Robert Howard
-
Posts
2,674 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Robert Howard
-
-
When it was first published Dick Russell's The Man Who Knew Too Much (Carroll & Graf, 1992) was hailed by Publisher's Weekly as "a masterpiece of historical reconstruction".
Daniel Brandt of Namebase has this to say about the book:
If the avalanche of reissued and rehashed JFK assassination books since Oliver Stone's movie has a downside, it's only because the one book that is possibly as significant as all the rest put together might get buried. After over a hundred interviews (including James Angleton and other CIA officials) and seventeen years of persistent research, Dick Russell has written such a book. While providing much new information on the intelligence connection, Russell doesn't offer any easy answers apart from the observation that organized crime alone could not have manipulated the physical evidence and the cover-up without substantial help.
Russell's treatment of the intelligence angle is comprehensive - Oswald in Japan, CIA in Mexico, military intelligence, mind-control, KGB, anti-Castro Cubans, H.L. Hunt et al. Simultaneously, his journalistic hook is an extended cat-and-mouse debriefing of Richard Case Nagell, an untalkative Oswald associate who contracted with U.S. intelligence and also had an arrangement with the Soviets; it still isn't clear who was pulling his strings. Nagell walked into an El Paso bank in September 1963 and fired two shots into the wall so that he would be in jail while "it" came down. "It" happened two months later, on November 22, 1963. If there is space on your shelf for only one JFK assassination book, make it this one.
The book was reissued in a revised, updated edition in 2003, coinciding with the 40th anniversary of the assassination.
I am pleased to announce that Dick has agreed to answer questions about his research into the assassination of JFK.
Please post your questions here:
I would like to go no record as stating that I have both the original and updated versions of "The Man Who Knew Too Much," and I feel that they are essential to any serious JFK researchers collection. I would like to ask Mr. Russell about the tapes and photographs of Oswald, Nagell and Leopoldo and Angel that at one time were in a safe deposit box in Switzerland. Did Nagell ever recover those items before his death, or are they still in Switzerland, unrecoverable? Have you discovered any new "revelations" about the assassination. Is David Dinkins still alive? If so have you spoken with him recently? What is your opinion of the William Torbitt manuscript "Nomenclature of an Assassination cabal"? And finally are there any documents that have been de-classified by the ARRB that you would place a high priority on obtaining. Sincerely/Robert Howard
-
The question about the Paine's ownership or use of a Rambler station wagon is obviously a good one.
Is this ownership information not obtainable from Texas motor vehicle files? If the vehicle was ever registered to the Paines, there should be some sort of paper trail.
Another question to ask BOTH of the Paines would be whether they ever moved the blanket that purportedly contained Oswald's rifle while it was in the Paine garage, and whether the blanket appeared to contain ANY object, rifle or otherwise.
And what of the ownership of the Minox camera(s)? How many actually existed? Who took it/them--DPD, FBI?
More questions about Michael Paine's background and his involvement at Bell Helicopter--what he actually did, rather than just a job title--might be interesting as well.
I've been wanting to mention a few things I have learned through out the years on the Paine family. Many researchers are not aware that Michael Paine's father, George Lyman Paine was a leader of the Trotskyite movement in the United States. It is worth mentioning that in a speech Oswald made at the Jesuit seminary regarding democracy versus Marxism his comments were very critical of Soviet style communism, in much the same way that a Trotsky-ite would. I believe that speech was a glimpse into the real LHO. Interesting similarity; Anyway on Nov. 5, 1963 in response to FBI agent James Hosty's visit to the Paine home, Oswald wrote a letter to the Soviet Embassy in which he among other things recounted his activities in Mexico City stating that he could not stay indefinitely because of visa restrictions and that he could not re-apply for a new visa "unless I used my real name." He also stated that the FBI was "not now" interested in his activities in the FPCC. He left the letter out on a table after he finished it (which I think is very strange) and Ruth Paine read it and made a copy of it allegedly because she was upset at his "false statement" that the FBI was no longer interested in him. She produced the letter the day after the assassination when she turned it over to the FBI. According to SA Hosty, his superior J. Gordon Shanklin wanted this letter to be destroyed as well as the infamous "note from Oswald" ostensibly threatening to blow up the FBI building; I suppose we all owe a debt of thanks to Hosty that he was able to save the incriminating letter. Other musings re the Paines, when Army Intelligence (Jack Crichton who would soon meet with H.L.Hunt after Nov.22) asked Ilya Mamontov a member of the White Russian community to assist at Oswald's interrogation after the assassination, he gladly obliged. (His family was very involved in right-wing politics and even knew George H.W. Bush in the Zapata Oil day's) Mamantov also knew Ruth Paine.
Lastly, the FBI had a wiretap on the Paine's phone at least as early as Nov. 23, 1963. There was a call that was intercepted in which a "male voice was heard to say that he felt sure Lee Harvey Oswald had killed the President but did not feel Oswald was responsible, and further stated, `We both know who is responsible.' " ... the tapped telephone numbers were those of Michael Paine and his wife, Ruth Paine, the woman who was playing host to Marina Oswald at the time of the assassination. Later the Warren Commission asked about this call with Michael Paine when he testified only to have him deny this took place, although he admitted that he was at home and Ruth was at DPD headquarters at the time the alleged call took place. My feeling overall is that Ruth Paine was Marina's "handler" for the intelligence community as George DeMohrenschildt was Lee Harvey Oswald's handler, that is until he went to Haiti.
-
Thanks, Robert. These are great. It's interesting to see how much is still redacted in the Elder document, even after the Church Committee. I'm wondering if this is because the redacted items were not interpreted to have any possible connection to the assassination, and were therefore excluded from the JFK records act. After all, if I'm not mistaken, the HSCA records released by the ARRB redact all detailed references to the MLK investigation. If that isn't the case, of course, then one can only conclude there's a whole lot of secrets the taxpayers are unworthy of knowing. At least in the eyes of Big Brother.
