Mervyn Hagger

Larry, I will gladly buy your book/s relating to the man with the radio. I bought 'Shadow Warrior' and that directed me to follow the trail of the 'Olga Patricia'. Please provide the title and date of publication and I will find and buy a copy.

That is McLendon, not McClendon. That is a mistake that keeps cropping up.

Here is the video link:

Well, all of the above has so far met with silence, so let me make it perfectly clear what I am saying: There is a 1966 hearsay statement published by The New York Times which is attributable to ears that belong to an unnamed source on an unnamed date about President Kennedy saying that he would smash the CIA for its part in the Bay of Pigs. I am saying that this so-called quotation is a lie. There is 1962 news film footage of President Kennedy speaking in front of a stadium of ex-pat Cuban supporters of the Bay of Pigs invasion, and the same President Kennedy flanked by the ransomed (from Cuba by Kennedy's friends of) Dr Manuel Artime Buesa, and Kennedy is holding in his hands the flag of the Brigade of the ex-pat Cubans who invaded Cuba at the Bay of Pigs. So who do you believe? The New York Times of 1966 with a made-up story, or the 1962 film of JFK telling thousands in person that he supported the invading ex-pat Cubans? Then there is JFK's brother Bobby in DC running the Special Group (Augmented) and their big spin-off CIA base in South Miami who are still raiding Cuba. Bobby, like Hillary worked for Senator Joe McCarthy, who spoke like Billy Graham ("Communism is Satanism") and was funded by Clint Murchison the pal of Gordon McLendon who ran KLIF, the station wrapped around the antics of Jack Ruby. If the simplest explanation is usually the correct explanation, that title does not belong to the convoluted 'Warren Report', nor The New York Times, it belongs to facts you can read, see and hear for yourself. The people who believe in the 'magic bullet' are the people who drag in the Vietnam War to misdirect with the antics of LBJ. Face facts: JFK and his brother Bobby were in the same boat as Joe McCarthy. Where things went wrong was in allowing in the Mafia to carry out the assassination of Fidel Castro, and Bobby has already made the Mafia his enemy. So the Mafia took out Bobby after getting rid of JFK. Since the people running the show in Dallas and Houston were oil men, and they also had a beef with JFK, the intervention of the Mafia killed two birds with one stone, as "they" say. What is not true is that unfounded statement from 1966 that is attributed to The New York Times.

So here's JFK at Parkland with a big chunk of his brain missing, and here's Gene McDaniels singing over 50,000 watts of power KLIF " Once I could have said goodbye but that was at the start - Now I think I'd rather die than be the one to say, we'll part" while laughable news unit "4" (the others in sequence did not exist), and following a pimple commercial, was able to give listeners a description of the murder suspect and murder weapon, and murder location, but not yet being able to say for certain who is alive and who is dead. McLendon, Murchison and Thompson had a rather weird and sick sense of humor. You should watch his movie in which both McLendon and his buddy Thompson act (very badly), which makes me wonder if the words sung by McDaniels = "I'd rather die than be the one to say, we'll part" - are the vicarious words that JFK was supposed to have sung if he was capable of doing so with a destroyed chunk of brain mass. That's what was broadcast and the man in charge of that broadcast was Gordon McLendon who called himself "The Old Scotchman" - as in booze, and not as in ethnic origin. But then JFK never said anything about "smashing the CIA", but he did promise to put the 'Bay of Pigs' Brigade banner on a pole flying over Havana while his brother was running the military arm of the anti-Castro CIA operation in Miami. What XXXXX these Kennedys were, just like 'Uncle Joe' and his son today.

