Bill Simpich

We should print Gil’s list and post it at every JFK conference.

Ben Cole, No offers from big firms, but we don’t need them. We are more nimble in a small group that understands the issues.

The Joannides documents were never sought by the ARRB, so our lawsuit seeks their release pursuant to a different theory. They are buried in another corner of NARA’s holdings - 44 documents withheld by CIA pursuant to FOIA. The problem is that the JFK Act specifically states that it was enacted to address the problems that occurred when FOIA was used to obtain JFK documents. Our reading is that the purpose of the JFK Act is to ensure the release of the Joannides documents (and others like it) currently trapped in FOIA limbo.

Robert Fitzpatrick, a student, created a summary of Oswald's speech after the assassination. He interviewed several other individuals who heard the speech before he created this summary. Note how different their recollections - which address Oswald's economic observations based on his time in the USSR - are from his notes, which are edgy political observations based on his time in the USA. You can also read the FBI interviews with another student - Oswald's cousin Eugene Murrett - or philosophy professor Malcolm Mullen and logic professor John Moore - all of them said Oswald's remarks focused on his time and observations in the USSR. It is not impossible that the comments about General Walker, the role of the military in a possible US coup, and the best way to deal with the Communist Party USA simply didn't make it into the summary - but it doesn't seem likely after reading the above interviews, and Fitzpatrick's summary: He worked in a factory in Minsk. When he applied for permission to live in the Soviet Union, the Russian authorities had assigned him to a fairly well advanced area, the Minsk area. He said that this was a common practice: showing foreigners those places of which Russians can be proudest. The factory life impressed him with the care it provided for the workers. Dances, social gatherings, sports were all benefits for the factory workers. Mr. Oswald belonged to a factory–sponsored hunting club. He and a group of workers would go into the farm regions around Minsk for huntings trips. They would spend the night in the outlying villages, and thus he came to know Russian peasant life too. In general, the peasants were very poor, often close to starvation. When the hunting party was returning to Minsk, it would often leave what it had shot with the village people because of their lack of food. He spoke of having even left the food he had brought with him from town. In connection with the hunting party, he mentioned that they had only shotguns, for pistols and rifles are prohibited by Russian law. Some details of Russian life: in each hut there was a radio speaker, even in huts where there was no running water or electricity. The speaker was attached to a cord that ran back to a common receiver. Thus, the inhabitants of the hut could never change stations or turn off the radio. They had to listen to everything that came through it, day or night. In connection with radios, he said that there was a very large radio–jamming tower that was larger than anything else in Minsk. More about the factories: factory meetings were held which all had to attend. Everyone attended willingly and in a good frame of mind. Things came up for discussion and voting, but no one ever voted no. The meetings were, in a sense, formalities. If anyone did not attend, he would lose his job. Mr. Oswald said that he had met his wife at a factory social. The workers, he said, were not against him because he was an American. When the U–2 incident was announced over the factory radio system, the workers were very angry with the United States, but not with him, even though he was an American.3 He made the point that he disliked capitalism because its foundation was the exploitation of the poor. He implied, but did not state directly, that he was disappointed in Russia because the full principles of Marxism were not lived up to and the gap between Marxist theory and the Russian practice disillusioned him with Russian communism. He said, ‘ Capitalism doesn’t work, communism doesn’t work. In the middle is socialism, and that doesn’t work either.’ After his talk a question and answer period followed. Some questions and his answers: More points that were contained in the main part of the talk: He lived in Russia from 1959 to 1962. He only implied that the practice in Russia differed from the theory, never stated it directly. The policy of Russia was important: After death of Stalin, a peace reaction. Then an anti–Stalin reaction. A peace movement, leading up to the Paris conference. The U–2 incident and its aftermath. At the factory he had trouble at first meeting the men. They did not accept him at first. He joined a hunting club. He belonged to two or three discussion groups. He praised the Soviets for rebuilding so much and for concentrating on heavy industry. He said at one point that if the Negroes in the United States knew that it was so good in Russia, they’d want to go there. Another question:

