Richard Booth

The F-35 is a death-trap ... it has a problem whereby toxic fumes are vented into the cabin which can give pilots cancer or kill them. Meanwhile, if a pilot has to eject, that will snap his neck. https://www.rt.com/news/317758-f35-ejection-seat-neck/

From what I can tell the F-35 was supposed to be a replacement for the F22 Raptor and the F15 Strike Eagle. Sad thing is the F-22 Raptor is superior and need not be replaced by this thing. The Russian's Sukhoia PAK-FA is also superior. Meanwhile we're stuck with this POS F-35 and it's supposed to be our primary fighter and ground strike aircraft for the next 50 years...

Right. It's completely broken. You can open a folder, but every folder there is empty. I've also noticed that some folders are gone. For example, under Weisbergs manuscript there used to be folders for all the unpublished manuscripts and you could read them. I read one of his manuscripts there in 2019. It's gone now. Just a bunch of empty folders...

It's Hood College's archive, it isn't "down" or taken offline, it's just that the interface doesn't work any more. So, it looks like it's supposed to still be "up" but for all intents and purposes it's useless because it's not working. http://jfk.hood.edu/ Click "browse archive" on the left and you'll see what I mean I suspect some kind of technical glitch that they may not be aware of at Hood college

The F-35 is a modern example of all these things: promises of high performance and explosive power that costs too much and goes beyond the requirements of the design... the very definition of boondoggle and a "lemon." The wikipedia entry for the F-35 accurately says that "the program has drawn much scrutiny and criticism for its unprecedented size, complexity, ballooning costs, and much-delayed deliveries, with numerous technical flaws still being corrected. The acquisition strategy of concurrent production of the aircraft while it was still in development and testing led to expensive design changes and retrofits" That entrenched system of corruption and waste is sadly still in-place and the F-35 is a great example of having too many cooks in the kitchen. Now imagine if the amount of money wasted on this piece of dooky were spent on something like healthcare for Americans. Sufficient healthcare and dental care for our people, I think, constitutes national security. An argument could be made for that. How many millions of deaths could be prevented, lives extended, and quality of life extended if we had basic health care like Canadians or British people do, where a poor person can actually afford dental care? I guess I should get off my high horse, lest I be labeled a communist for wanting to afford dental care, or wanting to see our seniors taken care of in the golden years of their lives...

Is anyone else finding that the Weisberg archive at Hood college doesn't work? I can navigate there, click on folders, but there are never any files displayed or anything you can access. I don't know if it's broken, but I've been trying to access it for a week and find nothing but empty folders. I read one of his unpublished manuscripts on the site a couple years ago (As I recall each chapter was there available as a separate Word document or PDF) Now, I can't find any of his manuscripts on there. @Rob Clark I know you've dug around extensively in the Weisberg archives -- any idea when the site stopped functioning?

Whenever I find myself thinking that some covert operations might be inconceivable, I just remind myself of those things that the United States has done which had consensus. Specifically, I think of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. If the United States establishment is willing to do that, and it's generally considered somehow reasonable and rational, imagine the kind of things that might be carried out covertly because doing so overtly would garner too much outrage. When you think about it that way, it becomes clear that blowing JFK's head off in a shooting gallery at high noon in front of everyone is rather mild, for these people.

It is a hard proposition to swallow, that is for sure. However, when you consider the nature of some of the key suspects and consider that they were riding high on 5-10 years of very successful regime changes outside the United States, you have to consider just how much these people might have considered it no big deal. I have no doubt Jim Angleton and Allen Dulles probably even considered it necessary and patriotic, they probably felt they were doing something that HAD to be done and that regular Americans had the luxury of not having to worry about the kinds of threats they were paid to worry about.

Let's not forget their favorite essay. The one by Richard Hofstadter... a pile of garbage along with the other works you cite...

He had good reason to believe that. What the Tarasoffs said was on the call and what ended up in the transcript are two different things entirely.

