Gene Kelly

Peter: You sound like you know well of what you speak. At the risk of asking, what are the roles of cleaners and how where they used in this operation? Are they still utilized (and active) today? --gene

Bill: Subject matter expert for leaflets/propoganda? Answer: CIA, disinformation, David Phillips and E. H. Hunt. Theri reputation preceeds them. As I recall, the message also used the word "inspired" act of god... - gene

Lee: What is your opinion of Edward Lansdale's presence and role? Was he not well known for his unique expertise in being the "producer" of such complex operations (along with Lucien Conein). If so, then doubles, actors and diversions were more the mark of a professional... and clearly not the signiture of crooks/mobsters, gun-runners and nightclub managers, passionate exiles, right-wing radicals and low level intelligence dangles. Something highly coordinated occurred that day. Gene

Larry: Hechsher ... I got it. Fascinating circumstantial affiliations. Berlin/Harvey, first-generation cold warrior and OSS veteran, that infamous circle of friends. Plus, you can't find much biographical on him (e.g. no pictures, not even from James Richards). Apparently bounced out of Saigon for bucking administration policy. Death squads, Condor and Latin American action resume. And he apparently died peacefully, with no sinister implications... no suspicious heart conditions, no refusal of autopsy. Fonzi didn't write about him, the HSCA didn't investigate or pursue as a person of interest. Untainted by Church Committee. The Agency kept him on a low and protected profile. And - my obsession noted - he has shades of Harvey written all over him. Does anyone have a photo? -- gene

Boris Pash...?

Larry: Would that be Hecksher?

John: I speculate that Harvey hated Bobby more (not necessarily John) for having cost him the JM/WAVE lead... and he was subsequently retired in-place in Rome, which must have been an extreme embarrassment to a primetime player like Harvey. The demotion (and essentially end of his career advancement) sure appears to be the heavy-handed influence of either the President or his AG... who else could've caused banishment (far away) of such an operator? I sure wish I had complete knowledge of everything Harvey did, and everywhere he went, in the ensuing year leading up to Dealey Plaza. Rumor had it that he travelled domestically, and continued to meet with Roselli, even though he no longer had Mongoose, Executive Action, ZR/Rifle, and was then supposedly Chief of Station in Rome (i.e. a ceremonial demotion). And, how do we explain the untimely murder of Roselli and the death of Harvey, so tantalizingly close to the HSCA hearings. -- gene

Robert/John: While not in the league of the true researchers who participate in this forum, I have studied this topic for a long time and read everyting I could get my hands upon. I strongly believe that Harvey is the centerpiece for the plot and murder. I say this inductively, since there's precious little fact available that can directly tie Harvey to the murder. But its precisely that observation - no pictures, no facts, no anecdotes - that draw me back to Harvey. Using that old investigator's sawhorse (of means, motive, opportunity), I can think of no one who had a stronger impetus to kill JFK. While I've read some accounts (e.g. The Company) that paint him patriotically and devoted to the clandestine cause, he's at the center of everything/everyone linked to the murder. He lost his career to the Kennedy's...and I think he not only got mad, but he got even....as simple as that. And his immediate colleagues (Roselli, Morales, Robertson et al) helped make that vendetta a reality. So, I think more reaseach, fact, and digging into Mr. Harvey will really shine a bright light on this fascinating and important historical topic that we all are committed to understand and resolve. As a person who's made a career of investigating all sorts of events within my profession (albeit not criminal cases), Harvey has become a really strong gut instinct that won't go away. I think his story is very important to flush out. -- gene kelly

Thanks Larry... that portrayal of LBJ's policy makes logical sense to me. Part of my 'strategy' for understanding the President's murder has always been to closely study the published history before and after. The world affairs are unmistakable pointers --IMHO-- to the plotters and motives. For Americans, that's The Cold War and Cuban Missile Crisis followed closely by Viet Nam... kind of the "bookends" spanning the 25 year period before and after dealey Plaza. And then nicely capped off/ended with the forever popular Watergate... all connected in a tragic fashion. The five years after 1963 (i.e. LBJ's tenure) do seem wholly uneventful with respect to Cuba. JM WAVE eventually gave up (trying to get Castro), and moved the players to SE Asia and Latin America to fight communism on other fronts. So, if the passionate anti-castro exiles were so inflamed about a proposed detente with Cuba -- inflamed enough to murder JFK -- how could they be appeased with shifting that passion to other places? This implies that regaining the homeland (Cuba) and ousting Castro were not really at the root of their needs. Could the unofficial CIA players really control them that easily... drugs, money, other fronts? How did Phillips keep them happy and focused... did we continue to preach/promise that Castro would be removed? A conclusion drawn from this picture is that the real 'drivers' for the murder were not the hard-line exiles who carried out the plot... they were manipulated in the same fashion that they used LHO. maybe they were surrepticiously eliminated. There was never going to be an invasion... no matter how the plot evolved. The true drivers (the ones who manipultaed the manipulators) didn't really want an invasion, nor did the dark-skinned Mexican exiles want one either. And when it didn't happen in the next 5 years, nobody really cared that much. Its as though the ouster of Castro became suddenly uninteresting, and has remained so for 40+ years. So, it was those principals who shipped out to Spain, Rome, Laos and Latin America... there's your killers. Hunt, Harvey, Morales and Phillips. -- gene

Charles: Thanks for the reference on Levenda. What I was playfully referring to is the music of Pink Floyd, and their classic album "Dark Side of the Moon", one of my favorites. -- gene

James/Charles: What you ponder and desribe is the "Dark Side of the Moon" -- gene

Larry: I finished your book this past month... just superb reading, excellent story flow, great factual confirmation. Kudos to you. It really puts 20+ years of diverse reading and stories in clear focus for me personally. I particularly liked your recommendations for future research... things that can and should be further investigated to sharpen the picture. The 'circle' of JM/WAVE alumni certainly are at the eye of the hurricane. I'd personally like to see more development of Harvey's role, since (after reading Norman Mailer's Harlots Ghost) I'm locked in on his complicity... and the lack of pictures, detailed information and anechdotes in general makes him all the more suspicious. His close associations with Morales, Roselli and Robertson make him hard to ignore. Plus, all of them spend the next several years well out of the country. Book him, Larry (pun intended). Regarding the radical exiles relationships with JFK and LBJ, I agree the back-channel episode was precipitous, as well as a significant difference in those two administrations. But there were the machinations that RFK was involved in that surely could've tempered their harsh views... looking ahead, level minds could've seen that LBJ was no less inclined to accomodate Castro. And history showed that he did far less than Kennedy in that regard. Maybe the great equalizer then became Viet Nam... where all of the JM WAVE principals quickly transitioned to. But what's missing for me is how the virulent anti-C exiles passions became dissipated...and why they didn't go after LBJ for similar reasons. Puzzling. That's where I think the larger conspirators and participants come into play/focus... somebody got what they wanted, and everyone apparently then backed off. Now the exiles fade out of the picture, the kill Castro plots fizzle - as the poet says, not with a bang but a wimper. Perhaps pure revenge for BOP was that this was...nothing more. Mobsters (and their CIA cowboy handlers) esentially get Bobby off their backs. But no chance for casino business in Havana... and pragmatic realization that invasion of Cuba is never going to happen. So the next level of manipulation in this conspiracy - just as Mexican/Cubans used Oswald - was the use of the exiles by the larger conspirators. And those folks all subsequently died coincidentally just before/after their HSCA interviews. Regards and great book -- gene kelly

If the community was so inflamed about JFK's lack of action against Castro, then why wasn't the same energy directed against LBJ (who sponsored far less in that regard)? I think this comparison speaks volumes about other motives, and participants, far different than simply anti-castro Cubans. Hi Tim, Thanks for reading my post and your analysis. While anything Escalante uncovered or says can't be used in court against any suspects, and he certainly has motive to lie, my point is that Bugliosi concludes that the Cuban G2 penetration of anti-Castro Cuban operations in USA would have provided them with info on assassination plots against Castro or JFK. Then he doesn't bother to go there to see what information is even available. Whether you belive Escalante or not, the Cubans did come up with more info on the anti-Castro Cuban organizations than the FBI did (at least they spoke Spanish), and they claim that they can identify those suspects who were invovled in the anti-Castro plots that were turned on JFK. And those suspects are the same as ours - Morales, Phillips, Roselli, et al. Nor do I trust Gordon Winslow any more than I do Fabian Escalante, as Gordon's postion of Archivist of the City of Miami, puts him in the center of the action. The city's municipal building is at the marina where Gordon Campbell kept his boat. While I was an early participant in Gordon's Research Directory, which tried to network those interested in similar subjects, it also tipped our hands as to what we were working on. While his website is a weath of great information, including partial transcripts of the COPA-Cuban conferences, Gordon and the Miami Cubans are not independent researchers, but like Peter Pavia, have an axe to grind against JFK. As Pavia notes in his book, "The most hated man in Miami remains Fidel Castro, but he is followed closely by John F. Kennedy. Kennedy might not have been half the man, or the president, that his hagiographers would like the world to think he was; neither was he the evil traitor who turned his back on the Cuban cause...Operation Moongoose,...from the first, (was) going to include direct U.S. military involvement, but then Kennedy was assassinated. Lyndon Johnson abandoned the plan in 1964." When the Cubans realized that JFK had no intention of using the US military to invade Cuba, and was actively conducting back channel negotiations with Castro via the UN, they pulled triggers of the guns that killed JFK. I don't believe the anti-Castro Cubans killed JFK on their own, but they were entwined with and followed the orders and well laid plans of the CIA officers at JM/WAVE (and the mob, via Roselli), and since it was a coup, not just a conspiracy, every significant aspect of the government was covered or neutralized - cabinet, SS, military, etc. There are two ways to solve the JFK assassination - through a normal law enforcement investigation that develops evidence to be used in court, or through a counter-intelligence CI investigation that also uses illegal sources and information that can't be used in court. The Cubans used the later, as did the USMC investigation, but we must use the former if we want to more than just satisfy our knowlege and counter the coup that remains in power. BK

Hi Tim, Thanks for reading my post and your analysis. While anything Escalante uncovered or says can't be used in court against any suspects, and he certainly has motive to lie, my point is that Bugliosi concludes that the Cuban G2 penetration of anti-Castro Cuban operations in USA would have provided them with info on assassination plots against Castro or JFK. Then he doesn't bother to go there to see what information is even available. Whether you belive Escalante or not, the Cubans did come up with more info on the anti-Castro Cuban organizations than the FBI did (at least they spoke Spanish), and they claim that they can identify those suspects who were invovled in the anti-Castro plots that were turned on JFK. And those suspects are the same as ours - Morales, Phillips, Roselli, et al. Nor do I trust Gordon Winslow any more than I do Fabian Escalante, as Gordon's postion of Archivist of the City of Miami, puts him in the center of the action. The city's municipal building is at the marina where Gordon Campbell kept his boat. While I was an early participant in Gordon's Research Directory, which tried to network those interested in similar subjects, it also tipped our hands as to what we were working on. While his website is a weath of great information, including partial transcripts of the COPA-Cuban conferences, Gordon and the Miami Cubans are not independent researchers, but like Peter Pavia, have an axe to grind against JFK. As Pavia notes in his book, "The most hated man in Miami remains Fidel Castro, but he is followed closely by John F. Kennedy. Kennedy might not have been half the man, or the president, that his hagiographers would like the world to think he was; neither was he the evil traitor who turned his back on the Cuban cause...Operation Moongoose,...from the first, (was) going to include direct U.S. military involvement, but then Kennedy was assassinated. Lyndon Johnson abandoned the plan in 1964." When the Cubans realized that JFK had no intention of using the US military to invade Cuba, and was actively conducting back channel negotiations with Castro via the UN, they pulled triggers of the guns that killed JFK. I don't believe the anti-Castro Cubans killed JFK on their own, but they were entwined with and followed the orders and well laid plans of the CIA officers at JM/WAVE (and the mob, via Roselli), and since it was a coup, not just a conspiracy, every significant aspect of the government was covered or neutralized - cabinet, SS, military, etc. There are two ways to solve the JFK assassination - through a normal law enforcement investigation that develops evidence to be used in court, or through a counter-intelligence CI investigation that also uses illegal sources and information that can't be used in court. The Cubans used the later, as did the USMC investigation, but we must use the former if we want to more than just satisfy our knowlege and counter the coup that remains in power. BK

Please add William Harvey to the list... he had all the right connections and associations, one heck of a motive, and the exclusive means.

A partial list of perps for both murder & cover up (very incomplete but I believe it's accurate as far as it goes): -LYNDON BAINES JOHNSON -J. EDGAR HOOVER -WILLIAM K. HARVEY -DAVID ATLEE PHILLIPS -DAVID MORALES -E. HOWARD HUNT -FRANK STURGIS -GERRY P. HEMMING -ED LANDSDALE -EDWIN ANDERSON WALKER -GENERAL CURTIS LEMAY -JOSEPH MILTEER -HL HUNT -NELSON BUNKER HUNT -BOBBY BAKER -JACK RUBY -DAVID FERRIE -CLAY SHAW -GEORGE HERBERT WALKER BUSH -EMERY ROBERTS -JOHNNY ROSELLI -JIMMY HOFFA -RAY HARGRAVES -PENTAGON -CIA/MOB/EXTREMIST ANTI-CASTRO CUBAN EXILES -FBI -DALLAS POLICE DEPARTMENT -JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY -SECRET SERVICE Possible perps: -Clint Murchison -Richard Nixon -John Rousselot -J.D. Tippit -Roscoe White -Cord Meyer -James Angleton -William Pawley -John McCloy -Allen Dulles -Earle Cabell -SA Kellerman -SA Greer -Lamar Hunt -Jesse Curry -Bill Decker -Carlos Marcello -Charles Nicoletti -Sam Giancana -Eugene Hale Brading -Ted Shackley -Lucien E. Conein -Alfredo Duran -Rip Robertson -John O'Hare -Danny Arce -Boris Pash -Orlando Bosch (I need to reread Larry's book; I'm spacing on some names.) How come they couldn't go ahead and blame Cuba & invade after Ruby killed Oswald? Using a mobster to silence the innocence-proclaiming patsy put a gaping hole in the frame job. A memo from then-CJCS Lemnitzer in Feb. '62 establishes the critera the super-hawks needed to meet for framing a successful pre-text to invade Cuba. This is in reference to Operation Dirty Tricks, a contingency plan developed by the Joint Chiefs to take advantage of John Glenn's 1962 flight should it have exploded. Operation Dirty Tricks came and went, so the Chiefs liked the idea of mounting a false flag attack on Americans on American soil (Operation Northwoods) -- and there had to be "irrevocable proof" that the fault lay at the feet of Castro. Had Oswald been shot the early afternoon of 11/22/63, he could have been readily presented to the world as a Castro agent. The FBI, the CIA, and military intel had the frame set. Oswald in Russia, Cuba, Soviet and Cuban Embassies in Mexico City. According to one account, Carlo Gambino blamed the CIA for 'Screwing up the Cuba thing. Screwing up the Kennedy thing." I'd take that to mean the CIA had the ultimate responsibility to see the frame through with Oswald's early demise -- and something went awry.

Larry: Just finished your excellent book... I feel I'm now on another level of factual truth. The work by Talbot then pulls it alltogether for me. Its clear the plotters wove a plan that made ot appear Bobby's actions got his brother killed. Its the classic revenge - by Harvey, Morales, Marcello via Roselli - using Cuba/communism and Castro (the bogeyman) as a convenient storyline. Would you agree? Kudos on your fine work --gene kelly

Psychologically, its easier to address an 'enemy' when you depersonalize them. Rationalizing a point of view as "conspiracy theory" serves to depersonalize, allowing for more brutalized behavior. For example, the Vietnamese communists became VC, making it easier to fight (and eliminate) that enemy. So, labelling those who question the historical record (i.e. WC) simply as "conspirasists" somehow depersonalizes and discredits, in much the same way. Its the same simplification of democrats versus republicans, as if we all are capable of being reduced to such a model. The world cannot simply be divided into/described as lone-nutters and conspirasists. In reality, the thinking person challenges and probes, and is much more complex...they see facts and relevance to both sides of the debate. And the truth lies somewhere in between. Sorry for the philosophizing, but it seemed to be analogous.

Scott is not a historian in the professional sense. He is an English professor, described on his own website as "a poet, writer, and researcher." That said, Scott certainly stands head and shoulders over the "historian" Dallek. John Simkin is an example of a historian worthy of the name. Though "historians" like Dallek may not be expected to be experts on human anatomy, it shouldn't be asking too much of them to know the difference between the human neck and back (and what a difference it makes in the JFK case).

My 2 cents and five fundamental points, although not deeply steeped in research on this , as others: The murder of Tippit is just way too coincidental to be unrelated. Keeping it simple, (1) its still unsolved... and the evidence was poorly handled and maintained, (2) the witnesses are inconsistent and enignmatic, plus some were ignored, misquoted or outright threatened; (3) the proximity of this murder to Oswald's rooming house (and Ruby's apartment) is awfully awfully interesting, a strange part of town yet so close to Dealey Plaza. Plus, I see no credible motive (for LHO), but (4) its perfectly logical to 'create' a cop killing (45 minutes after the assasination of a president) to shine a bright light on the suspect. What more compelling incriminating evidence could there be - to convince a shocked public - than a related cop killing associated with our beloved president, in such close timing to the assasination, to drive home cause and effect? This fourth point really resonates with me... if we buy a setup and masterful intrigue (i.e. professional treatment by Lansdale and Conein), its the perfect way to quickly solve the crime, clear the Plaza and send a large contingent of the Dallas Police force (in force, with God on their side) to apprehend the assasin. Lastly, (5) all within 1-2 hours... the most controversial muder of the century, wrapped up in an hour or so! It stinks to high heaven, and (unlike the Warren Commission), I don't buy it. Rosetta Stone, indeed.

James: I admire your photo collection, especially your work with "Familiar Faces". You seem very well informed and insightful, knowledgable of the black ops game. I'm interested in your opinion of Howard Hunt. I've posed this question to Larry Hancock also. Hunt seems up to his ears in this entire intrigue, yet he doesn't come across strongly as a "player" or operative... more the propaganda type, a la Mockingbird. But there is that photo ('central casting') of a trench coat spook crossing the street right after the excitement. Given his recent passing and book, I'd like your input on Hunt's involvement and/or role. Regards-- Gene Kelly

Thank you, Larry. Unfortunately, the pictures of tramps who resemble Hunt, and the mysterious man in the trench coat/fedora ("central casting") crossing the street just after the murder, represent a serious tease to our imagination. He's apparently sponsored by right-wing executives (Dulles et al) who appear to be in the 'Cowboy' camp. Hunt's postings in Mexico, his affiliations with Cuban nationals, supposed motive (post bay of Pigs fiasco) and the intrigue of Watergate (i.e. what were they really after) seem to add up. His wife dies mysteriously in a plane crash; its incredible that he's one of few humans who can claim to black-mailing a president. Even the Harvard versus Yale thing. So many coincidences. But I do understand the patriotic Agency man (an original OSS member)... one -while somewhat inept- who is committed to keeping the secrets and protecting the organization. But I can't see him as the deadly threat which Morales posed. So regretfully I scratch him off of the proverbial list. Thanks again for your thoughts.

Larry: Given your excellent research and insights, I'm very interested in your view of Howard Hunt. My instincts tell me he was an elitist "wanna be" (portrayed in Mailer's Harlots Ghost and books like The Company) as an original Yale OSS warrior close to Dulles, with aspirations towards CIA leadership. But he never quite impressed or succeeded. Yet he has what I intuit as an 'evil' nature and mean intent... I can't quite ignore him alone where suspicion and involvement are concerned. Mark Lane certainly was unconvinced. My instincts tell me he was up to his eyeballs in either the murder or coverup (or both)... and that he continued his 'dirty tricks' up and thru Watergate where he was finally disenfrachised by the intelligence community. Who knows what other nasty business he was responsible for. Please tell me what you see as his role in the assasination. Regards-- gene kelly PS. Your book is marvelous