Thank's Pat. There were three elements to these documents that were illuminating for me. The First is how there was a direct link between Roselli and the CIA with regard to the Castrol assassination plots, I didn't know how much of that was speculative and how much was proven until I saw these documents. I wish that it wasn't so problematic in discovering how much validity there is to the speculation that the JFK assassination was "utilizing the parties that were supposed to kill Castro to kill Kennedy. I personally do not believe that Castro OR Cuban intelligence was responsible for the assassination, because if they were I believe the US would have invaded Cuba, which is what so many wanted to do in the first place, both in and out of the government. Second, it appears that Sidney Gottleib and the CIA were all over the Patrice Lumumba assassination even if they didn't actually do it. Seeing Gottlieb and Lumumba mentioned by the CIA on one of their own documents was very enlightening. Third and I think potentially the most significant is the memo from Elder to DCI William Colby regarding Lucien Conein and the "large amount of money" he was given from the CIA as he was going to the Joint General Staff meeting on November 1, 1963. I know that there is a photograph of an individual in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963 who some researchers/people think is Conein, I haven't passed judgement, but most accounts of the Diem Coup have Conein practically side by side with the conspirators getting ready to off the Diem brothers, and that he was practically giving a play by play of this to his superiors. It is hard for me to think that he flew back to the US went to Dallas and was in on the Kennedy assassination, it is much easier to think the funds Elder mentioned were possibly to finance the S. Vietnamese General's coup. Also the portion where Elder is discussing a CIA proposal by Angleton and Helms to increase intelligence gathering at the Soviet Embassy "in this country" that the CIA was planning to "redacted" in an aim towards both "greatly increased intelligence collection" and "greatly increased CIA representation in the Moscow Embassy" as part of a program of "selected exposure of KGB activities and counteractions against the Soviet intel service." This left me wondering if "this country" might be Mexico and the items mentioned might be references to the mysterious figure allegedly known as "Saul" who was photographed outside both the Soviet and Cuban Embassy there. The reason I thought about that was Elder's reference to the quote "A third which assumes a new significance today." Isn't it a nearly unanimous belief among researchers that the key to understanding the assassination depends on Oswald's Mexico City trip? Not to mention that Angleton went to snatch Win Scott's memoirs.
-
In my opinion, telephone interviews by amateurs will not work.
How do you define a professional researcher?
However, to respond directly to the question posed, I would ask Raul who the shooters were. As Dawn would say, if nothing else I am predictable! Castro may not know; Raul does.Where is your evidence for this statement? I hope it is not based on one of those amateurish phone calls.
I would ask a special prosecutor to make this list of witnesses to testify under oath in the last investigation of the assassination, and the first "real one."
George H.W. Bush
All living former heads of the intelligence agencies( without recourse to the plausible denial crap)
Ruth and Michael Paine
All living Dallas P.D. personnel on duty that day.
E. Howard Hunt
And I would order the same intel agencies to provide all films and secret documents that haven't already been destroyed. (Obviously I am fantasizing.)
-
These are reproductions of the "Family Jewels Documents" that according to the CIA are related to the CIA. I did not have the capability to scan the documents so instead of copies of the originals these documents are re-written versions of the originals, I extensively checked them against the originals, and they are completely accurate. Note: The CIA is still in the redaction business. Robert Howard
Sorry the above should read "that according to the CIA are related to the JFK Assassination." Apologies
-
These are reproductions of the "Family Jewels Documents" that according to the CIA are related to the CIA. I did not have the capability to scan the documents so instead of copies of the originals these documents are re-written versions of the originals, I extensively checked them against the originals, and they are completely accurate. Note: The CIA is still in the redaction business. Robert Howard
-
John Leon worked as a private detective. In 1960 he was employed by Carmine Bellino to bug the phones of Engelhard Industries for JFK during the presidential election. Charles W. Engelhard, a South African diamond merchant, had discovered that Kennedy was having an affair with a nineteen year old student at Radcliffe College. Engelhard had attempted to employ a private detective in Boston to obtain photographs of Kennedy with this student. The detective refused and informed Kennedy of what was going on and this resulted in Bellino organizing the wiretap.
Leon was later convicted of wire-tapping. By the early 1970s he was running a detective agency called Allied Investigators Incorporated in Washington. Lou Russell was one of the men Leon employed.
In March, 1972, Russell purchased $3,000 in electronic eavesdropping equipment from Leon. Russell's friend, Charles F. Knight, was told that this equipment had been purchased for James W. McCord. This equipment was used to tape the telephone conversations between politicians based at the Democratic Party National Committee and a small group of prostitutes run by Phillip Mackin Bailley that worked their trade in the Columbia Plaza.
On 16th June, 1972, Lou Russell told his daughter he had to return to Washington to do "some work for McCord" that night. It was estimated that he arrived back at the Howard Johnson's Motel at around 12.45 a.m. At 1.30 a.m. Russell had a meeting with McCord. It is not clear what role Russell played in the Watergate break-in. Jim Hougan (Secret Agenda) has suggested that he was helping McCord to "sabotage the break-in".
Later that night Frank Sturgis, Virgilio Gonzalez, Eugenio Martinez, Bernard L. Barker and James W. McCord were arrested while in the Democratic Party headquarters in Watergate. Russell was interviewed by the FBI soon afterwards. He claimed that during the break-in he was in his rooming house. The FBI agents did not believe him but none of the burglars claimed he had been involved in the conspiracy and he was released.
According to Jerris Leonard, a supporter of Richard Nixon, Leon told Carmine Bellino, an investigator who worked for Edward Kennedy and the Senate Administrative Practices Committee, about Russell's problems. Bellino phoned Russell. It is not known was was said but as a result of this conversation Russell went to stay with Bellino's friend, William Birely on the top floor of the Twin Towers complex in Silver Spring, Maryland. Birely was also a close friend of Lee R. Pennington. Both men had been active members of the Sons of the American Revolution.
Leon claimed that Russell had been a spy for the Democratic Party within CREEP and that he had tipped off Carmine Bellino and the police about the Watergate break-in. At the time Leon was working on a counter-investigation for the Republican Party. Leon claimed that Watergate was a set up and the operation had been sabotaged from within.
On 2nd July, 1973, Lou Russell died of a heart attack. Leon now began contacting others who had worked with him for Carmine Bellino during the presidential campaign. This included former CIA officer John Frank, congressional investigator Edward M. Jones and Joseph Shimon, a former inspector for the Washington Police Department. Leon and the others provided affidavits claiming that the JFK had ordered the bugging of Richard Nixon during the 1960 presidential election. Leon now passed this information to Jerris Leonard, an attorney working for the Republican National Committee (RNC).
George Bush, the chairman of the RNC announced there would be press conference on 13th July, 1973. John Leon was to be the star witness. However, Leon suffered a heart-attack and died on the day he was due to appear at the press conference.