Good point John. I agree with you. I think it was a complex affair planned at very high levels with Jim Angleton and Allan Dulles at the top. The only way this works is if you get people in key departments participating in the plot without them knowing they are participating in JFK's assassination. By making sure that you have people in every key department contributing you guarantee they will all cover it up after the fact. The fact that this was planned for Miami, Chicago, Los Angeles, Washington D.C. and Maryland shows it was definitely bigger than a few Cuban exiles hijacking something. I agree with Ben's analysis of how a plot was hijacked, but propose the inverse of what he said: that very high level people created and sold something other than an assassination plot and they pulled a bait and switch.

I consider it Angleton's master genius at work. The master of plots within plots, of merging fantasy and reality, he designed this wilderness of mirrors and put together the layers of the onion such that major departments of the CIA became entrenched in an assassination plot and didn't even know it.

I have to say here that your "piggyback" theory is incredibly compelling. I think it is a perfect analysis of how the plan was carried out by a small group at the very top, a plan that allowed them to both utilize the full force of the CIA without underlings knowing that their actions were in furtherance of a conspiracy to assassinate the president. I differ from your conclusions in that I believe the "piggybackers" -- those who knew the JFK hit was the ultimate goal -- were more than just 3-4 people. I suspect it was probably closer to 6-8 people and that the poison-pills injected into the plot (such as the WW3 virus) guaranteed that everyone at the agency would participate in a cover-up in order to protect themselves, protect their loyal officers, protect the country, protect the agency. Catch-22: Containing Discovery of the Piggyback The "poison pills" woven into the plot essentially guaranteed that anyone at CIA who was able to figure out that their various operations were hijacked or piggybacked upon would be forced to cover-up that fact to protect their own job, to protect their officers and assets, to protect the country, and to protect the CIA. Inevitably, some in CIA would have figured out what happened. It was inevitable. However, many of these people were probably loyal intelligence professionals who loved their jobs, believed in the CIA, and supported their subordinates. They dare not share their concerns or speak up for it they did, they not only would likely have had little hard evidence to prove their suspicion, but they would commit career suicide if they spoke up, they would endanger the very agency they believed in and loved, and they would have destroyed what they believed was a necessary institution. In short, speaking up would have in their view endangered the national security of the country. They would be in a Catch-22: "I know what happened here ... but if I talk about it, it could destroy the CIA and that in turn would gravely damage our national security and do more harm to this country than the KGB or Soviets could ever hope to achieve on their own." The would be stuck. No choice but to keep their mouth shut. Win Scott I believe that Winston Scott is one of the people who did figure out that his station, his assets, and his personnel were used by the piggybackers. He figured it out. Probably rather quickly. It seems the most Scott did (as far as we know) about this was keep some evidence of this in his safe: holding onto recordings of the Oswald impersonator on the phone in Mexico and holding on to photos of Oswald (or an Oswald impersonator) in his safe. He probably kept these things for himself, a memento, a reminder, maybe ... more likely as "insurance" for himself. Richard Helms said in the PBS Frontline documentary (about Scott having photos and audio of Oswald) "that's fine for Win Scott to say, but he doesn't have any evidence so what he is talking about?". What PBS Frontline left out is that Jim Angleton hopped on a plane--in such haste he forgot to even bring his passport--to Mexico where he confiscated the evidence from Scott's safe before Scott could even be buried. When you watch that PBS Frontline documentary, pause it when Richard Helms said "that's fine for when Scott to say ... but what is he talking about?" and then pick-up and read Jim DiEugenio's Destiny Betrayed chapter 16 "Mexico City and Langley." Then pick up John Armstrong's Harvey and Lee and read the chapter "1963, Mexico City- Pandora's Box" (page 614-706) -- regardless of what you may think about Armstrong's central thesis, his chapter on Mexico City serves as the best scholarship on what happened in Mexico City and is without equal in research in this case. It's that important. The Piggybackers: Compartmentalization is the key I believe that Angleton and Dulles were at the top of the plot. The WWIII virus and various other "poison pill" components of the plot were Angleton's handiwork. The key really is compartmentalization, where various people involved in things like setting up Oswald don't know they're participating in an assassination plot. All they know is they're handling a sensitive clandestine project. Maybe they think they're working on a Fair Play for Cuba Committee operation, maybe some think it's one of the Castro assassination plots, and more than likely many of the assets and agents utilized had no idea of the bigger picture, they only have very specific direct orders to do (A) (B) and (C) and they don't question why, they just do what they are asked without any need to know why. Your analysis is astute, it's a very good analysis of the mechanics of how a compartmentalized operation can be carried out without key people in the operation knowing the bigger picture. I do disagree with some of the things you have suggested, however. Here are some of my thoughts on that: Joannides You mention a few times Joannides as a possible figure at the top who was part of the piggybacking -- I disagree there and think that Joannides was most probably/most likely participating in what he thought was a Fair Play for Cuba Committee operation where DRE, Ed Butler and INCA and all these assets were part of an operation designed to discredit the FPCC by linking it directly to Russia and Cuba, to try to show the organization was a front for the KGB and DGI. James McCord, however, I suspect