Years ago (1956), I took an interest in Allan Freed who broadcast from WINS in New York and was heard in England via transcription over Radio Luxembourg. My interest centered around freedom of the USA airwaves versus censorship on the UK airwaves. In 1960 I became interested in a USA-driven phenomenon known as offshore 'pirate' radio. In 1970 I set out to meet the Texas founder of the UK offshore stations Radios London, England and Britain, which the UK put out of business and the BBC tried to mimic. They were primarily funded by an American monologue polemical broadcast ('The World Tomorrow'). In 1985 I inherited the legal and foundational documents of Don Pierson who created those ship-based stations. In 2000 I began writing a series of academic monographs based upon my interests in offshore broadcasting. A friend in Norway took a legacy interest in a former Pierson radio ship called Olga Patricia and this eventually led in 2015 to this forum - after I inherited the original manuscripts of Charles William (Bill) Weaver. Who was Mr. Weaver? He was the man who brought the Beatles to KILT in Houston, and he was also manager of sales for the Gordon McLendon group of radio stations which included the 'pirate' radio ship 'Bon Jour' ('Mi Amigo') called 'Radio Nord', anchored in the Baltic and pretending, for about a year, to broadcast pop music to Sweden. Its signal also radiated over the countries dominated by the USSR and into Minsk where Lee Harvey Oswald was working. Weaver claimed that it was really a CIA station. Meanwhile, my friend's interest in the 'Olga Patricia' led me to the writings of Larry Hancock, and from Larry to the Special Group (Augmented) managed by Robert F. Kennedy, and the CIA offshoot in South Miami which had control of the 'Olga Patricia' and its association with Dr. Manuel Artime Buesa who had a company called 'BAM'. My Pierson documents included paperwork for the 'Olga Patricia' that led directly to the Miami bank used by 'BAM', and declassified CIA documents also told me more about the 'Olga Patricia'. Then I discovered that the infamous JFK quotation about "smashing the CIA into a thousands pieces" dates from 1966 hearsay. It is bogus, and that explains why in 1962, JFK was in a Miami stadium to welcome home the ransomed (from Castro's Cuba), Manuel Artime. JFK then told the enormous crowd that the 'Bay of Pigs' Brigade flag which he held in his hand, would one day fly over a "free Havana". Meanwhile, his brother Robert was using the Cuban ex-pats and Manuel Artime to raid Cuba using ships such as the 'Olga Patricia'. Bill Weaver wrote a series of manuscripts (which I have) then named Gordon McLendon and his buddy Clint Murchison as part of the core conspiracy to murder JFK in Dallas in 1963, and McLendon's KLIF station is a big part of the story of how Jack Ruby came to kill Lee Harvey Oswald. Bill Weaver died and someone published an absurd version of his book (under his name) that made a mockery of Weaver's claim that all JFK roads of assassination lead to the grave of Gordon McLendon. So instead of tackling this story from the School Book Depository in Dallas and outwards to Mrs Paine and Mr de Mohrenschildt, I have been following a trail created by Don Pierson of Eastland, Texas to the door of Gordon McLendon in Dallas, Texas via Wichita Falls, Texas and several other locations in the Lone Star State including Houston and Galveston. The thing about ships is that they cannot speak for themselves because they are man-made creations, but they do have birth certificates and 'graduation' documentation to show what they have been up to. In the end (in the 1970s), the 'Olga Patricia' was seized by the US Justice Department after being arrested In Rem in US waters with a flip-board of ship names on its bow. That was after Fidel Castro had denounced it over Radio Havana Cuba as a CIA spy ship and raider that was still shooting and killing Cubans. After years of research a trio of which I am a member is ready to start publishing our findings in book form. First in the UK later this year, and next year in the USA. Misdirection has been continuous ever since we began this investigation, and it seems that Bill Weaver stumbled on to the real storyline that connects many of the dots that even turns Don Pierson into another 'patsy' when his movements and that of the 'Olga Patricia' took him to Haiti where both de Mohrenschildt and Clint Murchison as one of another 'trio' of friends with Gordon McLendon, had already been operating. There are so many loose ends out there that have surfaced, but apart from our tiny 'trio', no one else has been looking into them. However, there is a possibility that someone who reads these words has some seemingly isolated bit of information relating the BAM, Miami or the Special Group (Augmented), that may be of help. It is plain as day to me that JFK never gave up on the idea of invading Cuba (Mongoose), that Bobby Kennedy who thought he was being clever in running a faction of CIA from Miami, was himself just another 'patsy', and that the seemingly complicated riddle is not so complicated after all because this story begins and ends in Texas and its twin cities of Houston (oil) and Dallas (communications). I might add that Larry Hancock's own published works have been of great help in steering our own investigation in the direction it has taken. Listening on YouTube to the rather 'sick' humor of the KLIF aircheck made at the time of the JFK shooting, is interesting itself. I am not suggesting that the dj understood the relevance of the first two records overlapping the initial shooting, but if indeed McLendon and his buddies knew in advance that JFK was about to die, then the lyrics of those two songs back-to-back with continuing commercials in between the records and assassination bulletins, might have had McLendon and his buddies roaring their heads off with laughter, just as Jack was having his head blown off amidst gasps of horror from Jackie.