Did he cancel the press conference? If so do you think Bush was about to reveal some kind of dirt on prominent Democratic politicians or "damage control" re: potential revelations of Republican "dirty tricks"? I don't know a lot about Lou Russell but to me he seems to appear somewhat enigmatic regarding whether or not his personal loyalties were to the Republican or Democratic party?
-
In all fairness, I would like to point out that, in the thread on the topic of "Castro Did It," the "testimony" of Veciana has turned out to be merely a summary...no one has actually produced this "testimony" on this Forum, and the veracity of Veciana's statements has been questioned. To then turn around and use Veciana's "testimony" to make a point is, I believe, not very solid ground upon which to base an argument.
This is NOT a defense of any particular member of the Forum [although, had I NOT posted this disclaimer, one certainly would expect him to claim so], but merely a defense of fairness in debate.
I recently read a post on a JFK forum, it might have even been on the JFK Lancer forum, that Shawn Phillips (who was a fairly famous rock singer in the 1970's) the nephew of David Atlee Phillips said that David told him shortly before his death that "he was in Dallas on November 22, 1963. It would be of interest for someone to interview him to find out what, if more Shawn is willing to reveal about his Uncle.
-
I think someone may have misheard and misrecorded the town's name. The town near Ft. Hood, is - I think - "Killeen". Not just clean - but, really ca-lean...
You are absolutely CORRECT!!!!!
-
Namebase entry for Richard Case Nagell:
http://www.namebase.org/main4/Richard-Case-Nagell.html
Anson,R. They've Killed the President! 1975 (283)
Back Channels 1995-05 (12, 14)
DiEugenio,J. Destiny Betrayed. 1992 (139-42, 177-8)
DiEugenio,J. Pease,L. The Assassinations. 2003 (119-20, 236-7)
Duffy,J. Ricci,V. The Assassination of John F. Kennedy. 1992 (323-4)
Garrison,J. On the Trail of the Assassins. 1988 (182-6)
Hinckle,W. Turner,W. The Fish is Red. 1981 (226-7)
Lobster Magazine (Britain) 1985-#10 (13)
Penthouse 1981-10 (183, 185)
Russell,D. The Man Who Knew Too Much. 1992
Vankin,J. Whalen,J. The 60 Greatest Conspiracies. 1998 (378-9)
I have always been extremely interested in Richard Case Nagell. I have both copies of the Man Who Knew Too Much the 1st printing and the updated version that came out recently. I am aware that there are certain researchers that think or want people to think he was a crackpot with mental problems and the helicopter crash in Korea gives a certain credence to that idea, but Dick Russell's book is so well written and researched that I personally believe Nagell was who Russell thought he was; a man who was deeply involved in the machinations of the plot that killed JFK until he went into the bank in El Paso in Sept 63. Nagell's story touches the fact that he, while working for the CIA and Field Operations Intelligence felt that the KGB had infiltrated part of the CIA's hierarchy, including the mysterious "Bob" who was his ostensible superior officer. The other issue involves the role of hypnosis with regards to Oswald. In a key part of the book, Russell asks Nagell what he thought Oswald's activities were on November 22 at the TSBD and Nagell drew a sketch that displayed Oswald firing a rifle under the influence of hypnosis. The frustrating thing about the book is that Nagell never gives away the complete story to Russell about Nov 22 allegedly because the government threatened to make sure he never got his retirement pension if he talked, which makes Nagell look bad to some people. But overall I think the book is a treasure trove of info. and is required reading for any researcher that wants to look at the JFK assassination "thinking outside the box." The only other thing I would add is that Nagell said he had audiotapes of himself, Oswald, Angel and Leopoldo discussing the assassination along with pictures in a safety deposit box in Switzerland to be opened after he died. I read in the update version I beleive it was, that all of his "stuff" pertaining to the JFK assassination was taken by the FBI before a family member could get it. I don't know if the tapes and pictures were included in the cache.
-
X Reveal, for the first time, the mysterious figure of Juan Valdes and his role in the Mary Sherman crime and the Kennedy assassination.
I only know of Juan Valdes from the coffee commercials...
...so you must be referring to another Juan.
I have read some items on Amazon.com and elsewhere about Joan Mellen's book due out in November and I have a strong feeling it is going to have quite an impact at least as far as the JFK research community is concerned, as for the public at large to a great degree it will obviously depend on if it get's the silent treatment or not. She did over 1,000 interviews for the book, thats not too shabby.
-
It's from an ARRB hearing.
I don't find it credible that if this event occurred, the military years later would send out letters to any participants saying ok, you can now talk a little bit about what you did that day, but you can't say too much. I don't think that's how it works.
Ron
In my exuberance I did not post the URL link it is on the McAdams website
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/arrb/index71.htm
The post indicates Osborn's testimony recessed at 12:45 and was to reconvene at 2:00 but I was unable to find the second part even on the ARRB Website, I wonder if they simply did not continue his testimony or theorizing maybe it is still classified?
PS I have seen a post assassination photo of a bus stopped in Dealey Plaza where there are a group of people standing in line to get on but I don't recall anything resembling the scenarion described in Osborn's testimony.
-
I stumbled across this today on the Net, does anyone know whatever became of this?
Dallas, Texas -- November 18, 1994 Hearing
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MR. MARWELL: Mr. Steve Osborn.
CHAIRMAN TUNHEIM: Good afternoon, Mr. Osborn.
MR. OSBORN: Good afternoon.
I, too, appreciate the opportunity to address the Board today and appreciate the time you are spending going to the public for information. One of the theories of the assassination revolves around the possibility that there may have been some involvement by persons with experience in the U.S. intelligence community.
In my study and research of the assassination I have discovered and investigated supporting information of the presence of an intelligence unit of the U.S. Army having been present and on assignment in Dealey Plaza just before, during and immediately after the assassination. To the best of my knowledge, information on this unit has not been released publicly.
In 1992, as the fury of the public resulted in the proposed legislation which created your Board, I came across an individual who claimed to have been very near Dealey Plaza during the assassination. Now, as a researcher, you can understand that this immediately caught my attention, and I began to question this gentleman about the experience.
Now before I tell you the entire story, I want you to know that I had a difficult time believing his story the more and more I thought about it. Even though I had personal experience with some of the devices and the techniques that this group used, I was still very skeptical, as you may be also. But with further investigation I convinced myself that it technically could have been accomplished, and I think you will be similarly so impressed about the possibility when we are finished.