may have been one of the people in the FPCC discrediting operation who might have also been aware of how the operation would be piggybacked. Once 11/22/63 happened, those DRE boys wasted no time taking advantage of the situation by sending their PR packet on Oswald to newspapers and radio stations to link the assassination to Castro. I view this as DRE being opportunists. They saw an opportunity to spin the assassination in a way that furthered their own goals in a way that aligned with their genuine beliefs. For example, I can see a situation whereby Bringuier or some of his DRE friends really did believe that Oswald was a Castro agent meanwhile Joannides knew better, knew that Oswald's "connections" to Castro were merely part of a legend being put together as part of the FPCC discrediting operation. David Phillips I think he was aware of the piggybacking/assassination plot, and that he is central to the Mexico City stuff. The things that happened in Mexico City look less like an operation targeting the FPCC than they do an operation designed to make Oswald look like a DGI/KGB assassin frantically seeking an escape route to Cuba for his upcoming starring role in "the big event." What happened in Mexico City makes little sense in terms of a FPCC discrediting operation ... though perhaps it was framed as one by Phillips to his subordinates and co-workers. The whole Kostikov and "Department 13" stuff, and the "Oswald trying to get to Cuba" stuff--all this makes sense only in terms of painting Oswald as a DGI/KGB assassination and sabotage agent who was quite clearly trying to seek some kind of escape route to Cuba. The Piggyback Players I have my own suspicions who the 6-8 people aware of the JFK hit were, the "piggybackers" who designed and carried out the plan that Angleton put together. The compartmentalization allowed the piggybackers to have the entire agency at their disposal, every resource and department they needed. All it takes is one key figure in each necessary department. By having these 6-8 people within all these CIA departments not only do they have the full power of the CIA at their disposal to carry out the plan but they also guarantee that everyone in these departments is forced into the cover-up after the fact to protect their own jobs, their own departments, and personnel who contributed to operations that were "piggybacked." For example, it can be shown that the piggybackers probably had people carrying out actions for them within: the Directorate of Operations, the Domestic Operations Division, the Domestic Contacts Division, Counter-Intelligence, the Office of Security, the Western Hemisphere Division, The Soviet Russia division, the Miami station, and the Mexico City station, just to name a few. In doing it this way, it also ensured that virtually every department in the CIA would be required to participate in the cover-up for all the reasons stated previously. Here are my nominees for the Piggyback Players -- those who knew the JFK was the target and who exploited other "legitimate" operations to that end: Allen Dulles -- no longer DCI but still having meetings with key piggybackers who were still at CIA James Angleton -- I believe he was the leading figure who put the entire plan together David Phillips -- key to Mexico City and in hijacking Joannides' FPCC operation from New Orleans by telling subordinates in Mexico City that what they were doing there was just an extension of the FPCC operation William K. Harvey -- I haven't figured out his role but suspect it relates to sourcing shooters Howard Hunt -- a piggybacker embedded in multiple areas at CIA. He was chief of covert operations in Tracy Barnes' Domestic Operations Division, he was "on-loan" to Mexico City Station when the Oswald stuff went down, and he was also embedded into the Soviet Russia division by Angleton. (see Creating the Oswald Legend – Part 5 by Vasilios Vazakas) I believe Hunt was a central person for the piggybackers and served several different roles. He was no "bench warmer" like he claimed in his limited hang-out deathbed confession which curiously omits James Angleton, while absurdly accusing Cord Meyer and LBJ. Sergio Arcacha-Smith Eladio Del Valle Herminio Diaz Garcia Much of this is speculation, but when you have all of the information surrounding these people and their actions, the puzzle pieces begin to fall together. A plot like this can be carried out with even a dozen people being aware that JFK was the target, basically because the "poison pill" (or "virus" as Newman called it) was embedded into the plot in several different forms which essentially guaranteed that everyone would be forced to participate in the cover-up in order to ensure that the entire CIA wasn't destroyed. Anyone and everyone at CIA who might have figured out what happened was left in a compromising position by having their own officers and departments unknowingly--in many cases--carry out central parts of the plot. The Most Secret CIA "Family Jewel" When Angleton's replacement, George Kalaris came on board, he commissioned former CIA officer Cleveland Cram to come out of retirement to do a study of Angleton's reign from 1954 to 1974 to "find out what in hell happened. What were these guys doing." Cram took the assignment and was given access to all CIA documents on covert operations. The study, entitled History of the Counterintelligence Staff 1954-1974, took six years to complete and was finished in 1981. Cram produced twelve legal-sized volumes, each three hundred to four hundred pages. Cram's approximately four-thousand-page study has never been declassified. It remains locked in the CIA's vaults. I often wonder if Cram put together what happened on 11/22/63, figuring out James Angleton's most egregious, sinister, and successful operation and that this study will never be declassified, so we'll never know. However, as Grover Proctor said, I think that the case has been figured out. It has been solved: "Who says that it hasn't come out already?" The marketplace of ideas has been flooded with an enormous number of opposing and contradictory "solutions," some by well-meaning and hard-working researchers, and some which are obvious and blatant attempts at disinformation. Who is to say that, somewhere in that morass of opinion and deception, the real answer hasn't already been revealed?" I believe that it has been figured out, and this post by Benjamin Cole fits squarely within that description. IMHO of course.

