Jump to content
The Education Forum

Gene Kelly

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Gene Kelly

  • Birthday 07/05/1950

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Philadelphia PA

Recent Profile Visitors

11,138 profile views

Gene Kelly's Achievements

  1. I am a fan of Joan Mellen, although she has some stubborn notions about certain topics. However, I am not a fan of Phil Nelson's work, nor his conjectures about LBJ. And his criticism of Mellen's writing style seems vindictive and over the top ... can we take seriously a retired property-casualty insurance agent commenting on a university professor who teaches creative writing? Here is how Joseph Green described Nelson's LBJ Mastermind book in a 2013 Kennedy's and King article: Phillip F. Nelson with a sizable work on the subject, wanting to go further than anyone has before. His view of Johnson is comparable to Sherlock Holmes’s description of Professor Moriarty: “He is the Napoleon of crime … He sits motionless like a spider in the centre of its web, but that web has a thousand radiations, and he knows very well every quiver of each of them.” To put us back on track - or at least address Jim and David's comments about Allan Eaglesham and Pitzer - there is also an enlightening discussion thread on the EF ("William Bruce Pitzer") begun on May 9, 2004 with comments from Allan, who debates Wim Dankbaar and JVB. A guest named "Dangerous Dan" (purportedly Marvin himself) also participates. The entire debate goes on for several months, with ad hominem attacks by Dankbaar, nonsensical comments by JVB, and a debate about the left-handed/right-handed aspect (Allan points out that Pizer played golf right-handed). Notably, Mrs. Pitzer pursued the autopsy report after being influenced by author Harrison Livingstone. Jerrol Custer's credibility is questioned, including the fact that he told William Law that Pitzer's right hand was congenitally deformed. Also, he appears to have overstated his familiarity with Chief Pitzer ... he asserted to William Law that he knew Pitzer well, which was inconsistent with his statement to the ARRB in October 1997. Eaglesham backed off in 1995 with his efforts to get the case reopened because - having learned of Pitzer's extramarital affair - he was sensitive to the repercussions for Mrs. Pizer if all that it proved was that he had committed suicide. A 2011 article by John Kays entitled "Can We Rely on Eaglesham’s Proof, LCDR William B. Pitzer Died from Suicide?" states the following: Allan Eaglesham had initially believed in a homicide argument for Lieutenant Commander William B. Pitzer’s mysterious death, on October 29, 1966. A great deal of investigation into Pitzer’s death unpeeled the layers of mythical conspiracy (for Eaglesham), and brought him to the shores of logic. Eaglesham couldn’t back everything out of the ‘conspiracy parking lot.’ The most auspicious tidbit that Eaglesham couldn’t repudiate is what Lt. Col. Dan Marvin told the camera for Episode 6. Dan Marvin was contracted by the CIA to kill Pitzer, but eventually turned it down. Gene
  2. I saw the Airplane in November 1968 at The Electric Factory in Philadelphia. To put it mildly, she had an irreverent and dynamic stage personality. After 1972, they split into two groups: Jorma Kaukonen and Jack Casady moved on full-time to their own band, Hot Tuna. Grace Slick, Paul Kantner, and the remaining members of Jefferson Airplane recruited new members and regrouped as Jefferson Starship in 1974, eventually adding Marty Balin. Here is what Grace said about creating White Rabbit: The song is a little dark. It’s not saying everything’s going to be wonderful. The Red Queen is shouting “off with her head” and the “White Knight is talking backwards”. Lewis Carroll was looking at how things are run and the people who rule us. All fairytales that are read to little girls feature a Prince Charming who comes and saves them. But Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland did not ... Alice was on her own, and she was in a very strange place, but she kept on going and she followed her curiosity – that’s the White Rabbit. A lot of women could have taken a message from that story about how you can push your own agenda. The 1960s resembled Wonderland for me. Like Alice, I met all kinds of strange characters, but I was comfortable with it. I wrote White Rabbit on a red upright piano that cost me about $50. It had eight or 10 keys missing, but that was OK because I could hear in my head the notes that weren’t there.