The gentleman I spoke with proceeded to tell me he was in the Army Station in Fort Hood, in Clean, Texas. On the day of the assassination his group, a communications group, was assigned the task of observing and videotaping the presidential motorcade as it moved through the Plaza. This unit had no similar assignment in any other Texas city during the President's visit, and they were only to tape that portion of the motorcade as it proceeded through Dealey Plaza.
Now if this event actually occurred, if it actually happened, it makes their activity highly suspicious and adds new questions to the assassination, particularly with reference to the possible foreknowledge of the assassination of intelligence personnel.
In my conversations with this gentleman, I asked questions of a technical nature trying to discovery how their assignment was accomplished. After discovering that the camera signals were transported by wireless means back to the control studio, which was actually a semi-tractor-trailer, I found myself doubting that this type of equipment was available in 1963.
I knew that ham radio operators have been sending television signals easily for a number of years, and I had also participated in that hobby. I also knew that videotaping was still in its infant years in 1963. I started to research available equipment to see if this story had any possibility of being true.
I have another handout that I would like to give you. Now that we know that equipment existed in 1963, and I can tell you a little bit about the equipment, if you would like, in the question and answer, I can relate his entire story, the following information was obtained over approximately three separate conversations with this individual. I had extracted a verbal consent to get his story on videotape, like any good researcher would, but when the time came for doing so, his attitude on the matter had completely reversed and I am only left today with the recollection, you know, the notes that I had taken from the conversation and the subsequent information by my independent investigation.
This military communications group had several cameras stationed around the Plaza. The signals from the cameras were sent back to a semi-tractor-trailer acting as a mobile studio parked a short distance from the Plaza. Each camera had a preview monitor and videotape machine associated with it inside the trailer recording the view of each camera. There was no sound recorded in this assignment.
Each videotape position had a single person responsible for its proper operation. Each position these men occupied was shielded from the others so that they could only see the preview for their individual camera. Each man saw the assassination occur from a different perspective of their monitors.
About 15 minutes after the assassination, a group of men appeared who identified themselves as FBI agents. These agents seized all the equipment used to videotape the motorcade. Each man was put on a bus which had been summoned to the scene and they were all driven back to their base. Upon their arrival, they were simply told to forget it.
Finding that there was equipment available in 1963 that would do this made it easier for me to accept the story I have just related to you. Several things have made me believe that this group was an intelligence unit.
First, the gentleman would not give me the name of his unit.
Secondly, this individual advised me that his 201 file was inaccessible.
Thirdly, he offered his opinion as pertaining to the reason his group was sent there, which would probably have been in line with the responsibility of an intelligence unit.
Fourth, having reflected on his story and what I have what I have additionally discovered, I am impressed that he realizes that he probably said more things to me than he should have revealed. At one point, he mentioned to me that he was allowed by a letter from the military to discuss some things in relation to his duties on the day of the assassination, but I believe he probably went further than he was allowed.
All these things collectively make me believe that this unit in Dealey Plaza was an intelligence unit. Still, one important step in my investigation was to find some additional evidence that the event occurred. You should know that there is some possible photographic evidence of this communication group being in Dealey Plaza that day, and I would be happy to provide you with further information on that if time allows at the end of my presentation.
Some requested things I would like to see the Board do, obviously what was recorded on this videotapes would be of invaluable aid to a serious study of the assassination, as well as cast more suspicion on the intelligence community. An attempt should be made by the Board to locate the tapes and request that another government agency attempt to get the exact electrical format determined and a video machine constructed to bring their images to view. Duplication to modern day formats would then make the tapes available publicly.
So far as locating the videotapes are concerned, the Dallas Field Office of the FBI and the Bureau Headquarters may have information or be in possession of the tapes. If there remains an estate of the late J. Edgar Hoover, they may have some information or be in possession of the tapes themselves.
If the men who seized the tapes were not real FBI agents, then CIA, military intelligence and other splinter groups of the intelligence community should be checked. Also, I would inquire of Mr. E. Howard Hunt, if he is still alive, as to his knowledge of the tapes and their subsequent disposition. There exists a possibility that he may even have them in his possession.
Regarding locations where you might find documents supporting this activity, I would suggest beginning with the records at Fort Hood. I would not be familiar with other depositories of documents, and you will probably have to use some of your existing source to hopefully lead you in the correct directions.
There seems to be a problem of gag orders that I would like to address also, and the fact that this individual I had interviewed had received notification that he did not have to continue to keep certain things confidential is further indication that there continue to be individuals who continue are under an obligation of confidentiality.
I believe this brings up an interesting problem for the Board. There appear to have been several instances of this happening to individuals required by military order or other Executive Branch order not to discuss any details of what they know of the assassination or its subsequent investigations, perhaps even the Board members itself have been required to sign promises of confidentiality.
Since these individuals do not have the permission of disclosure, many have not written of their experiences or granted interviews to members of the media or the research community to record their recollection. This will give history an incomplete record of this tragic event as well as making this information unavailable to the Board for review and release.
Therefore, I believe and propose that the Board consider asking the President of the United States as Commander and Chief to rescind any and all standing orders issued from any Department or part of the U.S. Government requiring the confidentiality of the information retained by these individuals, whether that knowledge is in written or memory form. If our government is really serious about full disclosure of all facts surrounding the assassination, he will rescind these orders, prevent them from being renewed and allow a complete compilation of personal records and recollections. This will allow the Review Board to further fulfill and properly perform its congressionally mandated task.
Additionally, as distasteful and wild as the thought is that the American intelligence community could be involved in such an event, I hope the Board will keep an open mind as you sift through the records. Your work may be the last official attempt to bring to the light of day this dark deed, so it is vital for you to question everything you find.
Remember, if any intelligence personnel were involved, it is their profession and they are very adept at covering up any evidence of their involvement in any activity. I mean, would we as citizens expect anything else of them? In any operation that U.S. intelligence personnel are involved in, we the citizens would expect them to be able to complete their missions with expert precision. We would expect that they would be able to cover up their involvement as an agency and our involvement as a nation if the nature of the task so dictated. We would expect them to have thought of every possible snag in an operation and work to make their mission completely successful.
I have spoken with individuals involved in intelligence work or who have known persons who were, and they have indicated that the intelligence community could basically do anything they wanted, and we have had some recent indications of that, of this, in the form of millions of dollars spent on building projects unknown to Congress.
