-
Posts
1,014 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Everything posted by Gene Kelly
-
Paul I agree that Lovelady was not a witting conspirator. Not only was he naive, gullible and used by Shelley ... so apparently was Oswald. In following this thread, and digging into the 2nd floor encounter, it really opened up a lot for me. It shines an unfavorable light upon both Roy Truly and Bill Shelley (neither of whom I knew much about). For one, Truly wasn't just a manager; he was a member of the Board of Directors of the TSBD and had been part of this organization for a long time (so he had to know what was going on behind the scenes). Roy Truly took the infamous call from Ruth Paine to hire Oswald, and later lied about the fictitious 2nd floor encounter ... a story that Officer Marion Baker was unable to keep straight. Shelley also changed his story several times about where he was after the shooting ... but he appears to have killed the building power temporarily, 'guarded' the elevator, got Oswald out of the building and then flagged him as missing to Truly, and finally identified Oswald for the police when he was brought into the DPD station. I encourage you to read William Weston's April 2020 article in Kennedys and King about the strange goings on at the TSBD. He references a Jerry Rose article, “Important to Hold that Man” that challenges Oswald being singled out, since there were at least 14 people missing from the building at the time (and they would not return until 1:30 pm). And Weston chases down the so-called Glaze letters, written by a Lubbock journalist (Elzie Dean Glaze) who interviewed Shelley, where he allegedly claimed to have been an intelligence officer during World War II and thereafter joined the CIA. Not only was Lovelady harassed, so apparently was Roy Truly, who according to Jim Marrs (in Crossfire) was, up to the time of his death in 1985, continuously frightened by "federal authorities." Truly's wife Mildred refused to talk about the assassination even with members of her own family. Gene
-
Joe Regarding your question about Shelley, John Armstong's website has a page called "Escape form the 6th Floor" where he posits that Bill Shelley (Oswald's supervisor) may have traveled to Louisiana in August 1963 and been in contact with Harvey Oswald in New Orleans. When Oswald was passing out FPCC literature, in front of Clay Shaw's International Trade Mart, a man who looks very much like Shelley was standing close to Oswald. There is no proof this man was Bill Shelley, but the physical resemblance is unmistakable. Armstrong points out that Oswald himself said that he was "out with Bill Shelley in front" during the shooting (recorded on handwritten notes by Capt. Fritz and FBI agent Jim Hosty). Apparently, Oswald expected his supervisor and CIA contact (Shelley) to confirm that he and Oswald were together during the shooting. But Oswald did not realize that Shelley was part of a plan to make sure that he quickly left the TSBD shortly after shots were fired ... a hasty departure that would appear as though he was evading capture. When Shelley was later questioned about Oswald's whereabouts after the shooting, Shelley denied being with Oswald. Armstong believes that it was also possible that it was Shelley who instructed Oswald to leave the TSBD, instructed him to board the #433 bus, and instructed him to meet a contact at the Texas Theater. Armstrong adds more suspicion of Shelley by suggesting that he might have orchestrated other suspicious activities in the TSBD. It appears the electricity in the TSBD was turned off as the escort car turned from Main St. onto Houston St., less than one minute before shots were fired at the President. The electrical panels were located on the back side of the building on the first floor, close to the domino room and close to Bill Shelley's office. Roy Truly probably knew Shelley was responsible for turning off the electricity, which is why Truly ignored the passenger elevator, failed to look at the electrical panels, and said nothing about the two men he encountered (almost certainly Shelley and Lovelady). Officer Marrion Baker was asked by Warren Commissioner Senator Cooper if he saw anyone else while in the building, (other than Oswald and Truly) and Baker replied: "On the first floor there were two men. As we came through the main doorway to the elevators, I remember as we tried to get on the elevators I remember two men, one was sitting on this side and another one between 20 or 30 feet away from us looking at us." David Belin knew there were two unidentified "white men" at the back of the TSBD, only one minute after the shooting. But when Belin interviewed Roy Truly a few weeks later, he never questioned Truly about these two men, nor did Truly say anything about these two men. Neither Baker nor Truly provided any information to the Commission as to the two unknown "white men" seen at the back of the TSBD within two minutes of the shooting. Shelley and Lovelady's April 1964 testimony was accepted by the Commission, which concluded that Shelley and Lovelady were outside of the TSBD during and after the shooting, and only returned to the building 10 minutes later. Before running up the wooden stairs with Officer Baker, Truly told Bill Shelley not to let anybody up and down the elevator or stairway, as testified before the Warren Commission: "Mr. Truly left me guarding the elevator, not to let anybody up and down the elevator or stairway...." Only one minute after shots were fired, Armstong asks what possible, legitimate reason could Shelley and Lovelady have for being at the rear of the building? Notably, the electricity was turned back on when these two men were on the first floor near the electrical panels. Finally, Shelly was one of the building employees who later identified Oswald for the police when he was brought into the DPD station. The picture below of an individual in New Orleans with Oswald during the leaflet charade bears an uncanny resemblance to Shelly. Gene
-
Pat On your question about the timing, my source was Roy Truly's May 14, 1964, WC testimony: BALL. Tell me about how many minutes you think it was from the time you obtained the address of Lee Oswald until you told Captain Fritz the name and address? TRULY. I think it was immediately … after I called to the warehouse and got his name and address in Irving, I turned around and walked over and told Chief Lumpkin. And I remember Chief Lumpkin talking to two or three officers and I stepped back, and he went ahead and told them a few things-it could have been 2-4 minutes. And then he came to me and said, “All right, let’s go up and see Captain Fritz and tell him this.” BALL. You have no exact memory as to the time you discovered he was not there? TRULY. It was 15 or 20 minutes after the shots were fired, but after retracing my trip to the roof and the time delay and back, I would have to say that it was farther along in the day than I had believed, so it could have been 1 or 1:05 or something like that. When Truly returned from the roof, he quickly notices that Oswald is missing, calls the warehouse to get Oswald's Irving address, informs Deputy Chief George Lumpkin (who was also a Captain in the Jack Crichton's 488th Military Intelligence Detachment), and seems in