Here is the second portion of Oswald's notes that I am reprinting from Jeremy Bojczuk. I believe these notes indicate what Oswald actually thought. Again, I believe these notes do not represent what Oswald actually said! That will be in the following post. Here it is - I correct his misspellings: A symbol of the American Way, our liberal concession is the existence in our midst of a minority group whose influence and membership is very limited, and whose dangerous tendencies are sufficiently controlled by special government agencies. The Communist Party U.S.A. bears little resemblance to their Russian counterparts, but by allowing them to operate and even supporting their misguided right to speak, we maintain a tremendous sign of our strength and liberalism. Harassment of their Party newspaper, their leaders, and advocates is treachery to our basic principles of freedom of speech and press. Their views, no matter how misguided, no matter how much the Russians take advantage of them, must be allowed to be aired. After all, the Communist Party USA has existed for 40 years, and they are still a pitiful group of radicals. Nowadays, most of us read enough about certain right wing groups to know enough on how to recognize them and guard against their corrosive effects. I would like to say a word about them, although there are possibly few other American born persons in the U.S. who know as many personal reasons to know and therefore hate and mistrust communism. I would never become a pseudo–professional anti–communist such as Herbert Philbrick or McCarthy. I would never jump on any of the many right wing bandwagons because our two countries have too much to offer too each other to be tearing at each others thoughts in an endless Cold War. Both are countries that have major shortcomings and advantages. But only in ours is the voice of dissent, and all the abilities of that voice of dissent have allowed opportunity of expression. In returning to the U.S., I hope I have awakened a few who were sleeping, and others who were indifferent. I have done nothing but a lot of criticizing of our system. I hope you will take it in the spirit it was given. in going to Russia, I have followed the old principle “Thou shall seek the truth and the truth shall make you free." In returning to the U.S., I have done nothing more or less than select the lesser of two evils.

I agree with Greg Doudna that Oswald delivered a fine speech at Eugene Murret's Jesuit seminary. I have always felt it was very telling about what was going on with Oswald. I go back and forth about whether he offering his sincere thoughts about politics - he certainly was about his economic system. I think he was hoping to get picked up by an intelligence agency, as a provocateur or a double agent. Before we get to the speech, look at Oswald's notes. I will reprint my favorite two sections below and in the following post. His original notes are hard to read - happily,Jeremy Bojczuk has transcribed them. Go to his site and read them, I will reprint my favorite parts here. I think they are authentic and illustrate his true thinking. Oswald thought General Walker and his pals in the army were not enough to pull off a coup. What got him thinking about that? Probably Walker's relations with the Cubans and the Minutemen. He thought that the USMC might be the best path to organize a coup. I will offer here the first portion of Oswald's notes. These notes are not the actual speech!! The speech is quite different. I will get to that. Americans are apt to scoff at the idea, that a military coup in the US., as so often happens in Latin American countries, could ever replace our government. but that is an idea that has grounds for consideration. Which military organization has the potential of executing such action? Is it the army? With its many conscripts, its unwieldy size, its scores of bases scattered across the world? The case of Gen. Walker shows that the army, at least, is not fertile enough ground for a far right regime to go a very long way. For the same reasons of size and disposition, the Navy and Air Force is also to be more or less disregarded. Which service, then, can qualify to launch a coup in the USA? Small size, a permanent hard core of officers and a few bases are necessary. Only one outfit fits that description and the U.S.M.C. is a right wing infiltrated organization of dire potential consequences to the freedoms of the U.S. I agree with former President Truman when he said that “The Marine Corps should be abolished.”