Be this right or wrong, we as citizens should have a great amount of respect for and suspicion of the power that these individuals and agencies wield in our world. Please keep this in mind as you ponder the information brought to your attention in whatever form it is presented.
Finally, I would like to make a comment in relation to the Board's mandate. One of the problems that certain individuals in our government have had with the idea of releasing all the assassination records is that to do so may compromise methods employed by the various intelligence agencies in their covert activities. At first glance, we may take this to mean that it may make it difficult for them to use these techniques in the future if they are made known to the general public, but I would encourage the Board to consider that it may be that many of these covert methods were used to carry out the assassination of President Kennedy, whether by Americans or some other government.
I have found considerable circumstantial evidence of more than a few intelligence techniques used in the assassination that may not be generally known. But if this assassination was accomplished by Americans from the intelligence community, they have not only betrayed the citizenry of this country by taking from them their President, but they have betrayed their agencies and the U.S. public by making it necessary to uncover and publicly expose their methods in order to bring satisfaction to the American people in this matter. This betrayal of their agencies alone makes them no better than Mr. Ames of recent history.
I again thank you for your time.
CHAIRMAN TUNHEIM: Thank you very much.
Questions?
Go ahead, Dr. Joyce.
MR. JOYCE: Mr. Osborn, in your testimony you indicated that information you had gathered from a subsequent independent investigation helped you in forming your conclusion that there was an intelligence unit in Dealey Plaza. Is there any documentary information that you have been able to acquire as part of your subsequent investigation?
MR. OSBORN: I have not made any attempts at that because I believe the story so thoroughly. I felt that if I were to make any attempts to confirm any of this or search for the tapes that those things might be destroyed, because these tapes -- if you would like to discuss the photographic evidence, there is one that would probably show a shooter behind the stockade fence, so I did not want these materials because of something that I did to end up disappearing. However, your mandate and your sources are much better than anything that I could ever do.
DR. HALL: Mr. Chairman, with that in mind, I would like to pose to you a set of questions, if I may, and you can cut me off if I get too long-winded here, as I am sure you will. Who are you?
MR. OSBORN: I am a citizen of the United States. I have not had any type of military experience, so I probably approach this a little bit differently as a citizen that would like to know what my government has been up to or persons within my government have been up to, why I can't know, why it has been hushed up so much.
I have been researching for approximately the last 15 years, not quite, and have mostly focused my investigation on identifying the man who fired the fatal head shot. These other things have just come about because of various digging and this is one of the things that I hope to use to be able to further identify that individual.
DR. HALL: I am wondering, Mr. Chairman, for the record, we could ask Mr. Osborn to provide us with a biographical statement, if that would be acceptable to you.
Can you provide us with the name of the individual with whom you spoke?
MR. OSBORN: Because I feel that he may have violated military orders, I believe that he thought that he had originally been saying things he could, and then the way that he froze up -- in fact, I have had several individuals that have done that, I feel that he may be guilty of some sort of violation. If the President were to rescind all those orders, I would be happy to provide his name. At this point, because of the way that he did not really want to be involved any more in the discussions, I feel incumbent upon myself for his personal privacy not to reveal that.
DR. HALL: Did he ever provide to you any written information or did you take any notes arising out of your conversations with this individual?
MR. OSBORN: The only thing that I really did was, from the conversations that we had, I prepared a list of questions, because I do have a technical background, I have been in electronics since I was 14, ham radio, and television, and most recently personal communications, and so I was very interested in the technical aspects of this because I doubted in my senses that this could be done in 1963.
If you would look at the cameras, this is a fully transistorized camera. It comes with a backpack transmitter so that you don't have to have a cable going back to a videotape recorder, and this device was available in 1962 by a company that regularly supplied the military with all kinds of camera equipment and, as I also indicated, there is some photographic evidence that exists that may possibly show one of these individuals. If you would like a summation of that, I am prepared to do that.
DR. HALL: If you will document it, that would be helpful.
You also indicate on page 5 that he had mentioned to you that he was allowed by a letter from the military to discuss some things in relation to his duties on the day of the assassination. Now it would obviously be in the interest of the Board, since you purport that a connection exists between this individual, the military establishment, and the assassination, to be able to know the name of that individual so that it would be possible to try to secure whatever copy of a letter may have existed that would have been written to him by the military.
MR. OSBORN: I will -- what I will do, sir, is, I will probably seek some counsel on that to ensure that I, myself, do not get into a situation here that may make me liable for something, and I will be glad to consider that for you.
I was going to, let me go on record saying, I was going to ask that individual for that document in the videotaped session, but because he cut everything off, I was not able to actually view that document. So I had to just go from my recollection as I made my notes as to what the individual had.
DR. HALL: One final question for you, if I may, Mr. Osborn, would your view be that this Commission or this Board, rather, excuse me, should undertake to disclose the names, identities of both living as well as deceased informants, agents, and intelligence operatives of the United States Government?
MR. OSBORN: That certainly is a gray area, and the problem with dealing -- if we are dealing with the intelligence community here in this time, they certainly have at their disposal, shall we say, executive privilege, and the rules are a little bit different when dealing with these type of people because they can claim national security.
I think national security a lot of times can mean more than one thing. It can mean security of our nation from its people being held in arms over something that the government or people within the government have done, so I think they really use the term national security quite widely, and I would fully expect that if there were individuals from the intelligence community involved that they would do everything in their power, like I had mentioned before, they are very adept at covering up. So that is a gray area because we don't know if these persons were really involved, and they may be saying that these are operatives that we can't afford to let their names go. So we have to -- it is going to have to be analyzed.
I used to think that it would be nice to have been a member of this Board, after hearing what is going on today, I think I am kind of glad it is you.
DR. HALL: Would it be fair to say that any effort to pursue the line of inquiry that you have set out would turn directly on an evidentiary and documentary basis on being able to know the name of the individual, and inasmuch as you have indicated that that person is known to you by name, there is some responsibility here, I would think, to be able to assist the Board in this matter in a significant way.
DR. GRAFF: I would like to ask this question with respect to the letter that this young man received saying what he could say about his activities. Was this a cover that he was being given, was this a story that was being laid upon him so that he would have an answer when people asked what are you doing?
MR. OSBORN: I don't believe so. I believe this had been received by him a number of years later.
DR. GRAFF: I see, I misunderstood that.
