Jump to content
The Education Forum

Leslie Sharp

Members
  • Posts

    2,131
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Leslie Sharp

  1. found this today-- sent to Morley a few years ago... Inbox Hank Albarelli <hankalbarelli@icloud.com> Tue, Jun 5, 2018, 10:44 AM to me, Joannides & Lafitte in New Orleans, 1963 Over fifteen years ago, while beginning to research a book on the odd death of U.S. Army biochemist, Dr. Frank R. Olson, I became aware of the existence of an enigmatic character with the unlikely name Jean Pierre Lafitte. The origins of my awareness came from my perusal of the 1952 and 1953 diaries of Federal Bureau of Narcotics official George Hunter White; a September 20, 1977 article in the New York Times by investigative journalists John M. Crewdson and Jo Thomas; and the private notes and correspondence of James R. Phelan, an investigative journalist and writer, who, in the 1950s through the 1960s, was quite close to both Lafitte and White. Later, during the year 2000, my knowledge about Lafitte grew considerably greater after I was consulted on Frank Olson’s murder by investigators for New York City District Attorney Robert Morgenthau’s office. Spurred by these meetings, I made about a dozen trips to northern New England and southern Florida to interview several individuals who were close to Pierre Lafitte. About 18 months ago, while researching a forthcoming biography of George Hunter White, these interviews resulted in my gaining access to some of the personal writings of Lafitte, including his private date books, which stylistically are quite similar to those of FBN official and CIA consultant, George White. Suffice it to say, I became intrigued with the life and activities of the man known as Jean Pierre Lafitte, who beginning in 1952, through to about 1978, covertly work for the FBN, CIA, FBI, Secret Service, and INS. Lafitte also managed to carry out a number of major, international swindling schemes and operated a number of well-known restaurants. In June 1952, according to a letter by George White, the CIA officially recruited Lafitte as a “special employee” after he was summoned to Washington, D.C. to meet with CIA officials, Dr. Sidney Gottlieb and James Jesus Angleton. Wrote White: “Expecting to be at CIA only a day, Lafitte was held over for a few days. I hope to hell they know what they are in for. I suspect even to that crew that he’s one of a kind.” While at CIA headquarters, Lafitte also met Agency Security Chief, Sheffield Edwards, Frank Wisner, and Richard Helms. Subsequently, Lafitte undertook a number of covert domestic and international assignments for the CIA, including a trip to the Republic of the Congo in December 1960, which coincided with the January 1961 CIA-assisted assassination of Patrice Lumumba. Lafitte’s work for the CIA lasted until about 1978. While writing my book on Olson’s murder, A TERRIBLE MISTAKE: The Murder of Frank Olson and the CIA’s Secret Cold War Experiments [Trine Day, 2009], of which Lafitte played an integral and deadly role, I could not avoid learning about a number of provocative connections between Monsieur Lafitte and Lee Harvey Oswald and the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. Not the least of these connections was that Lafitte, using an assumed named, throughout the 1960s lived in New Orleans. Indeed, in an incident that caused a flap at CIA headquarters in December 1969, the FBI arrested Lafitte in New Orleans. Briefly detained, he was released after a number of discrete phone calls from Capitol Hill were made to FBI headquarters. At the time of his arrest, Lafitte worked as the head chef at the Plimsoll Club, then part of the International Trade Mart. Portions of Lafitte’s date books for his New Orleans years are revealing of his dealings with various CIA officials, including at least 3 apparent meetings with CIA Western Hemisphere Division employee, George Efythron Joannides. Interestingly, Lafitte’s second encounter with Joannides occurred the second week of August 1963, just days after Lee Harvey Oswald’s Friday, August 9 arrest for provoking a disturbance through leafleting for his Fair Play for Cuba Committee New Orleans chapter. Lafitte’s handwritten notations for Friday, August 16, 1963 read: “… at Antoines room— Martello, Joanides [sic] & Labadie. Quigly [sic] interview Oswald over street demonstration. Call Holdout.” Another notation, made 6 days later reads: “Talk Joanides Cuba—refers to K Organization in Mexico— similar setup now. [D]iscuss with King, ask George and Charles about Havana, Mexico trips…” NOTES: “Antoines room” is thought to be Antoine’s, a well-known New Orleans restaurant that hosted meetings and gatherings in a number of private rooms. There are several references to Antoine’s in the date books. “Martello” appears to be a reference to New Orleans Police Department officer, Lt. Francis L. Martello; not to be confused with Francis “Monk” Martello. Lt. Martello interviewed Oswald in the New Orleans lockup on August 10, 1963. “Quigly” is perhaps a misspelling of the name Quigley. FBI SA John L. Quigley also interviewed Oswald in New Orleans jail. “Labadie” is a known alias, as in Jean Labadie, that Lafitte used often in New York City, but it is also the surname of Stephen J. Labadie, a special agent for the FBI. “Holdout” is unknown; perhaps it is a code-name for a program or confidential informer. “King” is most likely J.C. King, CIA Western Hemisphere director, but could possibly be William Harvey, as some CIA associated people occasionally and mockingly referred to Harvey as “King.” “George and Charlie” are believed to be FBN officials. Copyright © 2013—H.P. Albarelli Jr.
