Jump to content
The Education Forum

Benjamin Cole

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Benjamin Cole

  1. W- I handle most of your q's in Verily, a great deal of complicity after the fact---Sylvia Meagher's Accessories After the Fact-1967 still holds a lot of water. That's how obvious the post-JFKA cover-up was. Larry Hancock suggests the reason the post-JFKA cover-up was so obvious, mangled and crude is that there was, in fact, not much in the way of pre-JFKA planning. I defer to Hancock as a default position. That said, my take (different perhaps from Hancock's) is LHO was being run by the CIA, and they planned to use a witting LHO in a false-flag fake JFK assassination attempt. Ergo, the biography build on LHO. Cuban exiles piggybacked on the false-flag op, and made it real. Yes, the WC was a cover-up, and much that the CIA has done since in media, etc. The FBI destroyed and manufactured evidence (CE 399). This cover-up has allowed a mythology to build, that the JFKA itself must have been a very sophisticated operation. But a true and dreadnought investigation starting on Nov. 22 might have cracked the case within a few days. If LHO had lived, he might eventually have spilled the beans. As a basic premise, my take is that successful conspiracies, especially on the supremely explosive topic of assassinating a US president, require fewer, rather than many, participants. The versions of the JFKA requiring dozens of malicious and witting participants, high and low across many organization lines....well, for me, they just don't hold water. Think small!
  2. "No one has posted any evidence here debunking Prouty's "hypothesis" that Ed Lansdale was involved on some level in the JFK assassination op."--W. Not to belabor a point, but this comes close to "guilty until proven innocent." Here is a book: Mafia Kingfish: Carlos Marcello and the Assassination of John F. Kennedy by John H. Davis, c 1989. I just read this book, very readable. Free online, Internet Archives. Many connections between LHO, Ruby and Marcello, lots of documented bad blood between the Marcellos and Kennedys, and of course Mafia in bed with the CIA. Many eyewitnesses saw someone who looked liked LHO meeting with so-and-so, thus indicating a connection. David Ferrie was spending weekends at Marcello's manse before Nov. 22. That is sort of strange. What in the heck could the oddball eccentric gay Ferrie have in common with rich mobster Marcello? No one has debunked that Marcello was the animating force behind the JFKA. Was Marcello the animating force? I doubt it. But I can't debunk it either.
  3. OK, this is speculation, but here goes: DA Phillips concocts a false-flag but failed assassination attempt plan on the JFK, to be blamed on the leftie-loner-loser-commie LHO. Phillips cannot just do this, but needs tacit approval, unwritten etc., from above. He gets it. But then Angleton, or someone, plants a couple of very angry guys (Cubans) on Phillips false-flag team. Maybe even with no instructions, but a sense of what might happen. Ergo, LHO cooperates, expects to escape Dealey Plaza with help, but figures out JFK was shot for real and he is the de facto patsy, and goes AWOL. Even Phillips does not know what really happened. Maybe only the two guys know what really happened at the JFKA. The CIA concludes they have to eliminate LHO, but need plausible deniability, and hire the Mob. The CIA then spends decades scrubbing records and inventing false narratives, and, btw, destroying Garrison. Wrecking Richard Sprague, etc. That's my story I am sticking with it.
  4. Best of luck, Pat. You are a top researcher, devoted to finding real facts, and letting the chips fall where they may.
  5. W- I am on board that large parts of the M$M are CIA apparatchiks. At CNN they dispense with the charade, and just hire ex-CIA'ers directly and put them on the air. I also believe more than one gun was used to shoot at JFK and JBC that day, based upon research on primary materials. But really, you are convinced, beyond reasonable doubt, that the photo in question is Lansdale? Prouty implies the two Dallas police are fakes and in on the gag, by the "casual" way they are holding their weapons. Not much to go on, and yet that implies yet two more people who have information regarding the JFKA, and who have to be trusted to keep quiet. The "Lansdale" in the picture---he would walk around Dealey Plaza in the immediate aftermath of an presidential assassination he plotted? With cameras blinking everywhere? That is spycraft? "Lansdale" doesn't even doff a fedora (still worn back then) and sunglasses? A little brazen, no? If the three tramps were truly involved in the JFKA, and the two Dallas "cops" in on the gag, why parade the trio in public as suspects? Why not squeeze the three men into a car near the railroad cars-tracks and send them on their way? Other probable participants in the JFKA simply melted onto the crowds, such as the phoney "Secret Service agent" accosted by Dallas police officer Joe Smith and Dallas Sheriff Seymour Weitzman. Why parade tramps around in public? In ordinary civilian clothing, the "tramps" could have simply walked away from the scene, melted into the crowds. Nothing about this makes sense. If we applied such loose standards to LHO as are applied in the Lansdale Hypothesis, we would have LHO convicted and hung on the JFKA in two minutes.