MR. OSBORN: Yes, this was a number of years later that these things were no longer -- that certain things, and I never got into the exact details. I just assumed that the things that he was telling me were things that I could know. So I am sorry, I am not clear exactly what that letter said, or if it even still exists.
DR. GRAFF: I see.
CHAIRMAN TUNHEIM: Anything further?
[No response.]
CHAIRMAN TUNHEIM: Thank you, Mr. Osborn.
The public hearing will stand in recess until promptly the hour of 2:00 p.m., and we will return and reconvene at that time.
Thank you very much.
[Whereupon, at 12:45 p.m., the hearing was recessed, to reconvene at 2:00 p.m., this same day.]
-
[Once again James great work and thanks. I read somewhere that DeMohrenshildt was recieving some treatment from a doctor (injections?) that was new to him and that the doctor disappeared after trying to be tracked down. As soon as DeMohrenschildt started to see this doctor he apparently became more and more depressed??? I am typing this from memory so I could be wrong on some of the particulars. Is it possible that it was SUGGESTED that George shoot himself??? Has anyone read this also? Any info would be appreciated thanks, Justin.
Justin,
Follow the link that I provided to Sprague's letter to Cutler.
http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...indpost&p=29688
- lee
More on DeMohrenschildt. These excerpts are from Deadly Secret's pgs. 236-238
His fourth and last wife was ...the daughter of a director of the Nationalist Chinese railways system. In 1962 he opened an office in Dallas and joined the exclusive Dallas Petroleum Club. By this time he was on a first name basis with William R, Grace of Grace Lines, NO Saints owner John Mecom and George and Herman Brown, who sponsored LBJ's political campaign.....DeMohrenschildt may have been undertaking a contract of a different kind. A clue surfaced in 1976 when a de-classified CIA Office of Security file dated April 29, 1963 read
"[Deleted] Case officer had requested an expedited check of George DEMOHRENSCHILDT for reasons unknown to security."
That terse sentence blended nicely with the concurrent disclosure of former CIA contract agent Herbert Atkin that DeMohrenschildt's real mission when he arrived at Port-Au-Prince in June was to oversee a CIA approved plot to overthrow dictator "Papa Doc" Duvalier. END
From Crossfire pg. 279. Researcher Michael Levy obtained one CIA memo from former Director Richard Helm's stating that
"DeMohrenschildt's trip to Yugoslavia (in 1957) provided "foreign intelligence which was promptly disseminated to other federal agencies in 10 separate reports."
Another CIA memo indicated he also furnished lengthy reports on his later travels through Mexico and Central America.
Marr's mentions that while in Dallas, in addition to the above mentioned individuals cited in Deadly Secrets DeMohrenschildt also knew H.L. Hunt, Clint Murchison (then owner of the Dallas Cowboys), Robert Kerr of Kerr-McGee and Jean DeMenil head of Schlumberger Corporation.
(remember Jim Garrison's linkage with Schlumberger Corp and the New Orleans cuban exile weapons cache. Which Garrison alleged were provided by the CIA)
NOTE MINE.
Also from Crossfire page 284.
During May 1963, as the DeMohrenschildt's were preparing to leave for Haiti, they stopped in Washington where, according to CIA records, DeMohrenschildt met with a CIA representative and the Assistant Director of ARMY INTELLIGENCE. ....
What specifically was discussed at this meeting is not known, but at this same time another CIA documentshows that an Agency officer "requested an expedite check on George DeMohrenschildt." At this meeting was DeMohrenschildt's Haitian business associate Clemard Charles. Researchers have noted that Clemard Charles later was involved in the sale of arms and military eqipment involving a gun runner named Edward Browder. According to the HSCA Browder had leased a B-25 bomber under the name of a fictitious company and flew it to Haiti a year after the Kennedy assassination and later cashed a 24,000 check signed by Charles. Browder [was] a former Lockheed test pilot who is [this is in 1989] serving a 25 year prison sentence for 'security violations.' Browder told the HSCA he had been working for the CIA. According to author David Scheim Browder was also an associate of Jack Ruby in the 1950's when both men were arranging the sale of arms to Fidel Castro. END
Lastly is the info requested about DeMohrenschildt's mysterious Doctor shortly before the end of his own life. From High Treason pg. 261
"DeMohrenschilt's wife believes that her husband was programmed to take his life on command. She say's that her husband was sent to a new Doctor in Dallas, Charles Mendoza. Jim Marrs writes in Cover-ups that a check wasa made with the Dallas County Medical Society, and Mendoza had registered with the association just two months before he began treating DeMohrenschildt. Mendoza left Dallas in December 1976, shortly after George entered Parkland for mental problems. The forwarding address the Doctor gave proved false......George underwent two or three hours of "therapy" at a time with Dr. Mendoza, which involved IV injections. George did not know exactly what the injections contained. Jeanne states "Mendoza also insisted that we buy all of George's medication from the pharmacy near his office. He explained that he was a part owner and that the medicine would cost less that way. But I checked with my usual pharmacy and learned that the medicine prices were the same if not lower, than the Dr's pharmacy. I confronted Mendoza with this information and demanded to know exactly what kind of medicine and treatment he was giving George. Mendoza then became very angry and upset, but I learned nothing useful."
DeMohrenschildt quickly deteriorated emotionally, tried to take his life, became paranoid and finally appears to have shot himself. His wife says she believes that he received a phone call on the day he died, or a command of some kind which triggered his death, the day that the HSCA located him.
-
Lee
Great research.
Are all these verified personal correspondents of De Mo?
If they are it certainly adds some mystery to his interaction with Oswald, yes?
LEGEND by Epstein follows the Oswald / Demorenschildt relationship.
In summary, it appears that DeMorenschildt was the handler of
Marina Oswald, and his primary interest was Marina, who was of a GRU/KGB
family and defected into the US when Oswald counter-defected out of the USSR.
His murder (suicide?) was the turning point of the House investigation.
If anyone fails to see the hand of the CIA in JFK's Assassination,
they should look at the White Russian, who befriended the lone nut........