  3. Jim Nigel Turner's series (TMWKK) caught a lot of people's imagination at the time (mine included) and was good television. Unfortunately, many of the "stories" go nowhere, when you earnestly explore them. They become distractions that harm the credibility of legitimate investigation, tantamount to disinformation. These sensational anecdotes (mainly narrated by Gary Mack and Robert Groden) sent many interested readers down disappointing rabbit holes (e.g., McClellan, the Wallace fingerprint, Corsican assassins and the French Connection, Pitzer's suicide and Daniel Marvin, JVB's affair with LHO, Madeleine Brown and the Murchison meeting, LBJ and his confidant Billie Sol Estes, Liggett the mortician from hell, sewer shooters, Charles V. Harrelson and The Tramps, Badgeman and Gordon Arnold, the prescient Joseph Milteer, et al). All of it reminds me of the Jefferson Airplane song "White Rabbit": Go ask Alice When she's ten feet tall. And if you go chasing rabbits And you know you're going to fall, Tell 'em a hookah smoking caterpillar Has given you the call. Call Alice When she was just small. When the men on the chessboard Get up and tell you where to go Nigel Turner was censured by the British Parliament, and there was an attempt to revoke Central Television’s franchise based on making inaccurate broadcasts in British law. The Turner series ultimately set the legitimate JFK research community back or at least confused the playing field considerably (imho). It also served to give those who seek the true story a bad name, and served as grist for conspiracy theorist critics. Historian Stanley Kutler describer the series thus: Their work is a parody of assassination theories and beliefs; surely, this is history as a joke the living play on the dead. Such programs reflect our desperate desire to embrace a conspiracy rather than the crucial question of truth. Assassination conspiracy theories and books expounding them proliferate. But film is special. A conjurer's sleight-of-hand and verbal misdirection are ready ingredients for manipulating a mass audience. Some viewers saw TMWKK as a public relations success for the research community, with impact analogous to Oliver Stones JFK in that it revived interest in the case. On the positive side of the ledger, it exposed some interesting evidence and prompted viewers to question the facts versus blindly accepting the official narrative. Some interpreted the red herrings contained within TMWKK as disinformation, a mix of fact and fiction intended to cloud/confuse. Stated differently, far-fetched ideas draw outlandish personalities, thus leading the public further away from the truth. Others had mixed feelings about the series. John Simkin for one stated that the series contained some fascinating interviews, albeit far too subjective, characterizing it as more like tabloid journalism than historical accounts. He also made the point that the series lacks a political dimension (e.g., the connections between the assassination and JFK's foreign policy) which surely resonates today. Gene
  4. The picture below is a person of interest ... one who got away. Wonder where he ended up? I doubt that he went to prison for 50 years. Michael Wayne (real name Wien) was a twenty-one-year-old from England who professed to be of Jewish background, and not from the mid-east. Wayne worked at Pickwick Bookstore on Sunset Boulevard. He had gained entry to the pantry by obtaining a press button, and even managed to get into Kennedy’s suite on the 5th floor earlier in the night. When Kennedy went down to the Embassy room to make his speech, Wayne followed. He was loitering in the kitchen, was asked to leave, but returned shortly before the shooting took place. What happened after Wayne was arrested and handcuffed by Ace Security Guard Mallard is unclear, and troubling. An LAPD supplemental report to Michael Wayne’s interview states: This investigator received information that the business card of Keith Duane Gilbert was in the possession of Wayne, at the time of his apprehension after Sen. Kennedy was shot. Gilbert is reported to be an extremist and militant who has been involved in a dynamite theft, previously. The suspicious Wayne may have been a Sirhan 'double', or in cahoots with the Polka Dot Girl. Wayne (Wien) allegedly had a rolled-up tube (presumably a signed poster of RFK) and was noticeably fleeing the scene when several individuals chased him. He was detained because they thought he had a gun. Other accounts have him working in an antiques store in LA, and a 'collector'. Still others link him with Godarzian/Khan, an Iranian who had penetrated RFK's campaign team before the assassination. Given the dubious motive ascribed to Sirhan (anti-Israel, Phantom jets, Palestine) pointing disingenuously towards the Middle East - and the allegations about Mossad/Iranian assassins - Wayne/Wien is not simply a person of interest. If one were to connect