quite a hurry to get to the 6th floor to tell Captain Fritz: BALL. Now, what did you tell Chief Lumpkin when you came down from the roof of the building? TRULY. When I noticed this boy was missing, I told Chief Lumpkin that, “We have a man here that’s missing.” I said, “It may not mean anything, but he isn’t here.” I first called down to the other warehouse and had Mr. Akin pull the application of the boy so I could get-quickly get his address in Irving and his general description, so I could be more accurate … the only one I noticed at that time. He didn't make a check of all of his employees ... his focus is on Oswald: BALL. Did you make a check of your employees afterwards? TRULY. No, no; not complete. No, I just saw the group of the employees over there on the floor and I noticed this boy wasn’t with them. With no thought in my mind except that I had seen him a short time before in the building, I noticed he wasn’t there … (10 or 12 minutes earlier, in the lunchroom). I asked Bill Shelley if he had seen him around and he said “No.” This all appears to have happened in the first 20-30 minutes after the shots rang out. Gene
-
Pat This seems a point that can be debated (i.e., why did Truly single out Oswald). Part of my rationale (perhaps a bias) is that there's suspicion about various TSBD employees (e.g., Shelley, Arce, Dougherty) that persists to this day. I tend to lump Roy Truly in with that bunch. Also, it's extraordinary (imho) that Oswald's name surfaced so quickly with the DPD - within 30 minutes of the shots - and was apprehended in the Texas Theater shortly thereafter. Other than the fact that most agree that Oswald was set up, the DPD arrested the suspect in the crime of the Century in record time ... and Roy Truly set that chain of events in motion. So, he remains a person of interest to me. Roy Truly was a long time TSBD employee, employed since 1934. He became superintendent in 1944, and at the time of the assassination was also a member of the board of directors. So, he was a 56-year-old superintendent, not just a young man like the other workers. His WC testimony was taken twice; once in March and a second time in May 1964. Then there's Bill Shelley. In an April 2020 Kennedys and King article by William Weston, "The CIA and the Texas School Book Depository", the author suggests that Shelley - who had been distributing leaflets in New Orleans with Oswald- was a CIA operative. He also relates Shelley’s claim to a Lubbock journalist (Elzie Dean Glaze) admitting his association with the CIA, indicating a double life. And having a double life would not have made Shelley unique among the people who worked at the book depository ... Weston highlights collateral military, law enforcement, or intelligence affiliations for TSBD principals Roy Truly, Jack Cason, Joe Bergin, Sr. and Joe Molina, Weston points out that on November 22nd, there were 69 people working in the building at 411 Elm Street (33 for the TSBD and 46 for the publishers). But their move into the building only took place a few months before the assassination. In fact, Truly told the FBI that the Book depositary occupied the building at 411 Elm Street for only a few months (their previous address was 501 Elm Street on the first floor of the Dal-Tex building) ... prior to this time, the building was occupied by a wholesale grocery company. Weston suggests that occupying the building in summer of 1963 was a first step in a planning stage of the assassination, including having people inside the TSBD as assets. Furthermore, conditions at the TSBD changed dramatically after the assassination; new security officers appeared, employees were warned not to discuss the assassination with outsiders, and all visitors to the building had to cleared with Roy Truly. Weston found that Roy Truly was, up to the time of his death in 1985, continuously frightened by "federal authorities" and his wife Mildred refused to talk about the assassination even with members of her own family. Oliver Stone later uncovered information that Truly was not being paid directly through the TSBD in 1963. The plot thickens ... Jerry Rose authored an article called “Important to Hold that Man” in which he states that there were at least 14 people missing from the building at the time; and they would not return until 1:30 pm (including Charles Givens). In that same article Rose writes that Shelly was one of the building employees who later identified Oswald for the police when he was brought into the station. Therefore, I am wary of the fact that Truly confirms Oswald's absence with the dubious Mr. Shelley, who was Oswald's supervisor for six weeks. At the time of the assassination, Shelley was in his 16th year at the TSBD (begun in 1945). According to his WC testimony, after graduating from high school he “worked in defense plants a little bit during the war" before working at the Book Depository. Many believe that Shelley was CIA. And before going up the stairs to the roof, Truly had paused to tell Shelley to guard the stairs and elevators to make sure no one uses them: BALL. Did you make a check of your employees afterwards? TRULY. No, no; not complete. No, I just saw the group of the employees over there on the floor and I noticed this boy wasn’t with them. With no thought in my mind except that I had seen him a short time before in the building, I noticed he wasn’t there … (10 or 12 minutes earlier, in the lunchroom). I asked Bill Shelley if he had seen him around and he said “No.” Truly stated that around 1:05 pm he "discovered Oswald wasn’t there" and called the warehouse to get his name and Irving address ... he goes out of his way to get Oswald's address: TRULY. That’s right, and at such time that you have information of the officers taking the names of the workers in the warehouse over in and around the wrapping tables, it was at such time that I noticed that this boy wasn’t among the other workers. He then immediately informs Chief Lumpkin, who then accompanies him to the sixth floor to inform Captain Fritz that this boy was missing (along with Oswald's telephone number, and his Irving address: BALL. Tell me about how many minutes you think it was from the time you obtained the address of Lee Oswald until you told Captain Fritz the name and address? TRULY. I think it was immediately … after I called to the warehouse and got his name and address in Irving, I turned around and walked over and told Chief Lumpkin. And I remember Chief Lumpkin talking to two or three officers and I stepped back, and he went ahead and told them a few things-it could have been 2-4 minutes. And then he came to me and said, “All right, let’s go up and see Captain Fritz and tell him this.” In summary, something is fishy about Truly's immediate focus upon Lee Oswald - one of 69 people that worked in the building - that fateful day... Gene
-
It doesn't pass the red face test for me ... one minute, he's clearing Oswald (because he "works here") and the next, he's singling him out as missing. Several employees were not in the building (or had left) in the first 5-10 minutes ... how is it that Oswald stands out? How could Truly know where everyone was in such a short timeframe? But shortly thereafter, the DPD will have an APB issued for this individual. Something smells fishy here ...