JFK Researchers Appeal for Justice in Federal Court Ninth Circuit to examine district court’s faulty interpretation of JFK Act - by Chad Nagle The nonprofit Mary Ferrell Foundation (MFF), which maintains the largest online repository of records related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, filed suit against President Biden and the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) in October 2022, charging the defendants with failure to enforce the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act (“JFK Records Act” or “JFK Act”). The JFK Act, a sweeping law Congress passed unanimously in 1992, mandates the public release of all assassination-related material in the government’s possession. Thirty-two years after it was passed, thousands of records are still withheld. In January 2024, Chief Judge Richard Seeborg of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed all but three of MFF’s claims — i.e., litigation over (1) congressional JFK records, (2) destroyed JFK records, and (3) archival finding aids. The plaintiffs believe Judge Seeborg has made serious errors of judgment and now challenge his decision. On May 28, MFF filed an interlocutory appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, asking the appellate court to address issues the lower court dismissed or ignored, even as the lower court settles the surviving claims. The Foundation’s appeal asks the Ninth Circuit to block the Archives from enforcing a scheme — the “Transparency Plan” — designed by the CIA to govern declassification of records related to President Kennedy’s murder. President Biden formally approved the CIA’s scheme in December 2022, and MFF is arguing that this violates the JFK Act, which gives all JFK files “a presumption of immediate disclosure.” The decision of the White House and Archives to adopt the “Transparency Plan” delays release of the remaining 3,648 withheld JFK files indefinitely — and possibly forever. If successful, the interlocutory appeal will reverse the district court’s orders and direct it to review claims that were dismissed in January. Reversal would halt the use of the “Transparency Plan” before — hopefully — consigning it to the dustbin of history. Courtroom One in the Ninth Circuit Courthouse (Curbed SF) A Remedy for Mischief “The purpose of this appeal is to ask the Ninth Circuit to use its power to tell the District Court to interpret the JFK Records Act as a remedial statute,” Bill Simpich, lead counsel for the plaintiffs, told JFK Facts. “The purpose of the Act was to remedy the weaknesses of the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) by ensuring we obtained the full history of the JFK assassination,” he added. Section 2(a)(5) of the JFK Records Act of 1992 In other words, FOIA was obstructing the selection, collection and release of assassination-related files, and the JFK Act was meant to “remedy” that problem. As the plaintiffs explained in their March 2023 brief, courts should interpret remedial laws expansively, “to effectuate the beneficial purpose” Congress intended. Specifically, when reviewing a remedial law, a court is supposed to apply the “mischief rule.” This ancient Anglo-American legal principle requires courts to pinpoint the mischiefs and defects that the legislature identified when it enacted the law, then construe that law broadly, to suppress the mischief and advance the remedy. Excerpt from “Heydon’s Case” (1584), explaining the “mischief rule” The “mischief” that Congress targeted with the Act — i.e., ongoing secrecy over President Kennedy’s murder — had exacerbated public mistrust of government up to the 1990s, and it continues to do so today thanks to official evasions of federal law. Now, the district court is construing the JFK Act narrowly, discharging the Archives of any duty to perform the ARRB’s functions, and forcing researchers to rely on FOIA again. In short, the district court is sanctioning the mischief that the JFK Act was designed to eliminate, and this is what MFF is trying to stop. In granting the president discretion to withhold JFK files in spite of Congress’ mandate, Judge Seeborg’s ruling serves to protect the CIA, which is still concealing significant JFK assassination files, e.g., records of a psychological warfare operation involving accused assassin Lee Harvey Oswald and a 1961 White House memo on reorganizing the CIA. The Archives’ Duty In 1998, as time neared for the ARRB’s dissolution, several agencies waited out the board, failing to submit signed “declarations of compliance” confirming they had located all JFK-related documents and transferred them to the Archives. This bureaucratic foot-dragging recalled the actions of CIA counterintelligence chief James Angleton, reported in a March 1964 memorandum as saying