  6. W.-- Larry H. is more than capable of presenting his arguments, so I am not here to defend him, although I hope we do not lose his participation in this forum as he will weary of explaining and then re-explaining his position. Yes, Prouty has been bad-mouthed online, probably by people with an agenda. On the other hand, is there any evidence to support his scenario below, or is it speculation? The "hit men" were from CIA overseas sources, for instance, from the "Camp near Athena, Greece. They are trained, stateless, and ready to go at any time. They ask no questions: speak to no one. They are simply told what to do, when and where. Then they are told how they will be removed and protected. After all, they work for the U.S. Government. The "Tramps" were actors doing the job of cover-up. The hit men are just pros. They do the job for the CIA anywhere. They are impersonal. They get paid. They get protected, and they have enough experience to "blackmail" anyone, if anyone ever turns on them...just like Drug agents. The job was clean, quick and neat. No ripples." OK, in this forum the evidence against LHO in the JFKA is parsed, debated and often refuted, often for good reason. But at least LHO is a person, who was in the TSBD on the day of the JFKA. What role that LHO played in the JFKA can be discussed, debated, parsed. But sheesh, we don't even have evidence or names to debate against the mysterious "hit men" from Greece. Or, in other scenarios, hit men associated with anti-Gaullists in France. At least with the anti-Gaullists we have the name Lucien Sarti, or possibly Jean Rene Marie Souetre, or Michel Victor Mertz. Mertz (or somebody) was supposedly deported from Dallas area in the aftermath of the JFKA, although the story is murky. In conclusion, what Prouty offers on stuff he knows about is very good, and informative. When it comes to the JFKA, what he is offers strikes me as speculation. If you applied the same strict standards to Prouty's explanations of the JFKA that you apply to the Lone Nut theory....you would say Prouty's explanations do not hold water, as there is no vessel to begin with. Prouty's amorphous JFKA explanation may be true, but how to begin to verify? Even a reasonable suspicion is not an explanation or a conviction.
  7. Dennis B.- Thanks for your comment. I am no expert on the Hiss affair and I will defer to you. Perhaps the author, Chris Collins, is in error in this matter. But in the larger picture. Collins paints a grim picture of a ubiquitous national security state, and that the mere existence of a such a large apparatus is problematic. As a "buff," I have been reading about the national security state since the 1960s, and I found his thesis is worthwhile read, even if I "knew most of the stuff" going in. His perspective is insightful.
  8. I think Larry Hancock takes the necessary, circumspect approach to the JFKA. We all desire an explanation of the JFKA, both detailed in operation, and larger, in terms of motives. When I offer an explanation of the JFKA, I state it is speculative. Lower-level anti-Castro Cubans piggybacked on a false-flag operation in Dallas. BTW, there were something like 2,000 guys being trained in the anti-Castro efforts in the early 1960s, and who felt crossed by JFK (due in part to post Bay of Pigs CIA narratives). If literally only one in a thousand of those guys decided to go to Dallas with lethal intent.... In this forum we generally apply a very high bar to "proving" LHO's involvement in the JFKA. He is treated as innocent until proven guilty, and then some. Then, depending on author, the bar is dropped to the floor on a Lansdale, a Dulles, an LBJ, an Angleton. Dulles went to a CIA Camp Perry facility on Nov. 22, so he is guilty. Prouty has interesting insights to the Deep State. But reading his account of "Lansdale" smirking with the tramps as he walks by based on a photo....leaves me uneasy. We see the back of someone's head in the photo. This begs the question of why Lansdale would be walking the streets near Dealey Plaza in the aftermath of a planned assassination he orchestrated....
