Paul Brancato

More info on Mataxis Leslie?

There was also a movie planned.

McCloy?

Indeed. So Mr. Backes thought that Newman said that?

Seems to me the book has been in the works for years. I had an interaction with Mr. Jaffe when he was posting here in which his response to my question about who in French Intelligence was sharing info with him when Garrison sent him to France to research was ‘wait for the book’. That was literally years ago. Last time I sent him a message about when we would see the book I received no response. I agree with you that it would be of great interest. Did you see something indicating it was coming out soon?

Sorry my friend

And Solie above Angleton?

Did you read it?

I like this post Richard. I don’t buy your pet two Cubans theory, but the rest of it is spot on.

Isn’t it possible that McCord, and for that matter Solie, were acting as Soviet agents but at the behest of Angleton? Triple agents? Maybe there was no mole in the CIA, but it was useful for the CIA to let the Soviets think they were hunting for one. Robert isn’t posting - maybe he’s been kicked off again. Jim Asked him a question about Nosenko. After several years of torture by Angleton, Nosenko was cleared by the CIA. Meanwhile, Golitsyn was Angleton’s buddy, along with DiVosjoli. Pete Bagley as a trusted source? No way. Of course I think it’s fine to interview him or anyone else, but that’s not the question. I don’t hear Newman saying he was giving Bagley an ear, I’m hearing that he believed him. Meanwhile, no one, maybe not Newman, nor anyone else here (Jim D?) has read The Spy Who Would Be Tsar by Kevin Coogan. It’s available on Kindle. I’m reading it, and yes it’s a difficult read. So is Newman. Of course I will give Newman a fair hearing no matter what my impressions are of Nosenko/Golitsyn. Another book that I wish was on everyone’s radar is Secret War Against the Jews by John Loftus. Has anyone read about Kim Philby’s father? This is the book for you if you haven’t. It’s not difficult, and eye opening. Pondering Kim Philby and the Cambridge 5 made me look into Anthony Blunt, ostensibly one of them but he never left England. He came clean, was stripped of his titles but never jailed or excommunicated. In essence, he admitted to helping the Soviet Union during WW 2 because - hold on - the Nazi sympathizers in the British government were holding back info on German troop movements on the Eastern Front because they were siding with Hitler. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that Harriman, Prescott Bush, Allen Dulles, John J McCloy were conflicted in the same way. They had enormous financial interests in Germany which they sought to protect. After the war they took hold of American foreign policy, rebuilt Germany, barely punished the Nazis (compared to the USSR which put thousands of them to death) and went to war against the USSR. JFK tried to stop this. He failed.

Ditto

Mr. Metta, who wrote the recent book following up on Garrison’s investigation of Permindex, quotes an article in which an Italian journalist interviews Colonel Prouty. The Colonel never flat out says that Harriman was the puppet master behind the JFK assassination, but he does name him, and Prescott Bush, and Allen Dulles, Schroeder bank, calls the cabal something like supranational. He never mentions heroin, but the nice thing about your theory is that the military industrial complex and the worldwide drug trade both depend on the US Military and the CIA.

you have mentioned Weaver’s book before and left a review of it on Amazon in 2017. I tried to find a copy but as you noted it was very expensive if available at all. You didn’t mention your copy of his notes in the review, and I’ll presume you got them later. It would be nice if you made them available to researchers.

Do you have Weaver’s notes?

It is unclear whether the real motive of the planners of the assassination was to go after Castro, even though so many pieces were laid in place beforehand and activated immediately after. I’ve often said here that it wasn’t necessary to kill JFK if the motive was really Cuba, because an unsuccessful attempt to do so would suffice as long as the attempt pointed at Castro. This is why I think the real motive of the actual killing of the President was to further the deeper aims of the Military Industrial Complex which were a war in Vietnam and a continuation of US Cold War policies. I think it’s clear that JFK wanted to end the Cold War and seek a new Peace.

Eddy - I’m not expert enough to lay down details, but I’m pretty sure there was pushback. My reading of it is that LBJ, and his White House and Hoover clamped down on the conspiracy theories revolving around Oswald in MC, Castro, and nipped in the bud plans already in place to proceed with a military led Cuba invasion and possibly far worse, full on nuclear with the Soviets and Chinese, plans for which had been developed by the JCS and presented to JFK. That didn’t stop the conspirators in Mexico City, David Phillips/Winston Scott/DFS and others from continuing to provide reasons why LBJ should act against Cuba at least. So the way I read it, your last sentence underestimates the power of the Executive to put a stop to the aims of the clique that carried out the assassination.

Good work by Jeff. For me he answers some things satisfactorily, like the Liberty Lobby stuff from the early ‘90’s. I would encourage Jeff to write a sequel, and suggest he grapple with the part that Mr. Montenegro hammered home about Operation Bloodstone, and about his work in a very secretive part of the government. I’m too lazy at the moment to give exact info, but what I’m mostly interested in is whether Prouty knew far more than he ever revealed. Metta, in his follow on to Garrison, claims that Prouty named CMC and Harriman. According to a friend who translated the article written in Italian that Metta credits for that info, Prouty doesn’t actually come out and say that. The other most important issue is Lansdale. Was he in Dallas? Did Prouty actually point the finger at him? Someone at some time borrowed my first edition copy of The Secret Team. Does that book, or possibly another, name names?

Leslie - a reputable ink and paper analysis was already done - is that correct? I’m sure you’ve answered this question before, but if you don’t mind, could you explain why the results are not public? If a nda is hanging this up, does it have to do with Hank’s untimely passing?

Anyone reading or posting here besides Leslie should be assumed to have the worthy motive of authenticating what might be a hugely important document.

Thank you Pete. It’s his European sojourn I’m most curious about.

Sandy et al - what do we know about Win Scott prior to his coming to MC?

You all know I’m reading all this. I think the June Cobb story, wherever it leads, is a crucial one. All parties interested in this share a common purpose - to get at the truth. Which estate has control over the Albarelli/Cobb interviews? What can be done to bring them into the light? That question is not to be misunderstood as questioning Albarelli’s journalistic integrity. I for one do not for a second think that Hank made up his relationship with Cobb. Her life has been under a veil of secrecy, and Hank has done us all a service by finding her and befriending her under difficult circumstances.

Reading with interest and appreciation for both your efforts.

Interesting post. Not sure about the MJ12 story.

News flash to those that insult me - Kirk - I am a well informed citizen who finds your posts incomprehensible. I’m in good company there. You just enjoy tearing people down. Andrew - you don’t have a clue. Nothing you said is factual. william - I don’t need a lesson in the Republican bubble. I’m not confused or leaning rightward. The problem is the opposite. I’m far to the left in my political opinions than any of you. I’m hoping you will realize you are being manipulated. by fear of Trump into embracing corporate Military industrial media congressional complex fascism. Is it too much to ask that people fact check by listening to the man himself? The journalist I most respect in the world is clearly on his side. Talbot is an expert on the Kennedy family history, on CIA manipulations. He sees through all the crap you all apparently take as gospel. Kirk is grasping at straws when he tries to poke holes in Talbot’s truthful study of the Kennedy brothers.