he wanted to “wait out” the Warren Commission, which was investigating President Kennedy’s assassination. Left: Former CIA counterintelligence chief James Angleton (Steven Hager); Right: The President’s Commission on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy (the Warren Commission) in 1964 (Abdon Daoud Ackad, Sr.) The JFK Act created an independent civilian panel called the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) to oversee implementation of the law in the 1990s. When the ARRB dissolved in 1998, the Archives set about collecting, reviewing and releasing files under the JFK Act, albeit at a much slower rate than the ARRB had. The plaintiffs explain that, with the Archives standing in as “successor in function” to the ARRB, “the torrent of collected documents was reduced to a trickle, and a backlog of un-released documents sat in limbo.” Researchers and historians could not do their jobs. The ARRB expected the Archives to assume its duties: Sections 5 and 7 of the JFK Act require NARA “to review, identify and transmit possible assassination records to the JFK Collection when ‘an office has any uncertainty as to whether a document is an assassination record’ or when the ‘Review Board’ [i.e., NARA] has ‘reason to believe’ that a document must be reviewed.” Such duties are supposed to be broadly assumed. Excerpt from p. 34 of the interlocutory appeal filed by the Mary Ferrell Foundation with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on May 28, 2024 The district court ignored what the JFK Act said about the Archives’ duties. The only sections of the law that terminated with the ARRB concerned its administration, staffing, and day-to-day functioning. Indeed, it was precisely because the Archives and the CIA understood that the obligations spelled out in the JFK Act remained in force, that the two agencies entered into a “Memorandum of Understanding” with the ARRB in 1998. Excerpt from the preamble of the memorandum of understanding (“MOU of 1998”) signed by the CIA, the National Archives and the Assassination Records Review Board The U.S. Code transferred these duties to NARA as the “successor in function” to the ARRB. The district court has rejected the plain meaning of the law, not just in the form of a federal statute that Congress never repealed, but also clearly worded federal regulations. Excerpt from Federal Register, Vol. 65, No. 124, p. 39550 - Rules and Regulations / National Archives and Records Administration / John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Rules, identifying NARA as “successor in function” to ARRB Undermining Public Interest As MFF has repeatedly highlighted, Section 5(g)(2)(D) of the JFK Act requires that any agency seeking to withhold an assassination record from the public has to demonstrate that the “identifiable harm” from releasing that document is “of such gravity that it outweighs the public interest in disclosure.” Excerpt from pp. 43-44 of the interlocutory appeal filed by the Mary Ferrell Foundation with the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals on May 28, 2024 Furthermore, it has to do so — under Section 6 — by “clear and convincing evidence.” Preamble to Section 6 of the JFK Records Act of 1992 Yet as the plaintiffs note: “The nature of the ‘identifiable harm’ remains hidden — and hence unidentifiable — to this day.” NARA cites no “clear and convincing evidence.” It just relies on “the words of the statute” in President Biden’s June 30, 2023 executive order. Excerpt from “Memorandum on Certifications Regarding Disclosure of Information in Certain Records Related to the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy,” issued by President Joseph R. Biden, Jr., on June 30, 2023 The president offered no evidence at all to justify his decree. He simply announced he had certified postponement. Yet Section 5(g)(2)(D) requires him to certify “as required by this Act,” a statute Congress enacted with the help of his vote as a U.S. senator in 1992. Section 5(g)(2)(D) of the JFK Records Act of 1992, which features the two-part test for withholding assassination records from public disclosure NARA is withholding documents based on exceptions created by the CIA, even though these exceptions ignore the JFK Act’s definition of “public interest.” Encouraged by the CIA, NARA is substituting the 2022 Biden Memorandum’s usage of the term. According to President Biden, agencies can apply the “statutory standard” by giving “substantial weight to the public interest in transparency and full disclosure.” Whatever “substantial weight” means, it has nothing to do with the statutory standard. Section 3(10) of the JFK Records Act of 1992, which describes the public interest in disclosure as “compelling” The plaintiffs argue that President Biden