  9. This is a completely readable and fascinating account of Watergate within the broader context of a national security state. Yes, a little OT in this forum, but germane for insights. Nixon’s Wars: Secrecy, Watergate, and the CIA https://encompass.eku.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1350&context=etd This is the bachelor's thesis of a fellow named Chris Collins, at Eastern Kentucky University, who thereafter became a squad leader in the US Army, judging from Linked In. That's all I know about him, but he appears to have written in a deep, but non-polemical style. This is just one of dozens of interesting insights from the thesis: "The program, called VENONA, was so secret that even President Truman was not fully informed of its existence.19 Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Omar Bradley made the decision to keep the program secret 16 Richard Nixon, Six Crises (Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1962), 13. 17 Ibid. 18 Ibid., 59. 19 Moynihan, Secrecy, 61-62. 14 from all other government agencies except for the FBI, as an internal FBI memo from October 1949 reveals. It stated that General Bradley would “personally assume the responsibility of advising the President or anyone else in authority if the contents of any of this material so demanded,” but that the FBI should “not handle the material in such a way that [CIA Director] Admiral [Roscoe] Hillenkoetter or anyone else outside the Army Security Agency and the Bureau are aware of the contents of these messages and the activity being conducted.”20 The VENONA intercepts had produced proof of Hiss’s espionage for the Soviet Union (and also Harry D. White’s), but due to the secrecy of the operation, it could not be made public...." OK, so the Army Security Agency was running intercepts, and keeping results secret from even the CIA, and possibly the President. Collins' larger observation is the national security state has become so pervasive, that it ends up as influential and playing a role in all sorts of events, such as Watergate, or Iran-Contra and so on. We tend to think about the CIA a lot in this forum, and we probably should. But there are 17 national intel agencies. John Newman is evidently taking a long look at other military intel. The VENONA project is a reminder that not everything has to run through the CIA, or possibly the NSA, thought it might on paper.
  10. OK, but here is my point: If one posits LHO participated in or alone perpetrated the shooting on 11/22, participants on this blog will shred the abundant circumstantial evidence that he was involved. We reason that no one saw LHO on the stairs down from the Sixth Floor in the aftermath of the shooting, ergo LHO is innocent and so on. We are to believe that LHO is a totally innocent patsy (although a CIA or military-intel asset) who draws a weapon upon being accosted by officers at the Texas Theater. (My own take is LHO willingly participated in a false flag fake assassination attempt, but others piggybacked on the op and made it real. My take is speculative, but fits the facts neatly). But then we flip, and if Lansdale or Dulles had a meeting somewhere, or were somewhere on an organizational chart, or were unlikable characters with sordid histories, then they must be guilty. Curtis E. LeMay (a loathsome sort) was at a retreat in Canada, ergo he planned that as a diversion. If he had been at HQ, we would say that proves he had advance knowledge. Angleton hid and destroyed papers, and so he is convicted. All of the aforementioned and many others have records that are lamentable, to put it mildly. All could have participated in the post-JFKA cover-up, and probably did. We have concrete evidence the CIA lied to the WC and the HSCA. I posit someone inside the CIA worked levers to have Ruby do what he did. But who actually ordered the hit on JFK? Very speculative. Larry Hancock and John Newman may be getting somewhere.
  11. I best serve society by laying on my couch and eating Cheetos.
  12. Largely agree, save for the "Americans don't want these jobs" sentiment. Look, no one wants to work at all. We would all like $5 million in the bank, and then to "work" producing movies or music, or art, or joining some worthy charity or starting a foundation, running a boutique or snazzy nightspot, etc. You don't see ex-Mrs Bill Gates driving a taxi as "she wants to work." I spent 20 years in the furniture-manufacturing business in L.A. If wages and conditions improve enough, Americans will take any job. In the old days, college students worked hard through summer, one reason there was a summer break. Declining real wages in America for the bottom half of the labor force is perhaps the biggest issue in America today, followed by exploding housing costs. You read the M$M, and you would think it is Afghanistan, or 9/11, or 1/6. Real wages and housing costs are about 100,000 times as important as those three topics put together.
  13. D.A.-- This brings up a quandary for the WaPo-NYT crowd. They are avid globalists, global-security state warriors. But they also cloth themselves daily in the anti-racist mantle. Yet, the WaPo-NYT crowd never defines US foreign-military policy as racist, or anti-black. Every other aspect of American society reflects structural racism, but not US foreign-military policy. Somehow spending a few trillion in Iraqistan and not Baltimore-Detroit is OK. In the next 10 years the US will spend $13 trillion on DoD-VA. Biden's $2 trillion infrastructure plan is described as "big" and so on. Millions of illegal immigrants (good people largely) vie for jobs against Americans, in the bottom half of the labor pool. Who are those Americans? Personally, I don't care to define people by their color, but if we are obsessed with ID politics then the brutal facts are illegal immigrants dilute the labor pool heavily for American-born Blacks and Hispanics. That is never a talking point at Wapo-NYT. Lately, the WaPo-NYT-MSM wants to conflate American populism (which is generally anti-globalist) with hillbilly racism, and even the 9/11 event. I grew up worshipping WaPo-NYT and great journalism. But something has changed.