  2. Cleansing your palette or burying your head in the sand of what has been spoon-fed to the "community"? Ever look into Oliver Curme's history? Agents provacateur often use "prove it" as a tease, Doug. There are numerous references to Angleton's friendship with his prized contractor Lafitte aside from the datebook; but then, with one's head in the sand, one would never read those would they? I think your inability to read Coup, after three attempts, might say a good deal more about you than it does Albarelli's investigation?
  3. Then again, when Hank Albarelli provided Mr. Morley with what should have been welcomed confirmation back in 2013/14, Mr. Morley reacted, essentially, "prove it." My interpretation of the interaction is that in essence Jeff questioned Hank's professional integrity; anyone who knew Hank would know what happened next. It is not possible that CIA's George Joannides would used dozens of aliases in the field I'm curious to know your credential to make such a determination ... are you former agency? Had you read Coup, you would have a better understanding of the dynamics between Lafittte and Harvey - Barnes and those he was coordinating on their behalf. If James Angleton knew Joannides by his legal name, and if Angleton referred to him as Joannides with his friend — yes, friend with whom he and Cicely dined occasionally — then it's logical Pierre Lafitte would pen the name Joannides in his datebook as the Lancelot Project unfolded.
  4. Robert Emmett Johnson In the early ’60s, Robert Emmett Johnson, would-be journalist and skilled assassin, attested that he had been employed by Information Services International to support the agenda of dictator Rafael Trujillo of the Dominican Republic. ISI, founded and presided over by former OSS officer Ulius Amoss—dealt with extensively in the previous chapter, boasted as a trusted advisor, General Charles Willoughby. The day following the critical note, “O says done-- Oswald in place,” Pierre leaves a clue that the W. team included E. Johnson. W team E. Johnson’s (Itkin) Said to be fiercely independent and opinionated, Johnson advised Special Agents of the FBI in Miami on September 19, 1961 that he had been employed as Foreign Affairs Analyst for Dominican Republic leader Generalissimo Trujillo, who had been assassinated in May of that spring. Johnson held the “analyst” position from 1956–1960. At the time of his visit from the FBI (9/61), Johnson stated he was then employed by ISI, which he described as “an independent intelligence-gathering organization” founded by Amoss, a former Chief of Staff in the US Air Force. On the ISI board of Trustees was Charles Willoughby. As mentioned in a previous chapter, inside Trafficante’s world at Trescornia in 1959, among those he said he recognized—all of whom had a shared history—was mercenary sharpshooter Emmet Johnson. Factoring in Johnson’s employment by the master of leaderless resistance, Ulius Amoss and ISI trustee Charles Willoughby, there is sufficient reason to suspect that Johnson was on, or involved with, “W’s” team. According to the meticulous research presented by historian John Simkin, a declassified document says that in 1962, Emmett Johnson was a member of “Interpen” (International Penetration Force) established in 1961 by former US Marine Sgt. Gerry P. Hemming. With funding from Santo Trafficante and several wealthy, and organized, among other things, to train members of anti-Castro groups Interpen set up a training camp in New Orleans in 1962. Before he died, Emmett Johnson managed to publish several books under the imprint Paladin Books (publisher of Col. Charles Askins’ books) under the name “Paul Balor.” The cover of the second edition of his book, Manual of the Mercenary Soldier, published in 1993 features a clear image of Mitchell Livingston WerBell, notorious arms equipment manufacturer and dealer who had served in Donovan’s OSS during the war.