has no right to “water down the ‘public interest’ aspect of the JFK Act,” contravening Congress’ intent. Likewise, NARA shouldn’t be allowed to say it’s “just following orders.” Its duties under the law are clear. Killing the Process The “Transparency Plans” that Biden refers to in his 2022 memorandum are a less strict system than the process mandated by the JFK Act. They identify events or circumstances that “trigger” review by relevant agencies and the National Declassification Center (NDC). But these events only trigger a review of records, not disclosure, and any review would be opaque. In fact, the CIA’s scheme features no mechanism for automatic disclosure at all. Section 9(d)(2) of the Act specifies: The CIA’s “Transparency Plan” envisions no periodic review. In fact, it was precisely the nuisance or irritation involved in such reviews that prompted the agencies to advance the new scheme. Pentagon intelligence official John Dixson summed up the agencies’ beef succinctly in a letter to the National Security Council dated Sept. 29, 2022. John Dixson, Director of Defense Intelligence, Counterintelligence, Law Enforcement, and Security (DoD Cyber Crime Center (DC3)/LinkedIn) Worse, with his 2022 memorandum, President Biden removed his office from the process altogether. The first paragraph of his 2023 edict proclaims his “final certification” under the Act. In practice, this means the President no longer has any meaningful role in the process of review and informed decision-making concerning assassination records. Congress didn’t envision the President washing his hands of the certification process 30 years after it enacted the law — with bipartisan support — when thousands of assassination related files remained withheld. It required him to be a part of the process until all records were released. As such, Biden is thumbing his nose at Congress’ intent. Interior areas of the Ninth Circuit Courthouse (Credit: Curbed SF) ‘Arbitrary and Capricious’ The plaintiffs argue that the court should halt NARA’s implementation of the CIA’s “Transparency Plan” because it is “arbitrary and capricious” under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), enacted by Congress in 1946 to regulate federal and independent agencies. NARA’s changing attitude to the scheme exemplifies its chaotic approach. Excerpt from plaintiffs’ interlocutory appeal of May 28, 2024 In August 2017, the Archivist informed the CIA and the other agencies that their requests to postpone release of files did not comply with the JFK Act. Then in September 2017, the Archives suddenly issued “Procedures for Processing Remaining Postponed Records in the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection.” This flawed “guidance” was to be followed by all affected agencies and required them to identify the “impact of disclosure on current agency/department operations.” This is a departure from the requirements of the JFK Act. The guidance also required agencies to specify a rationale for continued postponement, keeping in mind that any “identifiable harm” to national security from disclosure must outweigh the public interest, pursuant to Section 5(g)(2)(D). But it didn’t require the agencies to show how the public interest was outweighed. They could just say it was. The guidance imposed no burden on the agencies to provide any evidence — never mind clear and convincing. It just skated over the JFK Act’s two-part test for continuing to withhold documents. Presumably an agency nod and wink would suffice. NARA has dithered between rejection of agency requests and accepting them under a new scheme with no basis in prevailing law. As the plaintiffs point out, NARA’s inconsistent behavior is “the very essence of arbitrary and capricious action.” Restoring the Rule of Law As the plaintiffs explain on page 7 of their appeal, President Donald Trump delayed release of the JFK assassination files as the Oct. 26, 2017, deadline under the JFK Act approached. President Joe Biden then approved the CIA’s “Transparency Plan” a few years later, modifying the procedure for release of documents, with standards weaker than the JFK Act’s. The result is that documents can be withheld for generations to come. As the clock ticks and material witnesses die, JFK researchers and the general public should demand justice in the form of broad, inclusive enforcement of a law passed over 30 years ago by their elected representatives. The JFK Act is a remedial law with a very extensive mandate. The plaintiffs in MFF v Biden want the judiciary to instruct the defendants to enforce this historic statute the way Congress wanted it enforced. If you would like to support the Mary Ferrell Foundation’s lawsuit, please go here. A ceiling in the Ninth Circuit Courthouse (Credit: Curbed SF)