This was posted on YouTube about a week ago: It's about 2 hours and 15 minutes The poster said that soon they will be posting a Weisberg speech from 1978 called "Oswald in New Orleans" -- I look forward to this as it's suggested that Weisberg talks a bit about CIA involvement which is pretty unusual for Harold Weisberg. Early, and very late, in his career he always would say he had no idea who did it and it wouldn't be right to speculate. I admit I have not read Weisberg's book "Oswald in New Orleans" but I have heard it's one of the better of Weisberg's books. For those interested it's available here: https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Oswald_in_New_Orleans.html

This is Lisa Pease's K&K piece on Otepka: https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/what-did-otto-otepka-know-about-oswald-and-the-cia There are a couple of things in it that cause one to raise their eyebrow so to speak. This is one of them, unrelated to Otepka, but it causes me to question Pease's judgement: There was an effort underway to reinstate Alger Hiss to the State Department. Knowing what we know today, one might wish that effort had been successful. "one might wish that effort had been successful" ? It's pretty clear from Hede Massing's testimony that Alger Hiss was a Soviet spy. Hiss and Massing both met once at a dinner party where they spoke about their mutual efforts to recruit Noel Fields... I can't see why anyone would think it appropriate that Hiss be reinstated at the State Department. Alas, maybe there are people who think he was innocent ... but I can't fathom that given the evidence against him regardless of how the authorities investigating him had conducted themselves. https://spartacus-educational.com/Hede_Massing.htm

I think that is real similar to the Roselli/Maheu memo I posted. It was almost a way of Hoover getting some stuff on paper that would show that he knows the score.

Sourwine is mentioned repeatedly in the Otepka FBI file. There are also a number of contemporary news reports in that FBI file. If the file were examined by someone who knows enough additional details it may assist in putting together what may have happened.

Indeed they did, none other than one of the world's most renowned magicians, John Mulholland. Surely others, too.