-
Couldn't resist weighing in here David ... I agree with Bill Fite that everyone in the buildings around Dealy Plaza (and all individuals in the Plaza for that matter) should have been detained, identified and/or questioned. We are talking about the shooting of the American President ... with copious amounts of law enforcement presence - DPD, sheriffs, military, Secret Service, perhaps some FBI - many of whom were quickly converging upon the TSBD. And initial suspicions are that shots came from the TSBD ... yet answering 'yes' to "does this man work here?" was a satisfactory response to leaving the building. Just imagine that happening today. This was no ordinary murder, with little or no police presence. Your rationalization of the world not being perfect doesn't pass the red-faced test; something's obviously wrong with this picture. The TSBD building should've been immediately locked down and secured, with no one allowed to leave. Same for the railroad yards, Knoll area, parking lots, Dal Tex Bldg. and other nearby locations. DPD Officer Marrion Baker: I was on a motorcycle behind the LBJ limo. I was on Houston Street when I heard the shots, and I was pretty certain the shots came from the roof of the TSBD building, so I sped to the front door and parked at the curb and ran inside. I demanded to know where the elevators were, and Roy Truly came up to help me. I think it was no more than two minutes after the JFK assassination that we were on the 2nd floor when I saw Lee Oswald, and I shouted, “Hey, you! Come here!” Oswald saw me and my gun and he came walking cool and calm. I asked Roy Truly, “Do you know this man?” and Truly said, “Yes, he works here.” So, without another word we kept trotting up the stairs to the roof. I searched all around roof. I figure my whole TSBD search took about 15 minutes. On our way down I saw Lieutenant Cunningham just coming up. But shortly thereafter, Roy Truly shares that one of his boys is missing: Mr. TRULY: We have a man here that’s missing.” I said, “It may not mean anything, but he isn’t here.” I first called down to the other warehouse and had Mr. Akin pull the application of the boy so I could get-quickly get his address in Irving and his general description, so I could be more accurate than I would be. Mr. BALL: Was he the only man missing? Mr. TRULY: The only one I noticed at that time. Now, I think there was one or two more, possibly Charles Givens ... and at such time that you have information of the officers taking the names of the workers in the warehouse over in and around the wrapping tables, it was at such time that I noticed that this boy wasn’t among the other workers." Eventually, the TSBD building is secured: DPD Inspector J. Herbert Sawyer: Around 12:34 the DPD Radio dispatcher said a passerby identified the TSBD as the source of the shots. So, I sped to the TSBD. and parked my car in front of the main entrance, and some officers there told me they thought some shots came from the top floors. Then an employee and two officers took me to the top floor. This was about 12:37pm. We looked around but found nothing. Then I came back downstairs with my two men to ensure the building was sealed off properly. I posted two men on the front entrance with instructions not to let anyone in or out. I also had Sergeant Harkness ensure the rear entrances were covered; they already were, but I said double-check. There were already officers out front, but I gave official orders that nobody was to go in or out without full screening. Sergeant Harkness soon told me that he had the building sealed off. That would have been about 12:40pm. Then I set up a Command Post out front. Now, at 12:43 I called the DPD dispatcher and said: “We need more manpower down here at the TSBD; tell those on Main Street to come here.”
-
Shasteen's barber shop customer was not Oswald
Gene Kelly replied to Greg Doudna's topic in JFK Assassination Debate
Thanks Tom ... I am interested in this haircut anecdote, which sheds more light on Ms. Paine's complicity. I read thru the topical debate, where Greg parker makes a convincing case, and summarize/paraphrase it as follows: Cliff Shasteen had cut Oswald's hair twice and Buddy Law once. Burt Glover was recalling someone else based on his description of the customer. Buddy Law only worked for Shasteen part-time and quit sometime after discussing the Oswald haircuts with Shasteen (suggesting he anticipated the controversy coming and did not want to be involved). Shasteen testified that Law cut Oswald's hair on a Friday evening, close to closing time. Shasteen was getting ready to leave early for a football game and Oswald had wanted to know where he was going. Shasteen adds that it was just brushed off as Oswald indicating that he wanted Shasteen to do his hair. Buddy Law told the FBI on 9/9/64, that he had no recollection of ever seeing Lee Oswald in the shop, or of the specific episode described by Shasteen where he (Law) cut Oswald's hair. He does say that Shasteen had told him that Oswald had been a customer on at least three occasions. This gives Shasteen credibility in that it shows he was recalling all of this right after the assassination. As for Law not recalling, he was likely trying to distance himself from it. Law was just there two days a week (extra money on top of his regular job), so he had no investment in in the work or the shop, unlike Shasteen who owned the business and - judging from his testimony - was invested in recalling his customers. Mr. SHASTEEN. To me, he didn't have a full head of hair. It was rather short and thin around here by the temples and the way his hair lies back, he would have been bald if he had been 40 years old. Straight after the assassination, Shasteen told Law that Oswald had been in the shop "at least three times". The only date that Shasteen was able to nail down precisely was the 8th of November, because that was the night of the football match. That means Oswald's next cut would have possibly been due the weekend of the assassination (as noted by Dallas police). The one prior to the 8th would have been on or about October 18 or 25. If it was the 18th, that puts the first cut on or about Oct 4 - the day Oswald returned to Dallas/Irving. It all fits Oswald’s timeline like a glove; there were three Fall visits in total by Oswald: 1st on or about Oct 4 or (by Cliff Shasteen); 2nd on or about Oct 18; and 3rd on Nov 8 (by Buddy Law): Mr. JENNER. I'm just trying to figure out this 22d and the 8th--did this hair-cutting go back into the summer? Mr. SHASTEEN. You know, that's--like I say, that's a saying--to