earlier published works.  I as yet have not read this evidence you claim they have uncovered.  Please direct me to their new work and I will be happy to read it with an open mind.  If I were a McAdams propagandist as you accuse me of, I certainly would not have posted that I support the works of Larry Hancock, and Bill Simpich.  Researchers who are clearly not aligned with McAdams and other Lone nut advocates.  You on the other hand, failed to acknowledge in your post the 3 researchers I cited and all three are members of this forum.   To be clear, my humble views align with the research and writings of Larry Hancock and Bill Simpich. 
    Finally, you have asked me to come up with evidence that L. Fletcher Prouty’s theories have been debunked.  Maybe you can start here: 

    https://ia601809.us.archive.org/8/items/wray-tim-and-jeremy-gunn-christopher-barger-joan-zimmerman.-interview-with-l.-fl/Wray%2C Tim%2C and Jeremy Gunn%2C Christopher Barger%2C Joan Zimmerman. Interview with L. Fletcher Prouty. Summary prepared by Christopher Barger on October 23%2C 1996. (Assassination Records Review Board%2C September 24%2C 1996).pdf

    That is a pdf of the findings of the AARB.  Pretty self explanatory.

  14. It never ceases to amaze me why so many people seriously contemplate  Fletcher Prouty’s fables about Edward Lansdale’s involvement with the JFK Assassination.  What year is this anyway?  1992?? Have any of you commenting on Ed Lansdale, Allen Dulles, General Walker et al. Read any of the research done by the likes of Larry Hancock, David Boylan or Bill Simpich?  Why do people constantly recycle old theories from 30 plus years ago instead of debating some of the latest research done by some in the community  based on the documents declassified and released since the JFK records act? Look,   I am grateful for Oliver Stone’s movie as it ignited a furor and forced Congress to act, but let’s be real folks.  Garrison and the 1st generation researchers had very little documentation to work from.  We should be way beyond these old speculations now.  What’s next?  Photo speculation of Badge man behind the fence on the grassy knoll?  🤦‍♂️ 

    On 5/4/2021 at 11:58 AM, Chris Barnard said:

    Thanks Chuck. I have always wondered if you cross referenced diaries and alibi’s with the dates of the Chicago & Miami alleged plots, if there is an incriminating pattern? DAP, Lansdale, Hunt, Sturgis and so on. What were the cubans doing too?! Was Dulles at the Farm on all occasions?! It’s interesting, someone must have had a go. 



  15. 4 hours ago, David Boylan said:

    Hi Anthony,

    The Lake Pontchartrain crew were not your average guys. Most had and were later assigned CIA POAs (Provisional Operational Approvals). Some were members of the 2506th Brigade and saw extensive action as part of the invasion. Carlos Hernandez and John Koch Gene were part of a group of 10 sent by the CIA to Helsinki in 1962 to disrupt the World Youth Conference and possibly help to recruit Rolando Cubela (AMLASH). If you recall, Cubela was recruited to assassinate Castro in 1963 and was visited by Desmond Fitzgerald to assure him that he had backing from the highest levels of the US Government.

    Miguel "Mike" Alvarez Jimenez had been to New Orleans and surrounding areas as as a BOP trainee and leader of the AMHAZE raider team. Carlos Hernandez was also a member of the AMHAZE team but was designated as a member of a small infiltration team. As Stu Wexler has pointed out, there was a Miguel Alvarez on the bus to Mexico with LHO. There is no indication that this was the same Alvarez.

    Antonio Soto was a B-26 pilot during the BOP invasion. He was also a pilot in the Congo. Harold Weisberg speculated that Soto was seen with Oswald around New Orleans.

    Acelo Pedroso was an armaments guy for the BOP Invasion. He along with Carlos Hernandez and John Koch became members of Quintero's Commandos for AMWORLD.

    Victor Espinosa Hernandez was a BOP veteran and close friend of Rolando Cubela often visiting Cubela when he traveled to Europe.

    More later.