  5. I was seeking deliberation over the challenges to any assertion that Marcello Did It and covered it up. I'm sorry you're unwilling to engage.
  6. I'm waiting to hear from Dick on the question. I do find the content to be "too pat" to be written or dictated by a director of the CIA; but then McCone was an enigma. Perhaps he realized he was going to be hung out to dry before he could resume his highly lucrative business career? If you've seen his correspondence with Ike Eisenhower in early December which makes absolutely no mention of the assassination in Dallas just days earlier, you know that McCone AND Ike were playing cards close to the chest.
  7. And, as I understand it, Douglas is questioning the authority that insists the document is fake? I find myself somewhere in the middle: if there are no inconsistencies in the content of the document — not the presentation of that content, but the information itself — should it be discarded? And why is NARA invoked as arbiter in this instance? I look forward to Dick's clarification.
  8. I respect generalizations, but you've invoked the term evidence and insisted that you're in pursuit of solving a case so I would think the details matter; how exactly did Marcello orchestrate the immediate aftermath and the ensuing cover up? For example, Marcello's fingerprints are nowhere to be found here: The propaganda promoted by Clifford Forster and his ilk continues to date, most recently with the publication of Operation Dragon, by former CIA director R. James Woolsey and coauthor, former Romanian acting spy chief Lt. Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa. Published by Encounter books, provider of “Books for Smart Conservatives,” the description claims the authors have “. . . finally and definitively put to rest the question of who killed President Kennedy on November 22, 1963. All evidence points to the fact that the assassination—carried out by Lee Harvey Oswald—was ordered by Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, acting through what was essentially the Russian leader’s personal army, the KGB (now known as the FSB). . .” Forster’s December ’63 contribution to the “clean-up operation,” claiming that Oswald was as a lone nut and a former defector to Soviet Russia sent home to murder the president, coincided with the role assigned to Forster’s fellow board member at Paix et Liberté, one Isaac Don Levine who is central to the Epilogue of our saga. As we learn later, it was Levine who was assigned the task to “deal with” Marina Oswald in the aftermath of her husband’s murder, as reflected in Lafitte’s November 28 entry: Levine will deal w/ Marina e.t. ... JA ... call Madrid.
  9. Nothing about Crichton or Storey, as but two examples of the details you failed to address here? There are many Occam's Razors: Vietnam Texas Tidelands Case Ellen Rometsch North Africa independence movements Middle East oil . . . to name but five.
  10. Evidence is challenged; courts of law call in experts; experts often disagree; ultimately the jury and or judge decide. I think that's the argument set forth by Douglas?
  11. In general, of course you can ask and you can anticipate not everyone is obligated to grant permission. You've asked for contact information and I've rejected your request. The conversation related to previous attempts at authentication is closed. Let me know if you want to reconsider the terms and conditions I offered in response to your initial offer. For your edification, the datebook was orphaned.
  12. The answer resides in the details. I had hoped we might deliberate over some of those details, specifically how Marcello might have controlled the immediate aftermath including arrangements for Marina's translator or Robert Storey's role as liaison with the Warren Commission? I'm wondering if you have evidence that Marcello had any influence over Jack Crichton, then running for GOP candidate for Texas Governor, or Robert Storey, esteemed international petroleum industry attorney?