A whole new avenue opened up when we learned that Felipe Vidal Santiago was AMQUIP-1… https://www.maryferrell.org/php/cryptdb.php?id=AMQUIP-1 …That Roy Hargraves had a long history as a bomber… …and that Felix Rodriguez was known as AMJOKE-1 https://www.maryferrell.org/php/cryptdb.php?id=AMJOKE-1&search=Amjoke …and that Joseph Milteer of the National States Rights Party claimed to be in Dallas on 11/22 …and that all four of them and others may have been in Dealey Plaza that day. People like Denis Morrissette and Greg Wagner keep adding to the database. We can keep adding to what they have put together. It’s great material.

David Talbot, S.F. author and journalist, suffers stroke that may prevent him from writing again By Sam Whiting, Reporter June 10, 2024 Here's the story in San Francisco Chronicle that provides a little more information on David's situation. The story is broken up in a couple places, but it's all here. Please donate if you can, or spread the word about his books! San Francisco author David Talbot suffered a stroke that may prevent him from writing again. David Talbot, the author of “Season of the Witch,” a celebrated account of San Francisco during the murderous mid-20th century, suffered a severe stroke on June 2 that left him immobilized. The medical emergency was confirmed by Board of Supervisors President Aaron Peskin, a close friend of Talbot. Talbot, 72, a visionary journalist who was also a founder of the news and culture website Salon, suffered the stroke while he and his wife, Camille Peri, are in the process of moving out of their home of 30 years, according to a GoFundme posting by close friend Connie Mathiessen. Talbot also worked for the Chronicle as a columnist. “It’s unclear if, or how much, David will recover at this time,” read Mathiessen’s post. “He currently struggles to form words, which, for a writer and speaker of David’s stature, has been incredibly hard for him and painful for all of us to see.” Talbot’s sons are seeking permanent housing for their parents if and when their father is able to leave the hospital. “David was looking forward to beginning to slow down, to write less out of necessity for once, and to begin to write simply for pleasure,” read the post. “This event has thrown a wrench into that plan, but we hope that through his unrelenting will, and through the generous support of you all, that he’ll be able to recover to a point where he can indeed finally rest.” Talbot suffered a stroke seven years ago but had mostly recovered, said his son, Joe Talbot. While still walking with the aid of a cane, he had been in the process of moving out of his Bernal Heights home on the the day of his latest stroke, which happened while he was at home in the evening. Paramedics came and he was rushed to the hospital, where he remained Monday. “The stroke happened at the worst possible time,” said Joe Talbot, who lives in Los Angeles. “My parents are having to move for financial reasons. The place that they were hoping to move into is no longer possible because of what’s happened to our dad. They can’t stay where they are, so that’s why we are looking at long-term housing.” Raised in Los Angeles, Talbot is the son of famous character actor Lyle Talbot, a film and stage actor who moved into television with a recurring role as the next door neighbor on “The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet.” David went to college at UC Santa Cruz and moved to San Francisco in the early 1970s. As an editor at the San Francisco Examiner, Talbot founded Salon in 1995. Talbot moved on to nonfiction books. with “Brothers: The Hidden History of the Kennedy Years,” published in 2007. “Season of the Witch: Enchantment, Terror and Deliverance in the City of Love” was published in 2012. The book is an in-depth look into the major news stories that gripped the city, ranging from the Summer of Love through Altamont and the Zodiac and Zebra killings, then to the Jonestown massacre and the murders of George Moscone and Harvey Milk, and on up through the AIDS pandemic and the San Francisco 49ers dynasty of the 1980s. For many years, Talbot kept an office in the Sentinel Building, the picturesque North Beach flatiron building owned by Francis Ford Coppola, and has been active in progressive political causes. “David has been a strong rallying voice for San Francisco’s neighborhoods and the city’s progressives values for decades, as well as a champion for investing in San Francisco arts and culture,” said Peskin. “Thanks to the good care that he’s receiving at the hospital right now, his loved ones do feel that his spirit is strong.” Joe Talbot has been at his dad’s bedside along with Joe’s younger brother Nat, Peri, and Talbot’s three siblings. Talbot has begun speech therapy. “My dad has not lost his spirit and he has been expressing his love for us in the limited ways that he can,” said Joe. “We believe he understands what we have been saying for the most part, which is wonderful.” Reach Sam Whiting: swhiting@sfchronicle.com