  14. I always say vulgar Marxist diagnosis is right 90% of the time; unfortunately Marxist medicine is poison. Liz Cheney and George Bush Jr. are the new CNN heroes. Who does CNN really work for?
  15. But remember, a far, far more serious danger to our nation...was the 1/6 scrum. If what you say is true, one of the authors of the 9/11 demolition, former President Bush Jr., is now likening that event to 1/6. The M$M accepts this analogy.
  16. "But one's character and presence actually matters, and the fundaments just weren't there, and as an executive, the guy just couldn't string anything together."--Kirk This is largely true. It is also true the national security state went after him hammer & tong. Like I said, had the national security state coalesced around Trump early on to bring his anti-globalist views to fruition ( as was their legal obligation), and protect his flanks along the way, he might have succeeded. Instead we had the Russiagate farce, and lies to the Commander-in-Chief about how many troops were where. For starters. Interesting parallel from cinema: Captain Quigg (Bogart). He was a terrible captain. But had the staff bolstered Quigg and worked with him, it would have improved outcomes. Instead Fred MacMurray operated to undermine Quigg, worsening matters. Anyway, the national security and the globalists are bigger than ever. Trump will soon retreat into a lugubrious section of history books.
  17. Dennis B- You ask tough questions. My answer is, there was a lot of complicity but after the fact. The CIA simply could not have the true story revealed, that even low-level CIA assets had done the JFKA. Or that the CIA set up a false flag op to conduct a fake but unsuccessful assassination of the President, that somehow became real. After the fact, the "we must avoid a nuclear war" meme took hold, as did "only lefty-loser-commies would defend LHO, or plant other stories" meme. Mark Lane was treated like dirt, and could not even get his work published in the US. The FBI build the case, including fabricating evidence, against LHO "for the national good," and the WC tagged along. Everybody felt the pressure. Kenneth O'Donnell worked for JFK, was a JFK loyalist, and rode in the car behind JFK on No. 22. O'Donnell told the Warren Commission that the shooting had come from the rear. He later told his friend, Tip O'Neill, that he had been under pressure from the Federal Bureau of Investigation to say this. In fact, he believed that the gunfire had come from in front of the motorcade. O'Donnell commented: "I told the FBI what I had heard, but they said it couldn't have happened that way and that I must have been imagining things. So I testified the way they wanted me to. I just didn't want to stir up any more pain and trouble for the family." This story was backed up by David F. Powers, who was sitting next to O'Donnell in the motorcade. I tend to favor JFKA explanations that involve a very limited number of participants, as in five or less. Some explanations have pre-JFKA participation by dozens, across organizational lines, including Secret Service, Joint Chiefs, CIA, Army intel, Dallas Police Department, and FBI. This suggests that the world's premier spy agency (CIA) had involved itself in a plan with dozens of participants, in several "leaky" agencies, to assassinate the US President. Well, maybe. But the odds get longer and longer against such a plan, the more pre-JFKA participants are involved.
  18. Here is something to remember: There must be hundreds, maybe more than a thousand, thinks tanks, centers, foundations, academic organizations, media outlets, congressional committees, federal agencies all devoted to globalism. Is there even one "anti-globalist' think tank out there? If you know of one, tell me, and I will subscribe to whatever publications they produce. I do not mean "anti-globalist" in the sense of being xenophobic. I like people, anybody. I mean in the sense that the US should mind its own business, quarter troops on US soil for defense of homeland, and trade relations should benefit the American middle-employee class. I cannot think of a single organization devoted to such ideals. Trump talked some along these lines, and was quickly annihilated. Trump was also loathsome for many other reasons, and good riddance. But he was annihilated for his anti-globalism.
  19. You misunderstand the point of what I am saying. Just as Nixon was loathsome, so was Trump. But, Axios reports that had the global security state supported and worked with Trump to get out of Afghanistan, the US would have been out under the Trump watch. And from Syria. But instead the global security state undermined Trump, and planted endless stories against him in the compliant media. And we have reached a point of institutionalized insanity that when a US president say he want to get troops out of Country X, he is painted as a lunatic or wildly irresponsible. See Biden at present. Here is the point: Hopefully, Trump is gone. The global security state persists. What the global security state did against Trump should be recognized---they will do the same thing against any President who crosses them. See Biden at present.