the dots, his involvement points towards a central player in all of the plots and subterfuge ... James Angleton. So, here we have a guy who resembled Sirhan; was: seen in a group that included Sirhan; obtained a ride from the notorious Khaibar Khan; was observed (by several people) to have a gun as he ran out of the pantry; and was apprehended by an ACE security guard. Wayne denied any knowledge of Keith Duane Gilbert (a white supremacist, Minuteman, and a founder of The Socialist Nationalist Aryan People's Party), and did not remember having his card. But Gilbert’s LAPD file contained a business card as well; one belonging to Michael Wayne. LAPD Sergeant Manual Gutierrez purportedly spent a great deal of time trying to find out whether there was any association between Wayne and Gilbert, a radical Minuteman activist. Gutierrez did not believe Wayne’s denials of a relationship, and ultimately pushed to have Wayne polygraphed. Not surprisingly, Hernandez determined Wayne was "truthful" about not knowing Gilbert. The LAPD and SUS ended up claiming that that the Michael Wayne card in Gilbert’s file referred to a different person; they never explained the reverse possession, nor did they adequately investigate Wayne’s affiliations and connections.
  5. Pat My thoughts and prayers go out to you. I went thru some similar experiences this past year. Stay the course, and keep the faith. Best, Gene
  6. From personal experience, I have found that many, to whom I try to explain what happened, do not want to engage in the discussion. I'm not sure if that's because it occurred so long ago (i.e., what does it matter today), or because its too difficult to fathom our own government's treachery in JFK's murder. Some know (in only a broad sense) of the Warren Commission findings, and even less know anything about the HSCA ...the former for a magic bullet controversy, the latter for a Grassy Knoll intrigue. Very few have ever heard of Jim Garrison and his investigation, and - while the movie JFK pricked the nation's conscience - virtually no one knows anything about the ARRB or what's contained in those released records (and more pointedly why they were withheld for so long). If I were to give a presentation that expands upon the more recent revelations, I would entitle it "The Devil's in the Details". Gene
  7. Gents This is an interesting thread. While not a journalist or PR expert (I am an engineer by trade, trained in physics), my thought has always been to keep it simple when explaining a complex story (e.g. teaching quantum mechanics to undergraduates). First, characterize the story as JFK's murder and avoid using the word assassination, to call it for what it was. My lead-in, when asked, has always been simply that "there's a lot more to the story than meets the eye". Let that thought percolate, then pick a few simple (basic) points like Michaleen's observation that Connally was hit by a separate bullet. Things that appeal to common sense. Like a good PowerPoint presentation, keep it to three compelling points (the word 'bullets' seems inappropriate here). For me and the JFK case, these are: agencies like the FBI and CIA have the investigatory power to know what really happened ... their capabilities are impressive, and the fact that they didn't prevent the plot from developing, or quickly ascertain who was behind it, speaks volumes. Just imagine this happening today to the President ... no stone would be left unturned, and each/every perpetrator would be brought to justice (promptly). Why didn't that happen 50 years ago? two "independent" federal investigations were largely unsuccessful in getting to the bottom of the story, and establishing a credible, satisfying conclusion. Important records were withheld (or in some cases, destroyed), and some are are still protected. How can that be, and what is so sensitive that 50 years later is still a mystery? the individuals who plotted and executed this murder were proficient at what they did ... hence no smoking guns, irrefutable evidence, candid confessions, damming memos, names/faces of shooters. Instead, what we have is a lot of smoke and mirrors ... distraction and deception. Someone who could enlist/infiltrate police complicity, control evidence and witnesses, compromise the media, influence an autopsy, manipulate a New Orleans DA's investigation and stonewall Congressional inquiries. So we must reflect and ask, who is expert at pulling all of that off? Once we rule out Oswald, the Mob, the JBS/far right, Castro, a foreign government ... only one candidate sticks out (like a sore thumb). I once asked a colleague (who had been an HSCA investigator) who did it - and why it wasn't exposed by now - and he tellingly remarked: "what makes you think that's the worst thing that they've ever done?" One of my favorite quotes is from an Esquire article about the 1975 Church Committee hearings, by writer Tim Crouse, remarking about what limited information the CIA divulged at the time (the so-called "family jewels"), almost as a willing and cooperative partner to the Committee's chief counsel (FAO Schwartz, Jr.): “It’s a queer thing to hear the chief Senate investigator talking as if he and the CIA were partners in the search for the truth.... It does not seem to have occurred to Schwarz that the CIA was, is, and always will be in the business of deception. One suspects that the Agency may be trying to peddle certain crimes of its own choice, trying to guide the Church Committee toward certain items and away from...God knows what." Gene