    Hi David,

    Another excellent post sir...   :)  can you refresh my memory?... was Acelo Pedroso also among those rounded up by the FBI along with Carlos Hernandez and John Koch Gene back in July/Aug of 1963/

  16. On 5/4/2020 at 6:14 PM, Larry Hancock said:

    I think its really hard for us to get inside the heads of combat veterans who fought together and built hugely strong bonds,  passed or not their is loyalty to each others memories and for that matter loyalty to each others families. 

    Not to mention having to admit having guilty knowledge and not acting to expose a murder - how many people really want to go public with the worst mistake of their life?  Their are just a lot of things wrapped together....I know from John Martino's son that John became very conflicted as time passed.  There was not doubt he thought he was doing the right thing at the time and being a patriot....later he came to feel he had probably been used.  But he still didn't want to face that and it troubled him.

    I've been told all those who were involved were very proud of what they had done,  it was a strike against communism which they had seen take over their homes and nation...and many of them went on fighting communism over the globe for years.

    I'm not giving any of that as an excuse but I very much doubt that it has ever been a simple matter of covering up for an agency, anymore simple than it was for the larger number of people who altered evidence, obfuscated the facts afterwards and consciously chose not to do a serious investigation of conspiracy - for a great many reasons, not all of them evil.





    Excellent assessment Larry, you hit the nail on the head regarding the feelings, thoughts, and sense of duty/ patriotism that all military veterans experienced during their time of service.. People need to realize that the 1960's was a vastly  different different world than the one we see today.   One cannot look at that historical event through the lenses of today and expect to understand the Geo-political, social, and economic fabric that was the U.S., it's military personnel, and those of its allies , especially the Anti-Castro Cuban Resistance groups..




    Greg Kooyman


    Active Duty: Feb 2 1986 - Feb 03 1992

    Reserves: 1992 -1996

    FC2-  Fire Controlman 2nd Class

    Weapon System:  Phalanx / CIWS (Close in Weapons System)

    Ship Command USS Vincennes CG-49

    Captain:  Will Rogers

    Persian Gulf 1988 - 1989

    July 3rd 1988  Operation Earnest Will

    Combat Action Ribbon

    Sea Service Ribbon (3)

    Good Conduct Medal

    Armed Force Expeditionary Medal

    Letter of Appreciation ( Captain Lynch)

  17. Here's Haldeman's Oct 22 1968 notes that prove Nixon directed his campaign's efforts to scuttle the peace talks.    

    They clearly show Nixon was using Anna Chennault to reach out to South Vietnam.. Chennault's contact was South Vietnamese Ambassador Bui Diem.  Haldeman's notes also show Nixon directing Rose Mary Woods (his personal secretary) to contact Chinese nationalist Louis Kung and have him press Thieu as well.  "..Tell him hold firm..."

    These notes also directed vice presidential candidate Spiro Agnew to .."Go See Helms.."    

    Of course we also know that Johnson had the FBI wiretapping certain individuals and discovered Nixon's treachery.   Johnson's quandary was that he could not expose how he knew Nixon was lying to him when he told him “My God. I would never do anything to encourage” South Vietnam  “not to come to the table.” 

    Very interesting as I had never seen these before. 




  18. 7 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

    It was that Jim but I'm not at all bashful about the new book....so much crap has been written about this that its time to dig in and bring out the real history.  If there are any objections I'll stop posting about it here but of course the point is it can't be discussed until someone know its exists and actually reads it. Besides, it will give everyone a few new villains, including Richard Bissell and two Navy Admirals - all of whom lied to JFK.

    I'll go even a step beyond that,  In Denial is also going to be important as background and context to understand the full nature and range of the assassination projects against Castro including the personnel that were most likely the ones turned against JFK in Dallas....how about that for a teaser.   The good news on that is nobody will have to pay for those new studies - they it will be freely available in the Wheaton Names White Paper that David Boylan and I will publish, and in my Thesis paper on the assassination.  Both of which I hope will be done and posted by the end of this summer.