  13. The Skorzenys Ilse 8:00 PM —Lafitte datebook, June 19, 1963 Cable to Madrid – all – ok – tell Tom D. O says come to Madrid —Lafitte datebook, October 1, 1963 . . . Otto, the Chief Tactician Lafitte first makes specific note of Otto Skorzeny in his 1963 datebook on April 30, Walker + Souetre in New Orleans/Arms (Davis?) -- where? Cable to O. As detailed previously, Skorzeny ran special forces training camps outside of Madrid, and among his chief trainers in the arts of sabotage and assassinations was Jean Rene Souetre, the extreme right OAS officer known for his expert marksmanship. Another close associate of both Lafitte and of Skorzeny was a French terrorist who had served in La Cagoule, Jean Filiol. Filiol and his mistress, Alice Renee Lamy, who was also an expert shot, were infamous for the interrogation and torture of over one hundred people in one day in occupied Paris. Decades later, Lamy and Filiol found their way to Dallas in late 1963, checking into a hotel, likely Lafitte’s favorite, The Stoneleigh on Maple Ave. in Oak Lawn as we read in our closing chapter. Three weeks later Pierre writes simply, “ask OS/Ilse.” Between those entries he continues to name Souetre, adding [Thomas Eli] Davis, and [Clay LaVerne] Shaw. On June 20, Lafitte indicates that he has cabled, or he plans to cable, Otto Skorzeny. On this date, Pierre also has Frank Wisner, former head of the agency’s OPC, on his mind. We don’t see Otto again until the 28th of July, when Pierre writes, “George” [Hunter-White] / Otto talk to Stockdale about P. Graham.” This suggests that Hunter-White, aware of Otto’s history with Ambassador Grant Stockdale, is asking about Phil Graham, or he’s asking Otto to phone Stockdale to discuss Graham. (See chapter 4.) Otto and his valued trainer, Jean Souetre are named in the same entry again on August 11th when Pierre notes that he has sent a cable to O in Madrid, followed by Souetre’s name. The first week of September, in a chilling note, Pierre writes, O.S. gas guns - 6, followed by Garland here - A [in a circle]. Garland is no doubt a reference to a close associate of George Hunter-White, Garland Williams. The familiarity of using his Christian name in the entry represents a decade-long association between Lafitte, Williams, and “George” Hunter-White. Author Albarelli was in contact with the Williams family in search of additional Lafitte correspondence but met a wall when the subject of money in exchange proved problematic on a number of levels. Williams was former head of the NY branch of the FNB and officer with the Army’s Central Intelligence Corps. He had also worked directly for Joseph Caldwell King, as identified in author Albarelli’s A Terrible Mistake, assisting the former chief of the CIA’s Western Hemisphere as he oversaw the agency’s Amazon Natural Drug Co. The intriguing entries presented previously about an August gathering in Antoine’s Room in New Orleans that included George Joannides are all the more so if indeed the “King” named in that entry was actually Joseph Caldwell King.
  14. Please read the terms and conditions provided Greg in response to his offer.
  15. Please read the terms and conditions provided Greg in response to his offer.
  16. Those directly engaged in this conversation at the moment, Paul, have expressed less than worthy motives in the past; in fact they have each attacked this potentially hugely important document again, in spite of never laying eyes on the physical instrument. Two years later, having failed in their attempts to impede my commitment to provide large swaths of Hank's investigation to those unable to or disinterested in securing a full copy of Coup, they now interject themselves into the process of authentication? Following Greg Doudna's offer to identify an analyst that might be willing to examine the ink for minimal if any charge, I've laid out entirely reasonable terms and conditions. I'm disappointed that so far he has rejected the parameters; perhaps he will change his mind and exhibit that worthy motive behind his offer you suggest.
  17. lolol. Yes, I've been told that "we" give "them" far too much credit. But there are other possibilities, obviously.
  18. @Greg Doudna @Benjamin Cole The discussion related to previous attempts at authentication is closed. Please read the proposal, Benjamin, and perhaps you can persuade Greg to continue his quest for an ink analyst.
  19. Considering the files and tapes Hank amassed during the years he spent in contact with June, why wasn't his environment ever breached? Why would thieves break in and steal June's small batch of files from Dr. Newman and not break into her own home - or Hank's?
  20. I agree that those here in good faith are "here to learn." but I've always been concerned by the Marcello Did It argument when the most fundamental question — the cover up — can't be explained. He did not have that power, and the suggestion that once Oswald was indicted, it all "just fell into place" makes no sense at all. Secret Service, SA Odum, Capt. Gannaway, Col. Crichton, Parkland, DA Wade, Asst. Alexander, Bob Storey, Leon Jaworski, Bethesda, Dulles, McCloy? Marcello simply did not have that reach.
  21. You're not listening, Benjamin. Please see my proposal to Greg. Apparently he didn't like the terms and conditions since he proceeded to issue his own buried somewhere in the rubble of rehashing his accusations that Hank was either a fool or a fraud. I'm trying to determine the credential either of you have to demand that "the community" should rise up and prohibit me from posting about this datebook on Education Forum? You have yet to address the implications of a single specific entry and the conclusions one must draw. What about this has you so disturbed? @Greg Doudna Don't either of you realize your vociferous refusal to even consider the potential breakthrough suggests to some observers that you might want this information suppressed?
  22. Here ya go, Benjamin, I'll make it easy; and perhaps it might behove @Greg Doudna to review the following as well: Greg in black; Leslie in purple: Ok, but just to be clear I am doing you the favor here, not vice versa. I intend to try to make contact with Aginsky’s office tomorrow and request advice and perhaps contact referrals. I have said and I repeat that under no circumstances will I become responsible for payment or fundraising. That is not my problem or responsibility. With respect, and not to be contentious, but I’m curious: if it is not your problem or your responsibility why have you interjected yourself into the dynamic? However it is possible—MAYBE—that if a top-rate examiner, credentialed and referred by Aginsky—could be found, I could ask, and maybe, just maybe, obtain, an offer to do so for research purposes with an intention of a scientific publication . . . If the ink and pen are, as you indicate here, being analyzed for research purposes only, with the intention of a scientific publication, I would insist on parameters related to which — if any — specific entries from the datebook could be incorporated in an article meant for scientific publication. I would expect to exercise editorial control over any references to Hank’s story regarding the history of the datebook and his access. I would be identified as joint-work copyright holder of Coup in Dallas: The Decisive Investigation into Who Killed JFK with H. P. Albarelli Jr., including all ancillary projects. The lab and expert examiners will agree to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement applicable to the information found in the 1963 datebook maintained by Pierre Lafitte. You would also agree to the Non-Disclosure specific to the details contained in the datebook that are not yet in the public domain; you would not publish anything you learn during this exercise including preliminary reactions/comments made by the experts without prior agreement with me. to which of course you would be invited to be on as coauthor with the scientists and I assume me. That will be my attempt or ask, of contacts vetted and recommended by Aginsky or his office and that otherwise are credentialed and experienced. I appreciate the time you may expend, but the document examiners currently under agreement to analyze the handwriting in the db obviously have contacts in the field. Based on the third-party assurance I have that Valery Aginsky was in the process of producing a final sufficiently positive report when the documentary project was interrupted by Hank’s untimely passing, the lead examiner has recommended I not go to the expense of another paper/ink analysis. I will assure them up front that their all parties concerned are committed to knowing the truth of the findings whatever they may be, . . . That should go without saying. It is also my prerogative to exercise due diligence to determine the objectivity of your candidate before analysis is initiated. and that there will be no non-disclosure agreement or control over their disclosure or discussion of their findings after the fact . . . The Non-Disclosure Agreement will cover the content of the datebook; I wouldn’t expect a non-disclosure agreement for the findings, providing the conditions established in the next paragraph are agreed to. . . . with the possible exception of a reasonable (e.g. 90 days) embargo period on public discussion or announcement after the lab and expert examination is concluded for the purpose of allowing you the exclusive opportunity to make first announcement, if you so wish. I will make the announcement, and I would also be open to a joint statement if the experts so wish. Yes, a 90-day embargo is acceptable and provides sufficient time for a second opinion if, after reading the report, I exercise the option. I must be assured you are serious about a serious offer, if such can be obtained. I will not risk insulting you by asking for that assurance explicitly but will assume it unless advised by you otherwise. Thank you. if it is not possible to obtain a gratis research-purpose analysis, I will forward to you what I can obtain in terms of costs and in the best case see if it is within your means at your end. That wouldn’t be necessary. I am assuming you will not be imposing non-disclosure restrictions on the results after the fact as a condition of payment or making the physical datebook available. To repeat, the lab and expert examiners will agree to sign a Non-Disclosure Agreement applicable to the information found in the datebook, not the results of their findings, with the understanding the results will not be revealed for 90-days; I will announce the results. I will not be funding the effort for reasons previously stated; and, if you are not funding the project, it wouldn’t be your place to determine conditions of payment either. The logistics of the analysis will need to be worked out; I will not be releasing the datebook, so arrangements would need to be made for a speedy turnaround. The aforementioned does not constitute a legally binding agreement; it is intended primarily to establish the spirit behind the effort. If your attempts in the near future are successful, we can enter into a more formal written agreement with the concerned parties.
  23. Bullying as a last resort, Benjamin? Please read the terms and conditions I laid out in a response to Greg's offer to identify an ink analyst. If you would like to participate in the effort, please share with me your qualifications and your intended contribution? Otherwise, you are an observer only.
×
×
  • Create New...