LOL

Hey Paul, It's FBI. I pulled it from a FOIA request for William King Harvey that was submitted by voluminous FOIA requester Emma Best (who has uploaded millions of pages online from her thousands of requests). You can find the Harvey file here. Some interesting reading in there: https://archive.org/details/WilliamKingHarvey There are a few ways to tell it's from FBI. Easiest is probably seeing at the top where it says "To: Belmont" -- that's Alan Belmont. If you've seen a lot of FBI files you can also tell it's FBI by the way "Memorandum" looks at the top. Another way you can tell it's FBI is the tone, and by how brazenly and openly it just airs CIA dirty laundry. CIA would not be putting things like this on paper. Whereas at FBI, due to their institutional rivalry, they have no compunction writing about perceived CIA misadventures. At the time of that FBI memo was written, Hoover is still in charge and he hated William K. Harvey. If you review the Harvey FOIA above you'll find memo after memo with Hoover and his minions (Belmont, Tolson, any of the top Hoover boys) vociferously complaining about Harvey to CIA. Really petty stuff. Anyhow, yes, it's FBI. Rather surprising to find so many details all in a single memo, especially given how highly classified those details were at the time this memo was written (summer of '63)

I doubt that the government would be able to succeed in a basic "show cause" preliminary hearing. This is the first step, before jury selection or anything involving a trial happens. This is where the prosecutor must show that enough evidence exists to charge the defendant. What evidence would they even be able to present there? No witnesses. No evidence putting a rifle in Oswald's hands. Nothing. CE 399 is out, the shells from the Tippit scene are out, all the witnesses brought to the line-up are out after it's shown how the line-up was conducted. The only way this thing works is if there is no trial and Oswald is dead.

Assuming Biden even makes it to October. There is a good chance he'll resign before then and it will be Kamala Harris who has to decide, and I don't think she will open anything up. Recently, Biden's people have started modifying their various websites, changing it from saying "Biden administration" to the "Biden-Harris Administration" -- this subtle change reflects how she's being groomed to take over, with the traditional quiet VP role being elevated in prominence. Then we have Biden's own flubs in language, which can be considered merely mistakes ... or perhaps representative of what Biden knows he intends to. Like he said "I'll develop some disease and resign." Biden has said more than once "President Harris" and even referred to his administration as "the Harris administration." I don't think these were merely flubs, rather these were representative of what Biden knows. I think there is a better chance that Biden would open the files than Harris. He's got nothing to lose and no long future career to worry about, to the contrary. Whereas Harris knows what's good for her and has to think about her future.

That is absolutely what it was. It was weaponized magic, with misdirection being a key element in successfully carrying out the assassination. What happened in the pantry is a real-life version of something that the Mission: Impossible team would have put together. Which is fitting, given Lisa Pease's research and the connections to Robert Maheu she uncovered, a man who was the real-life inspiration for Mission: Impossible.

There are three very exceptional films from the early 60s that stand out to me as some of the best films of that area, all three adaptations of novels: The Manchurian Candidate (1962) Seven Days in May (1964) Fail-Safe (1964) There were remakes of all three of these, most of them pretty bad except for perhaps Fail-Safe. The Seven Days in May remake was called "The Enemy Within" and came out in '94. Awful. Same goes for the Manchurian Candidate remake. The Fail-Safe remake was 1999 and on Showtime. It was okay, it was almost a shot for shot remake of the original and was actually more like a play. It was broadcast live and in black and white.

What I like about this document is that, in one document, you have a lot of sensitive things disclosed. For a 1-page document that's uncommon. You've got: * Confirmation of CIA working with the mafia * Confirmation of CIA working on assassination plots * Some specifics -- Roselli/Giancana both named, both said to be working with CIA through William Harvey and Robert Maheu The other thing about the William Harvey FBI file that I found interesting was a sort of passive-aggressive emotional pettiness on display in multiple FBI files, showing a very clear and obvious level of petty dislike for Harvey by J. Edgar Hoover. Hoover was constantly clutching his pearls and complaining about Harvey not being respectful enough to the bureau. You could almost sense the level of anger on Hoover's part, the image of him angrily sitting a typewriter blasting out memos to try to get Harvey in trouble at CIA. It truly was petty and stupid, there are at least 5 or 6 memos in the FBI file that are essentially the FBI having a hissy-fit over Harvey and complaining to his bosses.