    No objections here Larry plug away.. 😉  I also am eager to see your White paper and Thesis.. 

  19. 6 hours ago, Bart Kamp said:

    The material Pease is referring to is going to in his next book. Unless I missed the big meeting here.

    Hence my first post i this thread 'ere.


    I think what Tracy is referring to is the particular exchange between Dr. Newman and Lisa Pease on FB where Doug Campbell weighed in on the discussion.  Doug Campbell kept directing Lisa to read Dr. Newman's 3rd book and posted a link. Doug offered to buy the book for her if she would read it.   Lisa Pease responded by saying go ahead and buy it and send it to her.       

  20. 14 hours ago, Stu Wexler said:

    So I am not doing this to brag about my prescience, but I was interested in Leonov as of 2011 and, beyond that, about his possible impersonation as far back as 2015. I dug up emails I sent to Larry H, Bill S and Jeff M today.  It included some of the documents referenced in this thread.  The major addition for the past year or so are the Mexi photos which clearly show Leonov going into the Cuban consulate.  The reason I bring this up is the WHY I was interested in Leonov.  Here is what I wrote someone in 2011...


    I have mentioned this to Larry, if for no other reason that on my last archive visit (and I still have to email you a bunch of docs, Larry) I found Church Committee interviews with Angleton where he made a serious effort to raise suspicions about Nikolai Leonov, Che's and possibly even Fidel's KGB case agent, and an operational chief for the KGB in the Western Hemisphere.  This triggered a memory, from Jon Lee Anderson's bio of Che.   Pages 759-60 have a footnote for page 614 (regarding a visit by Che to Moscow when his pal Leonov was not there, having been transferred to Mexico.)  The footnote reads as follows:

    "In November of 1962, with his habitual knack of meeting historic personalities on the even of momentous events, Leonov came face-to-face with Lee Harvey Oswald.  Oswald had arrived at the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City and asked to speak to an official.  According to Leonov, he was called out to deal with him.  But when he saw that Oswald was both armed and agitated, Leonov decided he was "psychotic and dangerous," and says he quickly called other embassy personnel to help remove him from the premises.  Leonov says he was stunned when, soon afterward, he recognized  him as the man who had been arrested in Dallas, accused of murdering the American president. In a conversation about the various JFK assassiantion theories, Leonov dismissed the notion that Oswald might have acted on KGB orders, citing the "psychotic" behavior he had witnessed firsthand, and said that, theoretically speaking- even if the KGB had wanted to kill JFK- it would never have used someone so unbalanced and difficult to control."

    ...  I think dates are wrong, but it sounds very similar to the Nechiporenko incident.    If this happened, it is fascinating."

    ---  I think we have to factor in Angleton here in a big way.  And we also have to ask why three different people--   an ABC journalist spoke at Lancer several years ago detailing a third KGB general giving a nearly identical "I met with Oswald and he lost his xxxx" story as both Nechiporenko and Leonov above--   from the Russian side, all gave the same story but with a different protaganist.   I will let you folks gestate on both.




    Hi Stu,

    I second Ron's compliments.  It's good to see you posting on this forum.   I hope all is well with you.  

  21. On 1/17/2020 at 2:57 PM, Matt Allison said:

    So I believe the pictures below were given by the Cuban government to the HSCA. The one on the left certainly appears to be Nikolai Leonov. Considering that he was well known to the Cuban government, I'm not sure what message Castro was telegraphing by giving it to the HSCA and saying it was from their surveillance of Cuban embassy visitors.

    I used to have background on the person on the right, but I don't remember the details, so can someone fill that in?

    Screenshot 2020-01-17 at 3.56.30 PM.png

    Not to throw a monkey wrench into the mix here, but didn't someone identify the person on the right as an individual named Claude Barnes Capehart?

    Here's the thread I seem to remember that discussed this..


    Ok, had I read Bill Simpich's post before sending this, I would have realized he identified the man on the right.  Sorry for the confusion...

  • Create New...