point back, and you know, just to say that that is the first time this guy has come in here I just can't pinpoint the first time. In other words, it has been hard and I have tried to think, especially after I got that call yesterday evening to come over here. I tried to run that back through my mind and I wouldn't say when the first time was he was in there and of course we have talked about it--me and the barbers, and it seemed to me like there was a dead spot in there. Sometime maybe a month or 6 weeks that we might not have saw him, be the first time I cut his hair, but the last three haircuts--it seemed to me like he was pretty regular. Despite matching these dates to Oswald's timeline - like any proper investigation would - the FBI and WC kept pushing for Shasteen to place Oswald's first visit back into the summer, making it impossible for it be Oswald … the false outcome they clearly sought. There is also another barber (Herman Harrison) who claimed to cut his hair in Oak Cliff on two occasions. His interview is questionable and unconvincing, as the WC needed something to dispute Shasteen, so Herman Harrison came to the rescue. Notably missing from the interview are important details like a description, a photo, a time frame for the alleged cuts, and other barbers or customers named who could corroborate. Ruth Paine was William Hootkins’ Russian instructor at St Marks for the summer term and - following the summer term (mid-August) - he started having private instruction from Ruth. Ruth would pick him up on Saturday and take him to St Mark's for these lessons. The lessons were held at St Mark's initially, but this would change after Ruth picked up Marina in late September and brought her back to Irving Street. From that time, Ruth likely began bringing Hootkins back to Irving St. instead of taking him to St Marks. The assistant principle at St Mark's told Agent Hosty that, as at the date of the interview on October 31st, Ruth's private tuition (following her summer course) was taking place at the homes of the students (in this case, her only one). Shasteen's story is credible because: 1. His description of the customer is consistent with Oswald, including his apparent sullen presentation, the fact that he didn't really want a haircut, and hairy arms. 2. His description of the car is consistent with Ruth's car (with some minor discrepancies). 3. The description of the 15-year-old boy is consistent with Hootkins: a wide face and blondish hair (plus neither the boy nor customer returned post assassination). 4. The one date of being in the shop that can be nailed down is the 8th of November, which fits with the cuts commencing at the time Oswald returned to Dallas 5. Where Hootkins was having his lessons was confabulated; his mother believed they were taking place at the school, while the school believed they were taking place at Hootkins' own home. And the private lessons (started out at St Mark's) were most certainly not being conducted there by Oct 31st, even though Mrs. Hootkins continued to believe that was the case. A word of caution here (which I've pointed out previously) is that making the title of this EF thread "Shasteen's barber shop customer was not Oswald" is an example of the Illusory Truth Effect, where belief in certain statements, be they plausible or implausible, increases with repetition. Repetition makes assertions more plausible; it is also what makes fake news work, too. It's a brainwashing technique used by cults and disinformation specialists. The effect works because when we attempt to assess truth, we rely on whether the information jibes with our understanding, and whether it feels familiar. In the latter case, hearing over and over again that a certain fact is wrong can have a paradoxical effect. It becomes so familiar that it starts to feel right. The brain interprets that fluency as a signal for something being "true" (whether it's true or not). In other words, your busy brain is often more comfortable running on feeling. As with any cognitive bias, experts recommend that the best way not to fall prey to it is to know it exists and validate the facts (Reference: "I Heard It Before, So It Must Be True ... Repeated exposure to implausible statements makes them feel less so" by Susana Martinez-Conde, October 5, 2019, Scientific American). Gene -
MFF Sues Over JFK Assassination Records
Gene Kelly replied to Greg Wagner's topic in JFK Assassination Debate
Mark Knight: Good tip on Axios ... this last bullet in their article sums it up Worth noting: Morley told Axios that the final 16,000 documents yet to be released are among the most sensitive about JFK's death. "These are the documents that they are the most reluctant to release," he said. "Obviously, they've been keeping them secret for 60 years." And to all (Larry, Larry Schnapf, Bill Simpich, Larry Hancock, et al) ... great work! Very promising. Gene -
Jim This is the first that I've ever heard of the Jimmy Carter attempt. On May 5th, 1979, ten minutes before President Carter was due to speak at the civic center mall in Los Angeles, one Raymond Lee Harvey was arrested carrying a pistol. He later told the Police that he and another man (Oswaldo Ortiz) were hired to create a diversion, so that Mexican hitmen armed with rifles could kill Carter. Police were led to the shabby Alan Hotel, which overlooked the mall where Carter was due to speak. Investigators found an empty rifle case, and three rounds of live ammo, in a room rented under the name, Umberto Camacho, who had checked out on the day of Carters visit … no further trace of the hitmen could be found. A one-time story on May 21st, 1979, in Newsweek, confirmed that the suspect was arrested by secret service agents, he was carrying a .22 caliber eight-shot revolver, and 70 rounds of blank ammo. The suspect implicated a second man, a 21-year-old Hispanic who was arrested on bail of $100,000. The second man admitted that they had test fired the pistol, using blank rounds the night before Carter was due to speak. He said they had been hired by two Mexican hitmen to create a diversion, whilst they assassinated Carter using high powered rifles. The Newsweek article stated that Assistant U.S. Attorney Donald Etra (a close friend of G. H. Bush and fellow Yale graduate) was expected to make a decision on the case, stating ‘Unless it’s clear that the defendant (Harvey) has committed the crime with which he is charged (conspiring to kill the president), we’re not going to present the case to a grand jury. No further news stories appeared, no charges were filed, and the case against the two publicly disappeared. James Richards (in a 2005 EF thread) speculated that there was ‘talk amongst the Cubans’ that Raymond Lee might have been one Eduardo Ochoa. a militant anti-Castro Brigade 2506 individual. Carter - who had been rumored to be on the verge of making 'major policy changes' - never subsequently announced any changes and remained largely low-key throughout the Re-election campaign. Apparently, someone was sending the President a "message" ... Gene