First I would like to say that George DeMohrenschildt is obviously an important piece of the puzzle in the JFK assassination. My first awareness of this was reading years ago that he was asked to more or less "talk to" de-brief? Oswald at the request of J. Walton Moore - CIA Domestic Contacts Division in late 1961 specifically about his activities in Minsk while in the Soviet Union. DeMohrenschildt's own life from that point on until his 1976 suicide is an incredible story in itself. The walking trip with his wife from Guatemala to the US, his activities in Haiti in arranging a meeting between the CIA or a U.S. Defense Dept. official and Clemard Charles a Haitian banker (According to Jacqueline Lancelot she learned from DeMohrenschildt's Haitian bank teller that George D. received $ 250,000 after the Kennedy assassination. I would urge anyone interested to read his unpublished manuscript on Oswald, it is very interesting to say the least. This man was connected ostensibly to the Bush family, US Admiral H.E. Bruton - DeMohrenschildt states in his manuscript that he took Oswald along with him when he had dinner with Bruton one night, as well as the former Shah of Iran (Mossadegh). AJ Weberman's website has a very long section on George that I believe is essential for anyone wanting to know about him as well as books such as Jim Marr's Crossfire and The Last Investigation by Gaeton Fonzi. P.S. I have always been curious about Bruce Adamson, he seems to be a credible researcher who has published a great deal about DeMohrenschildt, the JFK assassination and the Bush/Zapata Oil angle but yet on the internet no-one ever seems to speak about his work. Why is that? I have always wanted to check out his stuff, but wanted to see if he suffers from any type of credibility issues among the JFK research community. Any thoughts
-
John wrote:
Changed your tune a bit. When I originally posted information from Thomas Buchanan you responded by saying you did not believe anything said by a member of the American Communist Party.
John, you understated it a bit. I said one could not believe anything written by a Communist (not just American communists). By that I meant a person willing to subject himself or herself to the discipline of the party. Because a Communist member must be willing to subvert the truth to the "party line".
Rather like being a Republican, then. You must remember the Ziegler-ism that the truth in the Nixon White House is "no longer operative?" Or, how about "Saddam's been trying to get uraniam from Niger?" Or, "Saddam has WMD?" Or, what about my personal favourite, "Saddam could launch a warhead against us in only 45 minutes?"
Good thing Republicans said those things, or I might have moments of doubt about their veracity....
This simply means you must verify everything a Communist says. A Communist could make a true statement if it is consistent with the then-current party position. My point is that one ought not accord a Communist writer a presumption of honesty as one would accord, say, a socialist or a Republican.
Why extend it to either of them? Why not just presume that it's all propaganda to advance a cause until it resonates within your head and heart? Or do you simply put your brain on auto-pilot because you're listening to one of your own? If so, it would help explain a whole lot about the naivete behind your posts here.
The same thing is not necessarily true of a former communist, particularly one who has renounced communism, whether one has moved to the left or to the right.
I would accord the same degree of careful scrutiny to a writer who also has a history of making false statements. Let us take Richard Sprague. We know he made a false statement linking me to the attempted assassination of George Wallace,
No, for the umpteenth G-D time, he didn't! Sprague said Bremer had been receiving money from a group with which Segretti, Cassini and Gratz were associated. [The Republican party would qualify as such a group.] We don't know that's false; only that you deny it.
which he falsely attributed to William Turner,
We do know that Turner has denied it, presumably with cause.
and we know he made a false statement linking Harry Dean to the Kennedy assassination. I would therefore not trust a word of Sprague's writing without verifying it. And of course his book offers few sources for the broad claims he makes.
Must be a Communist then, huh? But, jeez louise, Tim... what if Sprague was a registered Republican all his life? What happens to your theory then? [sprague's book is incredibly deficient in the footnote department, but so are many others that you cite regularly.]
The fact that I think the Mattei matter may merit investigation ought to make everyone (yourself included) understand that I am not blindly wedded to a single scenario based on a political agenda. (And I want to reiterate that several prominent leftists support the Castro scenario.)
But if they're too far to the left, then aren't you being suckered by... Commies? [Care to name your leftish fellow-travelers, Tim? As a Republican, you shouldn't have any trouble naming names, as was the case in the good ol' HUAC days.]
You wrote: Therefore I don’t suspect you are really interested in Buchanan’s theories.
John, respectfully, does not the above statement violate the following which you established as a rule of this Forum:
Most importantly, the motivations of the poster should not be questioned.
There's no question about your motives here, Tim. Hence, no need to question them.
Why would you think I was not interested in the Mattei issue when I, like Pat, immediately remewmbered that Buchanan had suggested a link between the Mattei death and I also took the time to do some research on Mattei on the Internet?
I do not, as you know, believe that LBJ was assassinated as a result of efforts by the Texas oil industry.
Well, that's a relief. I thought he'd died of old age, but I guess I must have been reading Communist propaganda instead of good Republican coverage of the event.
I find it far more likely that he was assassinated by either pro-Castro or anti-Castro Cubans (and that of course was the mileui in which LHO was operating).
That'll teach him to tell CIA to stop trying to kill Castro. Funny how they could make that old-age-cause-of-death thing so convincing.
Even if American oil interests were behind the assassination of Mattei, that does not, of course, mean such interests sponsored the Kennedy assassination.
Hell, no. Good Republican oil men might kill them damn feriners, but they'd draw the line at killing a US President, even if it offered unprecedented economic gain. Just like CIA, don'tcha know?
Nevertheless, if Texas oil interests did participate in the murder of Mattei, that certainly is an fact that must be entered into the equation. It would, for instance, make me reconsider my position that Texas oil money would not organize an assassination purely for economic gain.
Like the old song says, "Reconsider baby!"
The question, then, is whether there is any actual evidence that links the murder of Mattei to Texas oil interests, or if it is just Buchanan bluster (because that was indeed the Communist position). (Again understand the Communist position is not necessarily wrong but it must be very carefully scrutinized and justified.) I think it is an important point whether actual evidence of such a link exists.
When we find a Republican who says the same thing Buchanan did, we'll let you know.
You argued (posited? wondered?) if the CIA murdered Mattei because his brand of socialism was such a threat to the CIA's strategy for Europe. If this thought is based solely on the possible motive of the CIA, then let me make the following comment: JFK believed that in some cases democratic socialism presented the best obstacle to communism, particularly in Europe. If JFK was right, and if the Communists saw things from the same perspective, then the Communists had a motive to kill Mattei as well as the CIA.
No, the Commies only killed Kennedy. You must have mixed up your index cards, Tim. Do try to be more careful.
So the bottom line is that I think we have to go beyond motive to the actual evidence of the (alleged?) murder. What evidence exists that Mattei was murdered, and, if so, by whom?
This might relate to the person who I believe the History Channel suggested had admitted to participating in the murder.
A confession might be a good place to start your investigation, Tim. Just make sure the confessing participant is a paid-up dues-paying Republican, or his word means nothing.
I did a brief search on Google under "Enrico Mattei JFK assassination" and found this. I found it to be interesting although I would take it with a grain of salt.
-
Portions of the Family Jewels documents have indeed been de-classified they are included in the initial? release of the AARB Final Report and are listed among a plethora of other documents in "Box 13" under the subheading "Files of Michelle Combs" one of the members of the AARB.
-
Today while on the NARA website and some other sites. I discovered the existence of a set of documents compiled while William Colby was DCI, that detail "abuses" that took place before he assumed the position of Director of the Agency. The portion that deals with the JFK assassination is some 17 pages long, and I understand that documents have been de-classified. Has any member of the forum seen the JFK documents that could elabotate or share what they know?
-
Sorry Pat but I think your giving too much credit here. You are a much more learned man than I am and I mean no disrespect but your failure to believe in a large conspiracy in the case is naive. The amount of doors slamming closed by the intelligence agencies the last 40 years is overwhelming.
For the record, Justin, I do not believe in a wide-spread conspiracy to kill Kennedy. I do believe that after the Warren Report was released there developed a vast conspiracy to shut up and shut down the critics, as they were making Americans think uncomfortable thoughts. I believe the mainstream media willingly participated in this. Look at the NBC White Paper or the CBS specials in the sixties. I also believe that both the FBI and CIA determined that the conspiracy community was anti-American and was quite possibly a communist plot, and that they used and perhaps still use their resources to discredit and attack the conspiracy community. I also believe that the agents who participate in this do so out of misguided patriotism, and not because they are trying to protect Kennedy's murderers. That is why Posner, McAdams and Jennings are so powerful--not because they're paid to lie--but because they have a built-in audience for their distortions of the truth. I'll go even further--while I don't believe Posner or McAdams are on the CIA payroll I wouldn't be surprised if it was suggested by someone in the government that they go out and push the lone-nut idea after Stone's JFK turned a few heads. I can almost see the full-court press when Bugliosi's book is released. I've already got my spot reserved at the neighborhood puke-atorium.
I thought that Forum Members might like to look at the obit for George Joannides published in the Washington Post on March 14, 1990. He died on the ninth.
"George E. Joannides, 67, a retired lawyer at the Defense Department who later established a private law practice in Washington, died March 9 at St. Luke's Hospital in Houston, where he had undergone heart surgery.
Mr. Joannides, Potomac resident, was born in Athens. He came to this country when he was 1 year old, and he grew up in New York City. He graduated from the City College of New York and received a law degree from St. John's University.
Before moving to Washington in 1949 he worked for the National Herald, a Greek-language newspaper published in New York.
In Washington, Mr. Joannides worked for the Greek Embassy Information Service for a year. In 1951, he went to work for the Defense Department. His assignments included service in Vietnam and Greece. He retired in 1979.
When he left the government, Mr. Joannides began a law practice in Washington in which he specialized in immigration matters.
He was a member of the D.C. Bar, the American Bar Association, the National Lawyers Club, the American Hellenic Lawyers Association, the Officers Club of the Military District of Washington, the Men's Republican Club in Montgomery County and the American Hellenic Educational Progressive Association.
Survivors include his wife, Violet Joannides of Potomac; three children, Violet Folias and Alexandria Joannides, both of Salt Lake City, Stephanie Joannides of Juneau, Alaska; two sisters, Elizabeth Mills of Toronto and Ann Djinis of Dallas; and three grandchildren."
I believe John Simkin or someone else was seeking a photograph of Mr. Joannides, unfortunately there was not one in the article I obtained thru Obitsarchive.com. Perhaps there was one in the original story. I have done extensive searching on the Web for a photo of this individual without any luck.
-
I have always believed since the 1960's that the major assassinations of that era (JFK, Malcolm X, MLK and RFK) were conspiracies, that, to some degree intertwined with the apparatus of government. I believe that for, whatever reason the ensuing decades since then make it patently clear that the national media has for the most part, offered a de facto assent to the conclusions officially sanctioned by the Warren Commission, which, in itself presents a disturbing aspect to a culture that claims to cherish 'family values,' Which beg's the question, 'Isn't truth the greatest value we should posess?'
At one time in the early 1990's I was personally involved in researching the assassination of Pres. Kennedy, I was taking notes from an extensive collection of books, saw firsthand the DPD files that were "discovered" then, including the arrest reports for 11/22/63 which were central to the discovery that there are still a plethora of un-answered questions regarding all of the above cited assassinations, although I believe the assassination of Martin Luther King has finally been resolved to a great deal. I find the Education Forum - JFK Debate to be on the cutting edge in resolving, still un-deciphered aspects of the John F. Kennedy assassination. The time is past for accepting the status quo of mainstream media's attempt to keep the 'genie in the bottle' concerning what was one of the most important events in the 20th Century. It should be obvious to anyone who believes there is a connection between the events of November 22, 1963 and the ensuing litany of scandal's on up to the 'Post 9-11 World' of the 21st Century that 'time is running out' not only to keep 'unresolved issues' (of which the assassinations of the 1960's are but just one) from disappearing from the nation's conciousness, indeed if it has not for the most part already. I have a great respect for all the individuals who want America and the world to know the truth about the death of a President who I believe, may have kept the world from becoming a nuclear hell.
The words 'National Security' will become meaningless across the entire world, when, and if, it is used to obstruct justice and the right's of the people to know the truth about what goes on in their own country, and who collectively, are the governed.
After 43 years, we, as a nation, must all remember that the cycles of history repeat themselves, phrases from the lexicon of generations past such as, 'the common good' have gave way to what Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. entitled 'The Disuniting of America.'
When profound issues face America and the World, and America is in danger of accepting illusion as history, and history as illusion, there must be a engaged, enlightened and activist citizenry to question the intellectual development of a nation that fosters production of video games depicting the murder's of President's and think's nothing of it.
Jack S. Martin Sr.
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
This becomes more compelling in light of recently de-classified documents (which I haven't seen) that Joan Mellen apparently uses in her forthcoming book on the Garrison investigation. In a few pages on the internet (Amazon.com) and some others she references Jack Martin as having CIA connections (if not actually working for the CIA, if I am not mistaken). I think her book is going to be a bombshell. It appears to be one of the most meticulously researched books that deals with the JFK assassination ever written.