  20. Yes, I have now read the piece. Certainly interesting, although some expressions like "they are going to kill him" might just refer to politics, vicious op-eds and ads, hostile crowds, thrown eggs, that sort of thing. Actually, Morales playing a role in the JFKA fits with my idea that the JFKA was planned and executed on a lower level, even by CIA assets, but that the CIA and others had to spend the the next decades burying the truth, and that was "our own guys did it." This also raises the unseemly specter that the CIA worked levers to have Ruby do what he did. One still has to explain the CIA biography build of LHO, and what LHO was doing in the TSBD. That is not something Morales could pull off. And as I have said, to make LHO the patsy you have to make sure he is not down on the street waving hello at JFK. I will send you a PM also.
  21. Oh, egads. And the timing of this "book" suggests it yet another effort to essentially undercut the idea that full release of the records under the JFK Act is necessary. And what is it with the Daily Beast? They are publishing Max Holland? Why not just post the CIA escutcheon on the Daily Beast website?
  22. https://www.axios.com/off-the-rails-trump-military-withdraw-afghanistan-5717012a-d55d-4819-a79f-805d5eb3c6e2.html It is interesting what is attains gospel status both in the M$M, and then also in the political tribes and offshoots. And then what is ridiculed. The above link suggests Trump in fact tried to pull US troops out of several regions, and was simply overruled by the Pentagon-"Deep State," and no one in the media gave a hoot. This was not a story to gain traction. Really, the above link is not about whether you like Trump or not, or think he staged a coup attempt on Jan. 6, or how bad his hairdo was. Trump was mercurial, and not steady. What this is really about a US President giving a legal order, and the military wing of executive branch not carrying out the order. Decades ago, Nixon ordered the CIA to give him the Bay of Pigs files. They never did. I am not fan of Nixon, but do you prefer a government in which the military-intel services unilaterally decide what orders they will follow? But Trump is a no go in the M$M media and triggers loss of bowel control for self-styled social justice warriors. But---Trump was right on getting troops out of the Mideast, right on the Wuhan lab, right on the need for border security, right on the CCP-China trade issue. All of that was "wrong" in the lights of US elites-media, who want access to cheap labor at home and abroad and a global military.
  23. LH- I live overseas now and getting paper copies of books very difficult. But I will attempt to to re-read SWHT anyway, by hook or crook. Thanks again for all the serious work you have done on the JFKA.
  24. Well, I will have to go back and re-read the excellent Tipping Point again. For some reason I am dubious about Martino, but I forget why. It may be because first he was a state asset trying to blame Castro for the JFKA, and then he partially revealed the "real" plan which did not involve anyone by name in the CIA. And no clear discussions about how the CIA and others played an obfuscating role post-JFKA----and this may be the most important point. In other words, perhaps Martino was always in PR for the CIA, and that's about it. People who say they played a tangential role in the still-mysterious JFKA are always off-putting on some level (think E Howard Hunt) or that they have super-duper secret inside info, but are keeping it locked away (Richard Nagell). But that does not detract from the excellent and sustained work of Larry Hancock.
  25. I have to agree with Larry H. here, and in a small way I have been guilty as charged. My "plausible scenario" of a very small false flag op gone wrong mentions some real names---David Atlee Phillips, Eladio Del Valle and Hermininio Diaz---but I can prove nothing about them being in Dallas that day. (Witness Amos Lee Euins contemporarily ID'ed a gunman who looked like Eladio, in that he was bald, but that hardly cinches the deal. Antonio Veciana claimed to met LHO in the company of Phillips, and who knows if true?). That is the problem with these speculative scenarios. They are all possible. Dulles, Lansdale, or LBJ, or Marcello, or lower-level Cubans. I worry that John Newman is going to do a version of looking for keys at night under the light pole, as many of us do. That is, Newman is researching in Operation Gladio or something like that and will see clues, and then add them up. But we do not see the clues we do not see. The keys may be in the dark somewhere. One thing seems true, and that is the CIA was biography-building on LHO. That suggests CIA had an operational interest in LHO, and planned to use him somehow. My guess is a false flag op, Operation Northwoods style, to possibly trigger a war with Cuba. A false-flag but failed JFKA. But mine is just a guess. Lansdale? Maybe. Dulles? Maybe. LBJ? Maybe.
  • Create New...