-
Michael You ask the crucial question. I like Joe McBride's quote from Indira Gandhi. Some (like Doug Horne and James Douglass) have characterized JFK’s actions as being at war with his own National Security Establishment. And who could argue with Jim DiEugenio's point about JFK's foreign policy? It is instructive to recall Charles de Gaulle's reaction. When de Gaulle moved to end the French war in Algeria, he induced a strong reaction from his military and far-right circles, including several assassination attempts and a coup. De Gaulle was convinced that the French military coup attempts against him in spring 1961 were instigated by the CIA. President Kennedy told the French ambassador that he (JFK) was not in full control of his own intelligence agency. And when JFK was assassinated in Dallas, President de Gaulle confided that Kennedy was the victim of the same national security forces that had targeted him. David Talbot addresses this in "The Devil's Chessboard" and quotes the French President: “What happened to Kennedy is what nearly happened to me ... His story is the same as mine ... It looks like a cowboy story, but it’s only an OAS story. The security forces were in cahoots with the extremists.” Talbot also highlights the similarities of JFK's murder with the plot to bring down Charles De Gaulle - the people involved (retired French generals, rightwing French, poopoo sympathizers, and White Russians), the role of Allen Dulles, the motive behind it (Algerian independence and fear of Communist stronghold in strategic, oil-rich North Africa) - all bear an eerie similarity to the circumstances surrounding the assassination of JFK. His summary quote about Dulles is right on the money ... Dulles’s job was to hijack the US government to benefit the wealthy. What has always struck me personally is the brutality of the killing ... blowing off the President's head in broad daylight, while sitting next to his wife, at noon, in a motorcade. The assassination could've been accomplished many other ways, in a less dramatic and public fashion. But this was not just a murder, it was a statement. And I can't help feeling that it had the angry overtones of revenge (i.e., Bay of Pigs betrayal). Gene
-
Jim This reminds me of the intriguing fact that only two years after the assassination, in 1965, Sam Newman (the owner of the 544 Camp Street property) sold the building for 58,000 dollars. On the same day, it was resold for a much lesser price of 34,800 dollars. Just eight years later, in 1973 - as the local attorney's office is trying hard to get rid of Garrison - Gerald Gallinghouse, the man who was running the prosecution against Garrison, filed a motion for Washington (i.e., the government) to buy the building ... a generous offer well above the last sales price of $141, 162.50. Clearly, something odd was transpiring, and the coverup was eliminating any/all remnants of the investigation (and 544 Camp Street) left in New Orleans ... the files, the building, and the DA himself. As you pointed out in a June 2020 EF thread about Kerry Thornley, if Jim Garrison didn't have anything, why were they so eager to completely erase any memory of 544 Camp Street? Gene
-
Paul's synopsis of the insights from the Garrison files is excellent. It provides more depth and perspective to the plot and plotters. Paul makes it clear that Garrison was up against strong forces, and he was so maliciously slandered by the press, that no one would bother to look at what was in his files. No wonder that Harry Connick tried to burn all of the records. There can be no question that Clem and Clay Bertrand were Clay Shaw aliases. But Garrison wasn't just on the trail of the plotters, he had much more that remains to be uncovered by closer examination of the extant files. There's quite a lot of food for thought here: Oswald was assigned at least one Cuban escort (the forthcoming name will likely be very telling) David Ferrie admitted his part in the plot to a roommate, and was a source of young males for Shaw Clay Shaw was a paid CIA asset, circumstantially linked to Allen Dulles, and a 3rd Oswald babysitter (along with Ruth Paine and George DeMorenschildt) Comparing the original ITM board directors with INCA members and operatives ARRB evidence that CIA and FBI had counter-intelligence campaigns against FPCC; but Oswald was the only member of the New Orleans contingent, and he stamped Banister’s Camp St. address on his leaflets. Plus, Banister helped Oswald settle into his Camp Street locale. Jesse Core - who notified WDSU TV about Oswald’s leafleting event outside the ITM - also noted the flyer which had Banister’s office listed on it, suggesting that both he and Shaw knew this was a problem for the FBI. Oswald's provocateur activity in New Orleans, one of the major anti-communist blocs in North America Shaw, Ferrie, Banister and Oswald’s multiple connections to a network of anti-Castro Cuban exiles, right-wing extremists and intelligence actors was not coincidental Another person of interest: Emilio Rodriguez, a CIA asset based in Mexico City (and a stay-behind agent in Cuba) who worked for the Berlitz School at the ITM. His brother Arnesto would later run the school and attempt to teach Oswald Spanish. Daid Morales exfiltrated Rodriguez and Tony Sforza from Cuba in June 1961. Integrating some well-known "handlers": FPCC and DRE were monitored by David Phillips (CIA) as well as Warren DeBrueys (FBI) and George Joannides (CIA). The CRC was under Howard Hunt’s watchful eye. Another potential patsy to the list of other candidates - Richard Case Nagell, Oswald, Policarpo Lopez, Vaughn Marlowe, Harry Dean, John Glenn, Santiago Garriga - all 'coincidently' linked to the FPCC Jerry and Jim Buchanan ... part of the large number of Oswald frame-up artists The people who frequented 544 Camp Street and Carlos Quiroga (who lied and knew a lot more than he let on) The author(s) of the fake letter to the Russian Embassy designed to link Oswald with Russia in the assassination Gene
-
And don't forget that Lee's 'buddy', Kerry Thornley, was the person who picked up the pamphlets ...