Thank you Leslie.

What was the verdict?

This book was first published in 1968 in Europe with supposedly the initial guiding influence of Bobby Kennedy. Have you read this book and the Ramparts introduction? What is your opinion of its text - notwithstanding that it was published in 1968 - long before JFK documents began to be released.

There is a 'strange' acre of land near Runnymede, England, that was supposedly given to the USA which has a JFK monument on it. The site was dedicated by the Queen with Jackie, Caroline and Bobby in attendance during 1965. An MP asked in the House of Commons whether this land has the status of 'Embassy land', and was told "No". There was no other elaboration, just "no". So if this one acre is USA "territory", what is its status in international law?

Has anyone read 'Farewell America' written using the author name of James Hepburn?

I have just watched this Hoover Institute interview with Paul Gregory regarding his book about the 'Oswalds'. The father of Paul Gregory spoke fluent Russian, was in the oil industry in Fort Worth, and in the year 1962 he came to know both of the Oswalds in connection with a Russian language group meeting at Fort Worth Public Library and a Dallas Group of Russian speakers who did not get on with the FW group. My interest begins in 1963 with another group - a class - at UTA led by a US Army instructor, James D. Wilmeth. He has connections to the Oswalds very shortly before the assassination. Strange enough, the book by Gregory does not mention Wilmeth and his UTA class and vice versa. Yet the Wilmeth group at UTA has FW Star-Telegram coverage which Gregory cites as having alerted him to the return of LHO from the USSR to Texas. Any sensible comments about this? I mean, anything documented that is not part of a story cited without references by someone else, somewhere else. During 1962, Gregory in FW with a group in Dallas are all interested in LHO because of the Russian language, and the book by Gregory has just been published, why is there no mention of James D. Wilmeth and UTA in 1963, and how come the FW Star Telegram and Wilmeth don't mention the 1962 interests of Gregory in FW and the rival Dallas group in the Russian language?

I have just watched a Hoover Institute interview with the author of this book: 'The Oswalds: An Untold Account of Marina and Lee by Paul R. Gregory - comments please?

James, when videos appear in place of text that have one message alone, and that is to proclaim "xxxx" - I ignore them until others join in and totally ignore what I have written and begin to chant like parrots. Then I draw the line. I have seen that kind of behavior elsewhere. It is not informative nor helpful. Two people on this Forum have been extremely helpful, one is Larry Hancock and the other one is Gary Murr (who Larry also cited as his source of information.) As a result, the nonsense spewed by the noisy I have ignored, until now, but because it is obvious that Larry and Gary seem to be someone unique, I am pulling back from further contributions at this time.

I can see that you are drowning in your own words. Goodbye Cliff. I will now ignore you.

Chris, I am not interested into petty disputes - take them somewhere else - but I am interested in reading the words of people like Larry Hancock (whose work I have purchased), and from Gary Murr who also contributes here and who I am in contact with by email. It is the same old partisan rubbish that bores me. Gary has assisted Larry and Gary is a true research specialist and not a blogger per se. His specialized interest happened to overlap my interest and his research into firearms and bullets seems to me to be quite exceptional and thorough. But that is not the subject that brought me here. That subject is ships, and you do not seem to have any interest in that topic.

Chris, clearly you intend to also side with personal attacks rather than respond to issues. As for Mark Lane, I have explained many times how I got here, meaning to this Forum, and how Larry Hancock and Gary Murr have been of great help. But as for this petty, silly, childish, anti-Trump and pro-Kennedy nonsense that seems to have control of many on this Forum, I want nothing to do with it. It is all very stupid and it certainly is not educational or informative. It seems to me that going around and around in silly circles repeating the same old crap over and over and over again is all that many on this Forum can contribute. Count me out of that and if you don't like my enquiries, then just ignore anything to do with me.

If you are self-applying that tag, that is your responsibility. I am referring to the people who think that they are smart in responding with videos, etc.

To that list add 'Big Ignorance' within cultism, and the Kennedy adoration tribe is a cult. A dangerous cult because ignorance is very dangerous indeed.

Paul, do yourself a favor and quit the Kennedy cult which is when people with closed minds turn to personal attacks.

