W. Tracy Parnell

Please do enlighten us.

Joannides either chose not to file reports (as suggested to Morley by Harrelson) because of the diminishing influence of the DRE, or the reports are missing. We know this because Joannides was not disciplined for failing to file reports. So, either they were ok with him not doing so in this instance or the reports were filed and are now missing along with other materials. No reason to believe there was anything nefarious. Except if you're Morley.

The Bishop Hoax ~ W. Tracy Parnell (wtracyparnell.blogspot.com)

The CIA certainly knew that Joannides was the case officer for the DRE in 1963. And it is true they did not volunteer this information as it is normal policy for them to not give things away. But Morley has no valid reason to doubt the CIA’s assertion that they searched for “Howard” in their databases and found no record of him. DRE men that Morley interviewed stated that Joannides was “Howard.” Their statements are the only verification of this “fact.” Even the MFF only lists Joannides as “Howard” as being “probable.” There was a Howard Brubaker on the Cuban operations staff at the time. So, the possibility exists that he was “Howard” and acted as a go-between for Joannides and the DRE. The DRE men never saw the photo of Joannides until years and years later so they could be mistaken. But even if Joannides was “Howard” the CIA researchers (Harrelson) would not necessarily know. Joannides registered pseudonym was “Newby” not “Howard.” So, if he used “Howard” it was an informal alias and not necessarily known by headquarters. David Phillips testified that he had used as many as 100 of these in his career and they certainly were undocumented. As for the monthly DRE progress reports that Morley believes are “missing” he has no reason to believe that the CIA did not do a thorough search for the records as they stated. He also has no legitimate reason to believe that the CIA is withholding the reports for some nefarious purpose. The case officer before Joannides filed monthly reports as apparently did the one after Joannides. However, it could be that Joannides chose to not file monthly reports for whatever reason. Note that Joannides was not chastised for poor reporting on his performance records. It could also be that the reports are missing as are many other records related to the JFK case. It is unreasonable to assume the worst automatically as Morley always does when it comes to the CIA.

Many theorists think Oswald was a full-fledged agent of some intelligence service. What you are suggesting is certainly more believable but still wrong IMO.

I think he would have confessed to avoid the death penalty (given that option). He could always recant later ala James Earl Ray.

When will you be contacting the media to let them know? I hear Morley can get you a good rate at the National Press Club.

Right. I said essentially the same thing in a blog post but you said it better: The Assassination and Mrs. Paine-LHO Would Have Admitted Guilt? ~ W. Tracy Parnell (wtracyparnell.blogspot.com)

Nice to see you posting here Lance. I am always amazed that anyone still believes Oswald was an agent of some kind. All you have to do is look at the life of one of the top spys of the Cold War period, David Phillips, to see that this is nonsense. Phillips always had a plausible cover. In Cuba, he was running an advertising agency. In Santiago, he was a newspaper publisher (which he was legitimately been before the CIA hired him). But at all times, he had a house, a car, and proper health care for himself and his family. Nobody works for the CIA or FBI for free and there is no evidence Oswald ever had any money.

Morley Meets Glen Beck ~ W. Tracy Parnell (wtracyparnell.blogspot.com)

Yes, that is what he says. But note that Tunheim said nothing about having a partial file. My impression is that Tunheim doesn't remember. But Morley says Combs was a former CIA person who knew the system, so you would think her review of the files would be thorough. Anyway, I hope the files are released promptly. We'll see.

Everything should be made public as long as it won't harm national security or endanger informants or still used methods of intelligence gathering.

That's actually a terrible article full of inaccurate statements. I don't have time to go through it there are so many.

The latest is this. Morley is claiming on Twitter that the ARRB did not see the entire Joannides file. In support of this idea, he posts a link to a letter from Tunheim to Biden: Tunheim_PresBiden_JFKFiles_2022-12-05.pdf (maryferrell.org) However, Tunheim says nothing about having a partial Joannides file. He does say "we had the file on George Joannides..." He also says that the board "would have released the file in full" had they known who Joannides. To me, this implies they had the full file. But, admittedly, there is some ambiguity. Morley also says there is a mechinism in place for the release of the 44 Joannides files even though they are not a part of the JFK Collection. This is a "Memorandum of Understanding" that allows for files to be placed in the JFK Collection after the ARRB ceased to exist. But as far as I can see, this would have to be done by Biden who would have to hear the pleas of Morley and Tunheim and specifically act to place those records in the collection and release them. I will update my article to reflect this.

A short tribute: A Tribute to David Lifton ~ W. Tracy Parnell (wtracyparnell.blogspot.com) See also: David Lifton (1939-2022), R.I.P. (onthetrailofdelusion.com)

Point taken, but right now it should be about remembering the man who was undoubtedly a great writer and researcher.

The complete Joannides file should probably have been declared a JFK record-I agree.

Well said David. A remarkable writer and researcher.

It is my understanding that the ARRB looked at the complete file. You are correct that the available files do not refer to the DRE specifically. You may be correct that the files would have been included in this information was there. But, in any case, I believe the full file was reviewed and was very general as are the files that are available. I don't believe they would have any specific information such as the type Morley thinks they do regarding wiretaps and so on. But I am still working to clarify what the ARRB saw if possible.

I am working on this now.

This will answer the questions Denis and others may have I believe: Morley Disinfo Leads to Misleading Media Reports ~ W. Tracy Parnell (wtracyparnell.blogspot.com)

No, I don't see the connection either and know of no proof that "special intelligence" always refers to wiretaps in CIA documentation which is what Morley claims (but does not prove). I know of nothing that shows Joannides had any specialty in wiretaps.

If I understand his argument correctly, he is saying not that Joannides was brought to MC but that he was made privy to the wiretaps. This doesn't really make that much sense either since they already had Phillips, Scott and others to look at those.

The document is one that Morley posted in this article: Yes, There Is a JFK Smoking Gun - by Jefferson Morley (substack.com) I watched the whole presentation carefully. This has to be the document as nothing was said about a forthcoming document or anything. Morley has said he has witnesses, but you know all about witnesses. The doc merely says that Joannides was cleared for "special intelligence." Morley's theory stems from this and he says that the 44 Joannides docs will confirm it. All I can say is he must be a medium of some sort to know what is in files he hasn't seen. I am working on an article about this.

I do know this Cory. He can't possibly know what documents say that he hasn't seen (44 Joannides docs that are unreleased).