-
Would the muscular Cuban also be a person seen with Leon Oswald in New Orleans (e.g., by Perry Russo), and one of the individuals who visited Silvia Odio with Leon in late September? I am guessing one of the ex-patriots associated with JMWAVE Station (and the AMOT's) ... either Carlos Quiroga, Celso Hernandez or perhaps Miguel Aguado Cruz?
-
Reading Part 3 of Paul Bleu's work, he ends by mentioning one member of this network that has not been discussed yet ... a muscular Latino who was often seen accompanying Oswald, or perhaps an Oswald double. He was considered so suspicious that the whole Garrison team was on the look-out for him. He was never identified. He was seen so often and described in corroborative terms that can leave no doubt that Oswald, the supposed lone-nut drifter, had at least one escort. Why the suspense ... who was this person?
-
Bob I think there remains doubt about the VENONA transcripts, and their outing of Hiss. A good reference/read is Peter Dale Scott's "The Dulles Brothers, Harry Dexter White, Alger Hiss, and the Fate of the Private Pre-War International Banking System" The Asia-Pacific Journal, Vol. 12, Issue 16, No. 3, April 21, 2014. Here are some excerpts: VENONA evidence also was used to raise suspicions about two other suspects, senior Treasury official Harry Dexter White and Alger Hiss. However, the VENONA evidence against these two men is still fiercely debated. And the campaign against both men was not powered by security concerns alone. In part at least also it was a by-product of a deeper conflict over the future of America - between Wall Street (represented by the Dulles brothers) and the remnants of the New Deal (represented by White, a principal architect of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.) Hiss or Chambers was apparently guilty of perjury ... Truman’s Justice Department was in the process of preparing a perjury indictment against Chambers, a key witness against White. Matters would change five days later: on August 16, three days after his HUAC testimony, White died, after suffering two swift heart attacks. It was then that Hiss became by default HUAC’s principal target (and the key to Dewey’s presidential ambitions in the same year). Nixon and his fellow HUAC members knew that their case against White was weak. Earlier in the year, the former Treasury official had already made a successful appearance before a federal grand jury in New York ... the same body would later bring charges against Hiss but found insufficient evidence to indict White. Foster Dulles moved quickly to distance himself from Hiss, pressuring him behind the scenes to resign his Carnegie Endowment post, while Allen Dulles fed incriminating intelligence to Nixon to bolster his case. Some of this confidential information about Hiss likely came from the Army intelligence program that had been set up in 1943 to decrypt messages sent by Soviet spy agencies. The VENONA project was so top secret that it was kept hidden from President Truman, but the deeply wired Dulles enjoyed access. A secret weapon used by the Dulles brothers and Nixon against White and Hiss was a tendentious interpretation of material which existed about White and Hiss in the then secret VENONA transcripts of deciphered Soviet cable traffic… an unresolved question is whether Nixon’s secret sources (Hoover, Allen Dulles, or other OSS/CIA contacts) were aware by 1948 of the deciphered VENONA messages - and of the ALES cable in particular (of March 30, 1945) - that seem to point to Hiss’s guilt. The HUAC investigation could have been “acutely embarrassing” to Foster, Nixon later noted. But instead, with Nixon’s help, they turned the Hiss case to their advantage, with Dewey fulminating against the laxity of the Roosevelt and Truman administrations that had allowed Communists to penetrate the government. The VENONA transcripts (3,000 translations) would be only made public 50 years later, in 1995. To what extent the various individuals referred to in the messages were involved with Soviet intelligence is a topic of historical dispute. While a number of historians assert that most of the individuals mentioned in the VENONA decrypts were most likely either clandestine assets and/or contacts of Soviet intelligence agents, others argue that many of those people probably had no malicious intentions and committed no crimes (e.g., Albert Einstein and Robert Oppenheimer). Many academics and archivists consider the VENONA evidence on Hiss to be inconclusive Gene
-
Chessboard is one of those books that speaks for itself, without having to 'prove' anything. I had several copies, and would give one to friends who ask, "who really did it" ... or "if I could read just one book about the assassination, which one should it be?". It becomes clear that Dulles was a sociopath and behind the plot to kill John Kennedy. If you study his career and body of work, he specialized in government overthrows (including assassination's) to benefit the power elite. His arrogant tactics and pathological fingerprints are all over the JFK murder plot. When I consider the infamous "little god" quote, it is both revealing and provides perspective ... I believe it was meant to convey that JFK felt he was above the power elite ... rich Wall Street power brokers that controlled the world economy, and whom Dulles law firm represented (and served). Those are real 'gods', in Dulles' world view. Chessboard is also a good history lesson. Here are ten key points that Chessboard highlighted for me - and really opened my eyes - about the true allegiances that Allen Dulles maintained: Sullivan & Cromwell (S&C) earned its reputation as the firm of choice for generations of ambitious lawyers and clients seeking fortune and power around the world. The World Wars provided the political and financial opportunity which S&C rode to global influence. Two partners, brothers, led the firm from War One until they left to marshal the Cold War. While America fought two wars with Germany, John Foster and Allen Dulles proved the best friends, and the best lawyers, that German industry and banks ever had. Talbot notes: “Dulles was more in step with many poopoo leaders than he was with President Roosevelt.” Supreme Court Justice Arthur Goldberg, who as a young lawyer served with Allen in the OSS, later declared that both brothers were "guilty of treason” as regards their role in the wartime blackmail of the U.S. and their continued advancement of German interests including the protection of General Reinhard Gehlen. The Dulles brothers had control over U.S. foreign policy. S&C clients included United Fruit, whose vast holdings controlled Latin America (Guatemala, CIA coup, 1954). Standard Oil of New Jersey was a long-time Cromwell client (Iran, CIA coup, 1953). Another major client, International Nickel, was closely tied to Cuba. While the Dulles's publicly maintained some distance on the Senate side from Joseph McCarthy, they found a willing but useful unknown Congressman from California. Allen leaked confidential CIA files on Hiss to Richard Nixon, with the help of his cloak and dagger friends. Nixon claimed he had a "cherished relationship" with Dulles, and his destruction of the reputation of Alger Hiss before the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) in the late 1940s served as an unmistakable warning to Congressional committee members about the cost of too vigorous unmasking of the large, U.S.