When lack of personal research leads to personal confrontation with all that is held near and dear, the cultists - the religious cultists - for that is what they are - stream out of the woodwork with YouTube comments and backhanded remarks. The solution is personal investigative research through reading, but cultists are cozy in their delusions and do not want to be challenged. The only way to deal with them is to ignore them. So I do.

Greg, I read all of your text and I fully appreciate the point you are making. However, and leaving aside the specifics of Reagan for the moment, since his appearance happened in a different time period on a new stage, the fact of the matter is that the people on that stage (Reagan being a good example since he was first a theatrical actor and a body-voice in TV commercials); behind his movies, and behind the commercials were accountants, and behind the accountants were managers, and behind the managers were investors engaged in business plans involving money. Big money. Beginning with the rigged ballots and that first election of LBJ, was the shadowy but flamboyant 'Duke of Duval' in South Texas, and behind him were the guys who came together and huddled in a Houston hotel suite. They drew their numbers from that central geographical hub which included Galveston and Dallas and several points in-between. Here was the money, and the main driving force behind the money was the quest for oil. Showing off their 'good ol boy culture' was achieved by media, both printed and electronic. Here was the power base that controlled the USA in the days of the flashy Fifties and Sixties and bumpy Seventies and onwards. Their quest for oil was not confined to the USA. Since oil made the world at war operate, these guys operated wherever there was oil. To do that they needed protection. Sometimes by stealth, and often by the show of strength. Military power represented jobs, good paying jobs and those jobs represented votes. Votes equaled power. If anyone interfered with the control that the Texas good ol boys used to run their affairs in Washington DC, and therefore that part of the world not controlled by 'The Reds' - which included the 'ChiComs' - they were denounced as people who were out to destroy those good paying jobs and therefore American home-life of the Fifties and Sixties as portrayed in television commercials and supported by commercial radio. In short, they were "un-American"! "Better dead, than Red"! Of course, America of the Fifties and Sixties, as seen on those TV commercials and in the sitcoms that they appeared in, was all an illusion. Airchecked out of the sound and limited in the images were alternative views of women; Blacks and Hispanics - unless their inclusion supported the illusion that these three groups "asked for it", and were getting what they asked for. Listen to the Oval Office tapes of guys who sat around the big desk talking to their buddies in person, or on the phone. These were earthy conversations of the type you might hear in a bar, or even of the type that Donald Trump expressed getting off that infamous bus trip when he was talking about the genitals of women. This is how real men of the real Fifties and Sixties talked and acted: if they were 'in the loop'. That was the oil loop that stretched across the Atlantic Ocean and had the backing and support of the faceless men in London, England. They were in the process of continuing to lose control of the wealth of the Old World which they had gained by force, prior to the disruption of World War II. They were rescued from the clutches of Hitler by the guys who controlled the oil in Texas. (Oil) money talked and bullshit walked, "dooky, or get off the pot" they said. They were a ruthless crowd, and one day when LBJ called Clint Murchison after upsetting him, and Clint was told by his butler that "The President" was on the phone, he asked "president of what?" "Tell him I'm busy", he replied. An apocryphal tale that sums up the power that these guys held. When Reagan came along their power was still in place, just modified. Maggie helped when she came calling.

I don't buy any of that. JFK and his brother were two-faced and lied. They were dangerous people.

Isolationist and inward looking Americans who think that the world revolves around them, are probably not aware that the 1964 British Election Manifesto by the Labour Party (think Saunders-AOC), was inspired by an American who went to the UK and married a radical British MP called Tony Benn. That Manifesto called 'New Britain' was modeled upon JFK's idea of 'New Frontier' and it was used by the British Labour Party with Progressive themeology. The Labour Party was out of office in 1963, and before they got a new leader named Harold Wilson, the previous leader was supposedly bumped off by poisoning. Harold Wilson was viewed as a Russian spy by the CIA. Then came the murder of JFK in November 1963 to be followed by the scraped-by Labour Party win in October 1964. It is very interesting that LHO decided to stop off at Southampton, England in 1959, just as all this turmoil was about to take place. Turmoil? Think China-India war of 1959 revived in 1962 (the one that JFK discussed the possibility that the USA would intervene in with nuclear weapons). Then there was the Bay of Pigs; Cuban Missile Crisis and Berlin Crisis, not to mention those USA Polaris Nuclear Submarines stationed in Holy Loch, Scotland. How interesting that the Progressives are back, along with the Chinese and other spies. Perhaps they will bring back the threat of a nuclear World War III. What goes around, comes around.