  8. Jim I know this is a little off the thread topic, but Destiny 2nd Edition is an eye-opener for me. I didn't fully appreciate how disingenuous Blakey was, nor how unsatisfying the HSCA conduct was. And how duplicitous Billings, Sheridan and others actually were. I have become more convinced with time (and the emergence of previously withheld documents) of how spot-on Jim Garrison was, and what a courageous and important effort his investigation represented (where would we be, without it?). While I could optimistically speculate that their behavior was prompted by a narrow (albeit flawed) view that they were protecting the nation and national security, it was highly unethical and actually treasonous. When I look at the attached picture of the Warren Commission working attorneys, it saddens and repulses me. History has shown that JFK was on a path for peace - not one of Communist appeasement - although many historians apparently don't want to acknowledge it that way. Perhaps our more important battle is not to identify who murdered the President, but rather to ensure an accurate historical record and accounting. My fear is that anyone today who wants to understand what happened needs to assimilate an awful lot of information. This considerable amount of due diligence aside, they must also wade through a mountain of conflicting disinformation and misleading anecdotes, after having been conditioned by years of craven media reporting. So, the importance of the ARRB releases, your 2nd edition, and the new screenplay can't be underestimated, as far as further educating the public. Gene
  9. And a happy birthday to Sir Mick ... just turned 77 years old!
  10. Jim The four-hour version of the screen play will bring all of this detail in your book to light, and so better inform the broader public perception. I'm further into Destiny Betrayed and its just fascinating. I have been reading and studying this convoluted/complex JFK story for many years now (and all of its many subplots), but it amazes me how much there still is to learn and appreciate. Big picture, its instructive to see the true picture of Kennedy's foreign policy and an authentic accounting of American Cold War history. It provides a motive and reason for his murder. On the smaller scale, the details found in the released ARRB records are also very important context to add to the previously known stories of fact. Perhaps more telling is what topics were withheld for so long (until ARRB, and even today) such as the story of FBI agents Sibert and O'Neill, the conflicts of interest and unethical behavior of Clay Shaw's legal team, the inference of so-called journalist provocateurs (Phelan, Aynesworth, Sheridan, even Garrison's best man), and most notably, the inner workings of the HSCA. A few prominent observations about the conduct of the HSCA from Destiny Betrayed really stick out to me ... frankly, I had no idea how controlled and predetermined the Committee was. While most remember it for the Grassy Knoll inferences, it essentially upheld much of the Warren Commission findings (including ballistics), ignored the reality of the autopsy, threw in a convenient 'shot that missed' from the Knoll (based on contentious and confusing acoustics analysis), and then inserted the tentative and uncertain phrase "probable conspiracy". While I worry that the average audience won't be able to process all of this information (particularly if they're not already well-read into the case), you just can't make a story like this up: Robert Blakey was originally associated with Dick Billings of LIFE in discrediting or undermining Garrison during his investigation in the late 60's ... and then ten years later, Billings (a so-called "freelance writer") helps Blakey write the "small conspiracy" HSCA script. This is promptly aggrandized by their "mob did it" book in 1981, which is patent disinformation and a limited hangout. Hard not to smell some rats there. The sabotage of the early HSCA, and the attack upon Sprague and Tannenbaum. As one of the attorney's stated: "When I saw that they could do this to Dick Sprague, I knew there was a conspiracy". And how many of the HSCA investigators refused to talk about their experiences such as Jonathan Blackmer. The extreme censorship and management of the NOLA investigators (L. J. Delsa and Bob Buras) ... HSCA was studiously avoiding Garrison's leads, witnesses and evidence (like the Plague) On the eve of the Clay Shaw trial, Attorney General Ramsey Clark publicizes a misleading report (the Clark Panel) that ostensibly re-examined the autopsy material, and in particular, the head wound. This is clearly a cover-up of the disgraceful and treasonous Bethesda autopsy. To make matters worse, many of the pathologists who were later selected for the HSCA medical panel were from the original Russell Fisher forensic pathology circle, and had a vested interest in maintaining this inaccurate story. So much for independence. How the trio of Blakey, Cornwell and Billings kept their investigators in the dark, micromanaged a preconceived HSCA Final Report, capitulated to the CIA, perpetuated the single bullet theory (with questionable science), and sidestepped the sinister suspicious autopsy (although Pierre Finck's Shaw trial testimony is staring them in the face). It also surprised me how Blakey and the HSCA actually treated Garrison almost like a hostile witness in his HSCA interview. Blakey's feigned indignation and hand-wringing in 2003, when he complained that the CIA did not reveal that George Joannides had also been the handler of the anti-Castro group called DRE, and that this somehow compromised the committee’s investigation … the entire DRE/Joannides topic is disingenuous and misleading. Gene
  11. And this review from Awards Watch by Adam Solomons on July 13th: The Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) set up in 1992 amid a flurry of renewed interest in the assassination has steadily published previously classified documents which give more credence to the notion Kennedy may have been executed by the CIA as part of an effort to expand America’s military interventions abroad. That rationale is a crucial aspect of Stone’s original film: that the Kennedy brothers were the first White House occupants since World War Two to sincerely oppose American interventionism, and haven’t been matched since, is the strongest argument existing that the defense establishment acted to replace Kennedy with the more battle-ready Lyndon Johnson. Shortly after Kennedy was killed, the US vastly expanded its phony case for a full-scale invasion of Vietnam. The rest is history. After all, the assassination itself was never quite Stone’s main interest. The director’s original film targets the shadowy defense establishment’s ability to conduct illegal covert operations, and kill the president if it wanted to, as much as point the finger to a specific plot. JFK Revisited is much the same, lambasting the CIA and FBI’s intellectual laziness toward essential classified material as much as alleging the involvement of Clay Shaw and the Cuban campaigners. It’s this rejection of American policymaking in general which made JFK so iconoclastic. It’s encouraging to see Stone hasn’t left it behind. The sound perspective of Kevin Costner’s Jim Garrison is also missing, with Stone’s own investigative angle taking precedent. That reflects a desire to return to the assassination as a widely accepted plot, rather than persuade Americans anything suspicious happened at all, as JFK sets out to do. This gives JFK Revisited the impression of an ideological victory lap – and a somewhat deserved one, too. As the late Donald Rumsfeld might say, there are still many unknown unknowns about the JFK assassination. Oliver Stone still has an appetite to find them.
  12. One of the better reviews is by Stephen Dalton in the Hollywood Reporter (July 12th) where he opens by stating that "the controversial director weighs up recently declassified evidence about the assassination in this forensically detailed documentary": Had he lived, Kennedy may indeed have avoided full-scale war in Vietnam, but he was far from the messianic prince of peace that Stone needs him to be to fit his reductive narrative of American imperial villainy. None of this disproves speculation that he was killed in a treacherous coup plot, of course, but these lapses into misty-eyed Camelot mythology weaken the film’s otherwise impressively strong factual elements. Stone’s conception of good and evil is military-industrial, but not very complex. In visual terms, JFK Revisited offers a polished blend of contemporary interviews, archive footage and explanatory graphics. Surprisingly, clips from the original JFK are only deployed very sparingly. Stone’s regular cinematographer Robert Richardson, who also works with Scorsese and Tarantino, gives the film a glossy old-school finish. Stone himself only appears occasionally on screen, chiefly to pose precisely scripted questions to his expert guests. He also shares voice-over duties with Donald Sutherland, who had a small but pivotal role in JFK, and Whoopi Goldberg. Composer Jeff Beal’s overly insistent, intrusive score is the most jarring element in an otherwise handsome technical package.