-based multinationals that the Dulles brothers represented for S&C. Foster Dulles’ nuclear brinksmanship was the order of the day. And his younger brother was left free to pursue his own course at the CIA, free from scrutiny or moral scruples. In many ways, the two were the most powerful men in America. Talbot sums up the case in stark terms: “In the name of defending the free world from Communist tyranny, they would impose an American reign on the world enforced by nuclear terror and cloak-and-dagger brutality.” Dulles had a lifetime of experience in arranging assassinations; under Dulles’ leadership in April 1961, the CIA colluded with right-wing French officers in a plot to assassinate Charles de Gaulle. The plot had been organized by the OAS, the secret paramilitary organization that attempted to prevent Algeria’s independence from France. As Talbot notes, “Allen Dulles was once again making his own [foreign] policy, this time in France.” The plot was thwarted only after President Kennedy personally warned de Gaulle’s ambassador to the U.S. that the CIA might be involved. Kennedy ordered U.S. base commanders in France to disguise the landing strips where the OAS might land its planes from Algeria, and de Gaulle mobilized the French citizenry to oppose the conspirators through strikes and other actions. The lurid story of how Jesus de Galindez, a lecturer at Columbia University, was kidnapped in Manhattan by U.S. government cutouts and delivered to Dominican Republic dictator Rafael Trujillo. Trujillo then had Galindez, whose exposés of corruption Trujillo feared, boiled alive and fed to sharks, and ordered the murder of the American pilot who’d flown Galindez there. All under the beneficent gaze of CIA Director Allen Dulles. The insular existence of the CIA under Dulles’ direction began to unravel following the election of JFK and came to a head with the ill-fated Bay of Pigs invasion. As Talbot reveals, the truth about the cause of the invasion's failure is far different from the popular belief that JFK refused to provide air cover. The CIA's own Inspector General brought many of the facts to light, although many years after the classified report had been released. “It is now clear that the CIA’s Bay of Pigs expedition was not simply doomed to fail, it was meant to fail. And its failure was designed to trigger the real action — an all-out, U.S. military invasion of the island.” After JFK fired Dulles, most of the agency’s leadership in place. Dulles’ acolytes, Richard Helms and James Jesus Angleton, continued to dominate the CIA. Operations continued in secret, outside the oversight of the White House. As Talbot makes clear, “it was a mood of hatred and rage.” In this explosive atmosphere, Kennedy’s decision to lower the tension over Cuba following the Cuban Missile Crisis proved fatal. “This marked the fateful turning point when the rabid, CIA-sponsored activity that had been aimed at Castro shifted its focus to Kennedy.” Talbot details how it was not only enemies who had reason to fear Dulles, but his own friends and family, as well. The hideous “mind control program” developed by the CIA during Dulles’ reign as director - that dosed unsuspecting people with LSD and engaged in other deeply unethical experiments - was exposed thanks to lawsuits and investigative reporting, but Talbot sheds light on how Dulles subjected his own son and attempted to “enroll” his wife in these hideous “therapies.” Allen and John Foster Dulles manipulated of religious groups (e.g., Quakers, Unitarians) to achieve U.S. elitist goals, and further U.S. psychological warfare operations. Allen Dulles (while based in Switzerland) abused Protestant individuals and institutions for U.S. intelligence through two World Wars and the subsequent "Cold War." The use of Michael and Ruth Paine in this regard becomes transparent. As one writer stated, our darkest suspicions about how the world operates are likely an underestimate. There exists an amorphous group of unelected corporate lawyers, bankers, and intelligence and military officials who form an American “deep state,” setting real limits on the rare politicians who ever try to get out of line. Talbot points out that the surveillance state Snowden and others have exposed is very much a legacy of the Dulles past ... and he would have been delighted by how technology and other developments have allowed the American security state to go much further than he went. As a staff member of the 1970s congressional investigation of Kennedy’s murder said in an interview with Talbot: “One CIA official told me, ‘So you’re from Congress — what the hell is that to us? You’ll be packed up and gone in a couple of years, and we’ll still be here.’” Gene
-
Thanks Jim ... I suspected as much but given your deep understanding of what Garrison was doing, your input is valuable. I agree with Tom that T&C appears to have been an infiltration mechanism (why would they be any different than all the rest of the interlopers surrounding Garrison?). Its notable that T&C arose after Ferrie died in late Feb '63 and began to finance Garrison - a good way to to obtain information, gain access, and exert control over the investigation. It's a wonder that Jim Garrison retained his sanity, and still ended up where he did ... on the right side of the truth, never compromising, and later advising Oliver Stone. Asd other have previously stated, we have a lot to thank him for, as far as what we know today. He truly was on the trail ... Gene
-
NBC News ran a story in 2017 that stated: Most Americans doubt they know the real story of what happened on November 22, 1963. More than 60 percent believe gunman Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone – and they’ve been skeptical from the beginning. Gallup has tracked the Kennedy conspiracy question since the day of the shooting. A poll taken immediately after the murder found that 52 percent of Americans believed “others were involved in a conspiracy” while 29 percent thought Oswald acted alone. But by December of 1976, the conspiracy number jumped to 81 percent in the Gallup data. There are likely a few reasons for that spike. The film of the assassination taken by Abraham Zapruder became public in 1975 and that helped lead to the 1976 creation of the House Select Committee on Assassination, which investigated the deaths of John Kennedy and Martin Luther King. The conspiracy figure stayed relatively high in the Gallup data, not dropping below 74% for decades. The latest numbers from Gallup, from a 2013 survey taken to mark the 50th anniversary of the event, showed 61% of Americans believed the assassination was a conspiracy, while 30% believed Oswald acted alone. And a new survey from FiveThirtyEight released this week finds that’s right about where the public is today: 61% believe others were involved in JFK’s assassination, while 33% believe one man acted alone. But the most interesting finding in the recent poll is the breadth of the nation’s JFK conspiracy beliefs. More than 50 percent of most every demographic group believes “others were involved” in the assassination: Men and women, whites, blacks and Hispanics, registered voters and non-registered, all age groups. The one demographic group that believes Oswald acted alone, according to the poll, is college educated white people – and the numbers are very close with 48 percent saying one man killed JFK and 46 percent saying others were involved.
