Paul Brancato

Speaking of Lifton, what happened to the book he was working on in his last years?

No Kirk, Jim didn’t say that, I did.

Kirk - your distillation of the interview is so colored by your own bias as to make it useless. So I will not repost it here. You mischaracterized the exchange on the 1964 Brazil Coup, made it look like Talbot was ducking evidence that JFK wasn’t really anti-colonialist. I suppose most readers won’t bother to listen to the interview in Ben’s shorter version, much less the full one, so they won’t see what I saw, which is that the question Greenwald was posing, which Talbot did not shy away from, was the biased media coverage, then and now. The Brazil coup took place in the spring of 1964. That should be enough to cause anyone to hesitate assigning blame to JFK. We know for certain that his policy on Vietnam was immediately reversed after his death. Rather than provide evidence that JFK started this 1964 coup, and LBJ finished it, you chose via your own bias to share your intuition that he must have because Talbot didn’t go back to that subject at the end of Greenwald’s long question about media bias. Thanks for that. Now’s your chance to prove your point.

Awesome

Two points of view. I’ve always believed the first one, but I’m open to Mr. Kilroy’s idea. The question I have is since CIA was trying to incriminate Oswald, how would pictures of him entering or leaving either Cuban consulate or soviet embassy interfere with CIA agenda? I understand the general idea that CIA would not want to reveal operational interest in Oswald. They’ve done their best to deny it. How would submitting such pics of LHO compromise CIA? In your mind what was CIA doing with him in MC that they are trying to hide?

Who was her cia handler?

Greg and Doug - are you willing to digress from Prouty for a moment? Or do I have to dredge up an old thread? It seems to me that you are using Prouty to whitewash George Bush. You could be 100% right about Prouty’s claims regarding the names Zapata and Barbara, and be 100% wrong about the more important questions re Bush and Zapata Oil, and about the Hoover memo. It’s almost like Prouty handed you a perfect setup. But that kind of logic doesn’t cut it. I would sincerely like you both to answer this question - was JFK’s assassination the work of Lee Harvey Oswald? What I’m trying to figure out is why many posters here want to tear Prouty to shreds. Maybe you think Prouty was a deep state tool who deliberately laid traps over rabbit holes for intrepid researchers. Or maybe you think his many assertions are a threat to the continuing deep state dominant narrative and are doing your best to destroy his credibility in defense of that narrative. Maybe it’s something else entirely that drives you. I have no way of knowing without clarification. Are you both of the opinion that GHWB and his Zapata company were in no way involved in the Bay of Pigs? Or are you just here to knock Prouty off a pedestal and restore sanity? Or something else?

Thanks - Ratical is an interesting website I have not previously visited. I’m reading the Prouty interviews. I tend to agree with you that his naysayers focus in on one thing or another but miss the forest for the trees. I fail to see what is so incendiary about his recollections that a cottage industry would form in order to discredit him.

Maybe all this misses a point. We didn’t need Prouty’s mistaken evidence of a Bush connection to the Bay of Pigs. McBride’s discovery of the Hoover memo to ‘George Bush of the CIA was a far more important clue. Prouty’s revelation was a misdirection, intentional or not. But that doesn’t amount to a vindication of George Bush, whose explanation for the memo, discovered on the eve of his appointment to CIA director, doesn’t ring true. I realize this is a thread about Prouty, not Bush.

I’m certainly not on a mission re Prouty. What I’d like the experts here to do is outline in their view what Prouty, in his Liaison role between JCS and CIA would have known or not known regarding covert ops. There are inconsistencies in his testimony, and maybe he had good reasons for not going on the record, or not confirming previous assertions like the military stand down order. But it remains troubling that he held back on Lansdale. He must have known far more about a lot of things than he ever let on. so what exactly would he have been privy to?

So - Kirk - you don’t think that Dulles and company killed JFK? Do you dismiss Talbot too? Can you not recognize ‘shoot the messenger’? Did the ARRB help us understand the truth of Nov 22? Or continue to cover up the truth? Are you a CIA rooter? A fan of the Joint Chiefs? Just where do you stand?

Special services bureau, located underground at the Dallas Fairgrounds. Steve - is there a list of who was in the bureau?

When did you question Hosty?

I think I’ve read this years ago, but thanks Ben. I recall thinking why would Gonzalez, someone I thought was super progressive, do this. Now, in the fullness of time, it’s more clear.

Jim - remind me - who got Sprague ousted?

Great question Steve. Wonder if anyone knows? First thing that comes to my mind is his ‘alibi’ for where he was late morning on Nov 22. Since he was supposedly bringing a shoplifter into a police station, and as I recall there are no official records of that incident, only the shop owners decade later statement to the effect that Tippit was the officer who showed up in response to his phone call to the police reporting the shoplifter, such a notebook might clarify this.

Last paragraph is sure interesting - Hosty did not want to talk about the subjects he would have known the most about. He is quite sincere about what he was interested in (or perhaps what he was interested in talking to you about?). Do you think that Hosty knew much more than he was telling? You mention contact with subversives. Could you elaborate? What is it that you suspect Hosty may have held back about Oswald’s activity in Dallas re subversives?

They haven’t so far admitted that. What’s your take on the article?

Fortunately I didn’t make that comment.

All first hand accounts. Are your sources first hand accounts?

Michael - do you really want to get to the truth about the assassination?

If Prouty’s claims about JFK plans to leave VN were only his statements that would be one thing. But the NS memoranda are real, and the ‘liberal’ journalists who deny this are in fact revisionists. Why would I or anyone care what these ‘liberal’ say? Our media has perpetuated the myth that JFK was killed by a lone nut with no political objectives. Is that what you believe Michael? A simple yes or no would be appreciated.

What is the source for your rebuttal?

The 1994 interview is so prescient - incredible. He mentions Report From Iron Mountain, widely considered to be a farce. Might I ask what any of you think of this?

Michael - the Prouty interview is available. What is your source for your rebuttal?