  13. Jim On a personal note, I just got a copy of your 2nd edition of Destiny Betrayed for my birthday. Its awesome, and really pulls together the big picture of Kennedy's political challenges, and the forces he was up against. I've not been able to put it down since I got it. It reminds me that - which an engineer and physicist (not a liberal arts person) - the JFK story has allowed me to better understand modern American history and Cold war politics. That aspect of the assassination is as interesting to me as is the plot and coverup. I've also become a big fan of your extensive and meticulous footnoting and references ... as Lisa Pease's preface and Bill Davy's foreword state, the footnotes are an entire book of reading unto themselves. I'm sure that the fact-checking now common/required for such film documentaries will be greatly aided by have such comprehensively referenced information in your book. That was an obvious and common criticism of Oliver's 1992 JFK movie (i.e. that it was based upon inaccurate history and facts). With the thorough accounting in Destiny Betrayed, the critics will have a more difficult time making that specious claim. While I know many of the back-stories and topics in Destiny, this 2nd edition takes me to a next level of understanding. Peripheral characters like Kerry Thorley are brought into better focus, and events like the Clinton-Jackson visit become much clearer in intent. Jim Garrison was surely on the right trail, and the forces that he was up against were formidable. As most of us already understand, its nonetheless incredible that the Paines escaped attention and notoriety. However, if the film depicts their treachery, then the public will become better informed. I've also learned a lot more about the work of the ARRB that I didn't appreciate. Great book! Gene
  14. Matt Thanks for sharing the link ... I found the following to be interesting: Since the start of the fiscal year last October, the U.S. Coast Guard has intercepted more than 512 Cubans at sea, compared with 49 for the entire previous year. The Cuban government attributes its longstanding economic problems to the American trade embargo, which cuts off its access to financing and imports. But the pandemic has worsened conditions ... the Cuban Ministry of Health website says the nation of 11 million now has about 32,000 active cases of Covid-19 (6,923 daily cases and 47 deaths on Sunday). Only about 15 percent of the population is fully vaccinated. The Foreign Ministry tweeted that "Cubans know perfectly well that the government of the United States is principally responsible for Cuba’s current situation ... Cuba and its streets belong to the revolutionaries.” The President urged government supporters to hit the streets and confront the protesters. He blamed the United States for restricting exports, access to funds and travel to Cuba, which led to widespread shortages. The protests were a form of “systemic provocation” by dissidents doing the bidding of the United States. He said Washington in recent months had sought to destabilize and weaken the island’s economy as part of a policy designed to “provoke a massive social implosion.” I recently read an interesting book entitled "To Catch a Spy, The Art of Counterintelligence" by James Olson, a former chief of counterintelligence at the CIA. In the book, he calls out the Cuban intelligence service as very competent and second only to China and Russia as threats to the US: “I worked a lot in my career against DGI and against Cuba in general. They are a very formidable adversary. They were very professional. They were very disciplined and they had a vendetta against the United States. Castro focused all of his efforts on national security to bringing down his Yankee neighbor, to attacking us. They were impenetrable. They were tough. We had very little success against them. We underestimated them. And we paid a real price for that. I stand by my ranking of the Cubans as the number three intelligence threat to the United States today. Miguel Diaz-Canel is as hardline as Stalin and as the communist as Fidel ever was. He’s holding it together. And the DI as it’s now called is still focused almost exclusively on the United States. And they’re causing a lot of issues. I’m getting tired of hearing about people like a Philip Agee or Ana Montes or Kendell and Gwen Myers, The Cubans have penetrated our government. They are all over South Florida. If you go to South Florida today and you know where to tune in on the shortwave dial, you can hear this sultry, female Cuban voice reading off numbers. And that is the DI communicating with its agents and its illegals in the United States of America and they are very aggressive and conducting a lot of operations. And I don’t like the way they do it. You know, they’re vicious. They’re all over Venezuela. We know they’re rolling in Nicaragua with the Sandinistas. We know what they did in Angola and elsewhere in Africa. They’ve been a thorn on our side forever. Because I guarantee you, we only know the tip of the iceberg. They’re much better than the KGB ever was. In terms of discipline, in terms of tradecraft, in terms of professionalism.” Gene