-
Thanks Tom When I read the Jerry Rose article, it seemed to imply that Garrison was knowingly compromised and intentionally avoided implicating INCA. Particularly since Eberhard Deutsch had been Jim Garrison's former law partner and political mentor. Other indicators for me are that we know very little today about the mysterious T&C group (other than they "sponsored" the investigation) ... plus, if T&C were truly adversarial (and legitimately interested in the "truth"), you'd think that Sheridan and the CIA would've went after them to discredit/disrupt, as they did with Garrison's staff. It seems that T&C was really there to help Shaw's attorneys in his defense, and to limit the damage. Another fascinating dimension to the complex Garrison story. Gene
-
Vince Interesting point about time not being a friend. When I reflect back to how I first became interested, and then educated myself, it's quite the journey (and I'm still travelling). First it was certain prominent books (not all of which were accurate or enlightening). Next were conferences and talks given by certain experts and television specials (which in retrospect weren't reliable sources of valid information). More recently, it's been the computer and websites like the Education Forum, with a focus on whom I personally consider to be the most knowledgeable individuals. The difficult part is wading through a veritable mountain of information - and filtering well-disguised disinformation - to arrive at a coherent story, one that rings true. It takes great patience and persistence. When I think of the current generation (and my own children), they generally don't have the patience to read books, or perform the necessary due diligence. They want instant news and learn from Tweets (i.e., sound bites). And with so much out there now - including valid differing points of view - it's an almost impossible task to discern the Truth. As far as the older generation, when I forward information about JFK Revisited to my friends and family, some have taken the time to watch it and were impressed (so that's reassuring). However, given that the story is now more than 50 years old, I fear that many (young and old) just don't much care, nor does history interest them. Last, one thing I've learned in my JFK journey is to respect the many different perspectives and individual views ... that's its healthy to disagree (because that is how we learn). Nor do I like simplistic labels like LN's or CT's; we are all too sophisticated to be simply labelled as such. The reality is that there's a lot more to the JFK story than simply one guy taking three shots from the 6th floor (all on his lonesome). Where we all differ is in the details, and who was behind it (and why) ... nonetheless, I believe that the majority (70% or more) still don't buy that simple story. Gene
-
Tom This is excellent research you are doing on INCA ... what do you make of the T&C group? Were they actually out to help Garrison (which is the commonly held view) or rather to monitor and control the investigation? With such a suspicious collection of individuals - particularly Mmahat - it sure seems the latter. And did the DA know, or was he duped? Gene
-
I did not know that INCA may've tried to compromise the Garrison investigation, nor was I aware of the suspicious composition of the New Orleans "citizens" who, in early 1967, formed a group called Truth and Consequences (T&C) which provided private funding for Garrison in his investigation. That two of the three leaders of T&C - Willard Robertson and Cecil Shilstone - were founding members of INCA, is interesting. And the founder of T&C, oil tycoon Joseph Rault, Jr., had ties to INCA, and was close to Dr. Alan Ochsner. Jerry Rose's 1997 article raises some intriguing questions ... addressing the formation of T&C, and naming Eberhard Deutsch, John Mmahat, Edmond G. Miranne, Harold Cook and Lawrence Merrigan. Deutsch was an attorney whose name appeared on the letterhead of the Directors of INCA and was the General Counsel of Standard Fruit and as "Jim Garrison's former law partner and political mentor." Not sure what to make of this just yet ... was it just one more infiltration of Garrison's investigation, or was it designed to keep INCA out of the spotlight?
-
Ted Callaway & The 1:15 Shooting
Gene Kelly replied to Bill Brown's topic in JFK Assassination Debate
The Harvard essays characterize as follows: Rhetorically, sealioning fuses persistent questioning — often about basic information, information on easily found elsewhere, or unrelated or tangential points — with a loudly-insisted-upon commitment to reasonable debate. It disguises itself as a sincere attempt to learn and communicate. Sealioning thus works both to exhaust a target’s patience, attention, and communicative effort, and to portray the target as unreasonable. While the questions of the “sea lion” may seem innocent, they’re intended maliciously and have harmful consequences. -
Ted Callaway & The 1:15 Shooting
Gene Kelly replied to Bill Brown's topic in JFK Assassination Debate
Disruptive threads often use a tactic called "sealioning" to derail discussions of important but contentious issues, with the intent of provoking emotional responses or manipulating others’ perception. The term originated in an online comic by cartoonist David Malki, where a sea lion acrimoniously follows someone around - asking for sources, evidence and explanations for their opinion - all while loudly demanding a reasonable discussion. The sealioner makes relentless demands for answers and evidence. For more about this tactic, see the essays in the collection "Perspectives on Harmful Speech Online", published by the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard.