Jeffrey Reilley

Just a question, but do you think there is a big difference between anyone at that level of the game? It just seems to me that anyone able to reach the highest levels of government have been tainted so long that there really isn't that big of a difference in anyone. Clintons and the Trumps go to the same parties and seem cordial, but on television you'd think that they've had a blood feud for three generations.

3 bullets left on a windowsill overlooking where Carter was giving that speech, if I recall correctly.

I've been reading this non-stop since I saw this

Thank you so much for sharing!!!

Just an "as I go" comment on this reading: I find it interesting that Chief of Station, I think Devlin(off memory) had heard nothing about assassinating Lumumba in late July of 60'. Lumumba was assassinated what, 3 days before Kennedy's inauguration? So, I take that as the ones giving orders were banking on Nixon winning, and when Kennedy started to pull away, panic mode was instilled. They realized that the status quo may have been in jeopardy

This reminds me of the scene in Goonies, when Chunk is being questioned by the antagonists. Just talking, talking, talking...

Mr. Santos, First off, great post. Second, when and where do you give lectures? I would gladly attend. Thirdly, I have never heard this. Please enlighten. I will pay if I must.

Not sure if this will help, but I am intrigued and reading currently. Try to find some other relevant stuff as well.

I don't understand this statement. Not saying I disagree at all, but why kill him if he hadn't ascended to power? I'm of the belief that if Nixon had won, the good ole' boys would have been running the show, they would have had the chance to have their own little war in Cuba, and the status quo would have gone on undeterred. I believe once Kennedy won the election, the truly powerful people of the country went into a sort of "panic mode" and did everything they could to undermine or sabotage his presidency. When everything failed and it looked like Kennedy was going to win again the next year, "panic mode" went into desperation, which leads to hastily made assassination.

I forgot all about. Good call.

If my two brothers were assassinated the way they were and at the times they were, and then Chappaquiddick happened to me, two things would happen in my mind: 1. Any doubt I may have had about my brothers' murders would be gone. 2. I would worry about myself and the rest of my family and would never speak of it again.

4th paragraph, "To me, he is a sensationalist". About sums everything up right there. I hate that language being used when discrediting anything. To me, it sounds like mere opinion."To me, Geraldo Rivera is a sensationalist. His staff does not take time to confirm witnesses' stories. His research consultants' veracity is usually unquestioned. The search for documentation is superficial. Opinions pass as facts." I didn't go with the exact quote before, sorry. But I really cannot stand when people do that. "

How do you feel about Ted Shackley?

I like this post. Thank you. I've always believed it had to be people that were: A: Experienced- Nobody could have just lucked into such a successful operation as their first attempt, nor would any person capable of pulling off such a feat be willing to swing so big on their first attempt. B: Capable- Someone with the ability to get others to go along with the "plan". Not getting people directly involved, but to stand-down at the least...i.e. Hoover, JCS, Warren Commission. A person(s) capable of convincing others that there was no other way. Whether it be because of a possible WWIII scenario or an end to proper democracy because of some weird liberal takeover, the person(s) had to have the ability to reach those in power and convince those in power to either lend a hand or at the least turn a blind eye. C: Willing- The person(s) had to be willing to deal with the consequences. Whether it be a land war with Cuba where a few thousand Americans and a percentage of the population of Cuba died, or reversing Kennedy's withdrawal plan in Southeast Asia and dealing with the fact that thousands of Americans would die and...what, a couple million Vietnamese deaths would ensue, the person(s) had to be willing to let this happen. D: Arrogant- The person(s) had to believe they would not be challenged, caught, or punished. The person(s) had to believe they were the smartest in the room at any given time. Good lawd, they were taking down POTUS, for cryin' out loud. That in and of itself screams arrogance...or desperation. Who had experience taking down governments? Dulles oversaw the overthrow of Guatemala, right? Others involved in that endeavor were Phillips, Hunt, Shackley, and so on...Why did they do it? Commies running loose through the streets having wild orgies and burning American flags? Or was it some rich old cronies not happy about a new leader trying to add prosperity to impoverished people? How were they so successful? Manipulation of the air waves, and making the people believe they were about to be overrun...controlling the media. Who were in charge of that aspect, Hunt and Shackley(I think). Dulles was retired after BOP, but Hunt was busy helping him with his memoir, if memory serves correct, in 1963. Phillips was apparently setting Oswald up for patsy time and in Mexico City, and Shackley was running JMWAVE. As well, Shackley was very close to Mr. Harvey, who I wouldn't put it past to use an Italian rifle as a little signature on his part. Phillips went on to whack the Chilean guy, Shackley decided the heroin business and mass killings in Southeast Asia were his thing, Dulles decided to get real old, but not before being a part of the Warren Commission, and Hunt, once he became a malcontent was put in prison and his wife was in a well timed aircraft accident. KGB, no matter what.

Ted Shackley

Excellent photos. Thank you for sharing!

That would be the longest "long game" scenario ever. If someone thought and acted on the thought that that would be the ultimate outcome of knocking off JFK, then that person was wasting an awful lot of talent and potential.

Wasn't Plausible Denial the cool thing of the time? It would make sense if a government agency outsourced a plot, which they had been doing with their plots to take out Castro, and used it to assassinate the president.

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/180-10147-10164.pdf Some good quality reading. Surprising how similar his story is to many others involved in this saga...getting in a fist fight over being pro-Castro the summer of 63 for instance.

Mr. Trejo, I agree that Veciana was solely after Fidel. I don't believe you would find many that disagree with that. I have not read much that suggests a finger should be pointed towards him in relation to JFK's murder. However, if DAP, Veciana, and LHO were all on board this train of "let's go get Fidel", how exactly would the Dallas right-wingers be privy to the sensitive operation that was taking place? I mean, Veciana was with Frank Sturgis within two weeks of seeing DAP with LHO, which to me seems like a lot of big hitters in this saga going after the same goal: killing Fidel, not JFK. Who then would have the ability to set them all up, to the point that they would bury their own guy(Oswald) to save their own face? Although I make it a point to never underestimate my enemies, I find it hard to believe that ex-general Walker and the people of his ilk had that ability. In DAP's novel, didn't he have it so Oswald took the plan for taking out Fidel and use it for killing JFK? Although a work of fiction, in the real world would there not be people above DAP that would have been in the proverbial loop as to what those plans were? Would they not have the means, motive, and opportunity to hijack said plans? I am relatively new to this subject, so I may be completely off direction wise. I am but a golf ball whacker guy who likes to read. Have a great day! -Jeff

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/124-10280-10004.pdf Mr. Veciana was getting around in the summer of 63. August 24th in Orlando meeting with Frank Sturgis. A week or two later meeting with DAP in Dallas and seeing Oswald.

An interesting release, if for no other reason but to reinforce the fact that Texas oil had a lot of business interest in Cuba: https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/124-10200-10184.pdf The checks were backed by Francisco Sugar Company in the days leading up to Batista's ousting, a company that had merged with King Ranch in Texas, which had previously merged with Humble Oil.

Thank you for posting this. I tend to be lazy, and you posting this makes it much easier for me. I do appreciate it.

Mr. Josephs, I was mistaken. It had been a couple of months and my memory is somewhat akin to swiss cheese, so please excuse my error. This is the reference that I had recalled, which you had nothing to do with. I want to know if we can find more info on Lopez's movements in the months leading to the assassination. Maybe not as well guarded?