  15. Ron That is a good observation. When you read the record closely, Cabell dances around this topic in his Warren testimony. Hubert presses him on it, but seems to be laying a groundwork and cover story (for Earle). The red herrings are a parade permit (that gives him an excuse to talk to Curry) and death threats received by Cabell. However, it gets "muddy" because after Cabell refers a Catholic torchlight parade (replete with the mention of nuns) for Sunday night which was cancelled, intermixing (or conflating) it with a call that he eventually admits to with Curry that occurred "a matter of minutes" before Oswald's murder: Mr. HUBERT - I believe in your conversation with Chief Curry on Sunday, you discussed a threat that had been made to you, or indirectly? CABELL - He called me that this call had come through the switchboard of the city hall, and it was his understanding that it was long distance, but he did not know the source, and since it was a direct dial and they could not trace it, there was not enough time, wherein the caller said that an attempt would be made on my life. Mr. HUBERT - Attached to page 3 it seems to indicate that the call with Curry must have occurred a bit before you received the news of Oswald's shooting? Mr. CABELL - The first call from Curry, or only the starting of any conversations with Chief Curry were relative to this torchlight parade on that night. I had called him and told him that I would recommend the cancellation of that Parade. He had granted it, but then I had recommended the cancellation, and I would assume full responsibility for having given that instruction. HUBERT - At that time Oswald had not been shot? CABELL - No. HUBERT - But on that first call then, was there any discussion between you and Chief Curry about the transfer of Oswald? CABELL - No. HUBERT - Was there any discussion about the security precautions that were being observed or the problems that they were? CABELL - I do not recall any discussion on that at all. HUBERT - Chief Curry did not tell you that any threats had been made to Oswald? CABELL - No. HUBERT - Can you comment upon this Lancaster Smith proposal of a parade? CABELL - Lane Smith is a very well-known, very active lay worker in the Catholic church, and he had called me earlier, and I think the suggestion for this came from some nuns, and when he first talked to me I didn't realize frankly the implications or the hazard of a procession such as that, and I told him--he asked about a permit, and I said that that is a matter that is handled by the chief of police, that he would have to be the one to issue a permit for any type of parade, because that is what that amounted to. HUBERT - When did Lancaster Smith call you? CABELL - I think it must have been around 8 or 9 o'clock in the morning, originally. HUBERT - Then you called Chief Curry about what time? CABELL - Must have been very shortly after that. I would say 9 o'clock or possibly a short time after. I believe that it must have been just a little before 10, because I think that he was talking to me in his office at the time word was brought to him that Oswald was shot, or possibly had hung up the phone, or he would have mentioned that to me at the time. HUBERT - Because the evidence we now have shows that Oswald was shot about 11:20, so perhaps your time would have been 11 rather than 10? CABELL - Yes; I was thinking in terms of 10 o'clock being the hour of shooting, but we can move this conversation with Curry to a matter of minutes preceding the shooting of Oswald. There was this retrospect in the Dallas Observer in November 1998: Not long after Oswald's assassination, Curry was hospitalized because of stress, and in 1966, he retired from the force under doctor's orders. He would go to his death in 1980 insisting he was a "happy" man--but one always "haunted" by the deaths of John Kennedy and Lee Harvey Oswald. Gene
  • Create New...