A positive ID of Vidal would represent a breakthrough. If anyone has more photos of Vidal, could you post them?

If we could prove that Vidal was the Dark Complected Man - we could agree to disagree about the Umbrella Man - and we would crack an important part of this case. I think there is a good amount of evidence that Vidal is the Dark Complected Man. Resolving this question is important. Vidal was one of the more important people in the Cuban underground, and a well-documented ally of Gen. Edwin Walker.

Whether or not Roy Hargraves is the Umbrella Man, he claimed to be at Dealey Plaza that day. I think we should consider the possibility that Vidal and Hargraves were there to blow up the underpass if the shots didn't kill JFK. Hargraves repeated that story more than once - maybe because he wanted to get that story out and bask in glory with his pals - and then buried it in a bodyguard of lies. If we could prove that Vidal was the Dark Complected Man - we could agree to disagree about the Umbrella Man -and we would crack an important part of this case. From Ronald Ecker: The late Roy Hargraves told researcher Noel Twyman in a 2001 interview that Mitch WerBell supplied silencers used in the JFK assassination. Hargraves was an explosives expert and member of Hemming's Interpen group. Hargraves said that he was in Dallas on November 22, 1963 as part of a four-man support team led by anti-Castro activist Felipe Vidal Santiago. (Vidal was captured on a mission into Cuba in 1964 and executed.) The team, according to Hargraves, was ordered to Dallas by CIA operative William Bishop, who could have got his orders from CIA's JMWAVE base in Miami... Source: Larry Hancock, Someone Would Have Talked: What We Know about the JFK Assassination after 40 Years (Southlake, Texas: JFK Lancer Productions and Publications), pp. 290-292. I think this is the 2010 version. Here's Larry Hancock on the role of Vidal and Hargraves in Tipping Point, Part 5: Beyond David Morales and John Rosselli, those who either admitted to or were specifically named as being involved were in minor roles: John Martino as a courier, carrying messages and money between Miami, New Orleans and Dallas. Felipe Vidal also as a courier, and both Vidal and Roy Hargraves as support personnel, performing field communications and overwatch - and with Hargraves having built an explosive device that was not actually needed in the attack. (My Note: Hargraves claimed planting a bomb in 1962 on a commercial boat trading with Cuba that failed to detonate; a source reported that "Vidal's friend Hargraves" was hired to plant a firebomb later in 1962; Hargraves was convicted for blowing up an "SDS peace center" office in Long Beach in 1968; the same year, Hargraves was jailed on charges of bombing right wingers and the Black Panthers with the intent to promote strife between these groups. Noel Twyman, Bloody Treason, The Assassination of John F. Kennedy, 1997, "Personal Interviews with Roy Hargraves", the following synopsis is reconstructed from a partial transcript made available by Noel Twyman; the entire interview session was taped but a transcript was prepared for only a portion of the many hours of dialogue involved in the session. Appendix A, Tape 2, Side A, 2001 Interview http://larry-hancock.com/roy_hargraves_interview.pdf Hargraves related to Hemming that he and Vidal had gone to Dallas but that he had no prior knowledge of a conspiracy, asserting that he had no idea of what was going to happen in Dallas and was simply taken there to perform a specific job (building a bomb). Hargraves also repeatedly stressed that neither he nor Vidal were involved in the actual murder. He remained vague on Vidal's role however, in the first phase of the interviews, he stated that he and Vidal were on Elm Street and Vidal acted as a signal man; in the second round of interviews he became much more circumspect about Vidal and their being on Elm Street at the time of the shooting. Photographs do show two men (described respectively in JFK assassination literature as the Umbrella Man and the Dark Complected Man) who appear quite similar to Roy Hargraves and Felipe Vidal standing beside each other on Elm Street, then sitting quite close together before they walk away in different directions. One of them wearing a beret similar in appearance to berets seen in other photographs of Vidal and to many appears to have some sort of radio in his back pocket. It may be that Hargraves was not aware of those photographs in the first phase of the interview. Hargraves was more specific about his own role. Being experienced with explosives (it can be confirmed that Hargraves was an explosives specialist; in later years after he and Hemming had moved to Los Angeles he built bombs which were used against the Black Panthers) he was to build an improvised explosive device (a car bomb). The bomb was placed in a car on the access ramp from Main Street to the Stemmons freeway (the route to JFK's scheduled speech at the Trade Mart), but was not used given the success of the rifle attack on Elm Street. Photographs do show a number of vehicles parked in the area described by Hargraves... Unfortunately it can be shown that Hargraves was also passing along a great deal of misinformation - and intentional disinformation - in his conversations with Twyman – something not unexpected. Even Gerry Hemming's brother was open about the fact that Hemming, and presumably Hargraves, intentionally convoluted their stories so extensively that anyone dealing with them as potential suspects would simply give up and walk away confused. There is absolutely no doubt that Hargraves' information needs to be approached with great caution, considering only that which has some level of corroboration."

That is the problem. An investigation should lead somewhere. If you ask a question, you should try your best to answer it. If you don't have enough information, you should say so. I think there is a lot of information to determine if Felipe Vidal Santiago is the Dark-Complected Man. This question - and other questions like it - is not a parlor game. The problem is a lack of will.

Jonathan, I wrote my book State Secret to try to solve the question about whether Lee Oswald was impersonated in Mexico City. I believe we have sufficient evidence to conclude Oswald was impersonated on the telephone - I don't feel that we have enough information to conclude whether or not Oswald was impersonated in person. The CIA specializes in keeping people guessing on questions like this.