Leslie Sharp

@Tom Gram additional assassination research homework courtesy Albarelli.  What do you know about any of the following:

Charles William Thomas Revelations 

Charles Thomas, another individual of intrigue mentioned by June Cobb, was also completely aware of Davis’s presence in Mexico City at the same time as Lee Harvey Oswald’s visit in September 1963. In a December 25, 1965, memorandum, attached to a “CONFIDENTIAL” letter he sent to US Secretary of State William P. Rogers in which he explained that he had thoroughly investigated the events that transpired during Oswald’s stay in Mexico, Thomas wrote: 

During this latter conversation [of January 9, 1966], Sra. De Paz [Elena Garro] admitted that she had to the [United States] Embassy [in Mexico City] on an earlier occasion with her daughter and mother-in-law and had talked to two Embassy officers (presumably from the Legal Attaché’s Office) about the matter [of seeing Lee Harvey Oswald at a party]. She said since the Embassy’s officers did not give much credence to anything they said, they did not bother to give a very complete story.

Charles Thomas then launches into a very detailed accounting of the Garros’ encounter with Oswald. The party, Elena told Thomas, was held at the house of Ruben Duran, who was a cousin to Elena Garro. Elena explained, “Lydia, Horacio, and Ruben Duran are all cousins … [and] Silvia Duran [who worked in the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City and who spoke with Oswald when he visited that embassy in September 1963] is married to Horacio, who is a rather weak man … Sra. De Paz [Garro] had never had anything to do with Silvia, who [Garro] considers a communist and a whore. Ruben [Duran] was born in the United States and served in the US Army during the war. He still goes to the US from time to time but had no relatives or particular connections there…. The party in question was held at the home of Ruben Duran.” 

            Thomas explained that Elena Garro was unsure of the date of the party. She said that it had been held sometime in September 1963 and recalled that “it was on a Monday or Tuesday because it was an odd night to have a party.” Thomas’ report then goes into his Lee Oswald and Thomas Eli Davis section: 

At the party, the man she assumes was Oswald wore a black sweater [perhaps the same black sweater he wore in Dallas when he was murdered by Jack Ruby]. He tended to be silent and stared a lot at the floor. Of his two young American companions, one was very tall and slender and had long blond hair which hung across his forehead. He had a gaunt face and a rather long protruding chin. [A perfect description of Thomas Eli Davis, Jr. in the estimation of the authors.] The other was also rather tall and had short, light brown hair, but he had no real distinguishing characteristics. All three were obviously Americans and did not dance or mix with the other people. The three were evidently friends, because she [Elena] saw them by chance the next day walking down the street together.  

Described by those who knew him as tall and handsome with dark hair, Charles Thomas was a US State Department employee who served as the department’s Political Officer in the US Embassy in Mexico City from 1964 to 1967. Before that, from January 1961 to August 1963, he had been stationed in the US Embassy in Port-au-Prince, Haiti. Thomas was also a covert employee with the CIA’s Branch 4, Covert Action Staff. He had been hired by the CIA in early 1952, following his service in the US Navy as an ensign assigned to still-secret intelligence matters. Thomas, before going to Haiti and Mexico City, had covertly served the CIA, under State Department cover, at several additional posts, including Monrovia, Liberia; Sierra Leone; Accra, Ghana; and Tangier, Morocco. Endnotes in this chapter provide more on Thomas’s status with the State Department and CIA.

            Interestingly, early on in his stint in Haiti, Thomas inadvertently ran slightly afoul of a team of three physicians working under contract with the CIA’s ultrasecret MK/NAOMI project, according to former Army biochemist Gerald Yonetz, who was interviewed by the author in March 2002. Beginning sometime around 1954, both the CIA’s Security Research Service and the US Army’s biochemical research center at Fort Detrick, Maryland, sometimes working in tandem, favored using Haiti—due primarily to its complete lack of governmental regulatory authorities, but also the ease with which any supposedly concerned authorities could be bought to turn-a-blind eye toward questionable and unethical activities—for risky human experiments with psycho-chemicals and other more lethal drugs. 

            Charles Thomas, according to former Detrick researcher Yonetz, who made several trips to Haiti, as well as to Africa, “was surprised at the conduct of the experiments, as well as their nature, and expressed innocent surprise and perhaps dismay” upon first learning about them. As is underscored in one of this author’s [Albarelli] books, A Terrible Mistake, and in several excellent articles by investigative journalists Dr. Jeffery Kaye and Jason Leopold (available on the Truthout.org website), the US Army and the CIA, under projects MK/ULTRA, MK/NAOMI, and MK/DELTA, conducted extensive covert experiments with many “incapacitating agents” beginning in the 1950s and continuing until about 1970, Haiti being one of the favored locations for certain experiments. Dr. Kaye reveals that the military and CIA were especially interested in anti-malarial drugs derived from cinchona bark. The curative and medicinal powers of cinchona bark have been known for hundreds of years in Haiti. During the 1977 Congressional hearings on the CIA’s stockpiling of lethal and incapacitating drugs, it was revealed that the CIA and army were interested in anti-malarial drugs for “devious reasons.”

            Writes Dr. Kaye: “CIA-linked researcher, Dr. Charles F. Geschickter told Sen. Edward Kennedy in 1977 that the CIA was interested in anti-malarial drugs that ‘had some, shall I say, disturbing effects on the nervous system of the patients.’” 

When is anyone in this "community" going to pressure those who purport to be experts in the Win Scott history to release his early diaries or datebooks or notes which cover his period in Europe as the chief of Western European division of the Office of Special Operations overseeing all espionage operations collecting intelligence . . . 

Documents confirm that reports of Otto Skorzeny's activities were crossing Scott's desk.

To repeat, @Greg Doudna @Tom Gram, if you are genuine in your expression of interest in June Cobb, please share with us your reactions, in the specifics, to the following — or is this thread intended to provoke something else entirely?

Albarelli writes,

Contact was also made with the CIA officer who recruited and handled June Cobb during the early 1960s. Working under the Agency pseudonym “Bill Mannix,” the officer held the position of Chief of Cuban Operations in CIA’s Mexico City Station, reporting to station head Win Scott. “Mannix” spoke guardedly but clearly with the author when asked about Cobb’s identification of Oswald and Davis in Mexico City in 1963. He confirmed that “she” (Cobb) had reported seeing a man “who turned out to be Davis.” He said that Station Chief Scott told him not to discuss Davis anywhere, or “commit it to any sort of writing, official or unofficial.” The remainder of the author’s conversation with “Mannix” follows:

“Why?”

“It’s obvious, isn’t it?”

“So you believe that June saw Davis in MC at the Luma with Oswald?”

“Yes.”

No doubts? Why?”

“Because she wasn’t the only person who reported him being there.”

“Who else?”

“No. No comment on that. I’ve said too much. And with the understanding 

 you won’t use my name.”

“But, ‘Bill’? I can use that?”

“I can’t stop you.”

Win Scott’s directive that Davis was not to be pursued shines intense light on Scott’s role, witting or not, in the cover-up. And as we learned, the US Ambassador in Madrid, a close friend of Ambassador Thomas Mann whom Scott knew well, followed suit, advising the State Department, and all those inquiring, that the entire Davis matter in North Africa had been given “disproportionate importance by local authorities who fear any and all arms traffic in view local recent political events.” 

@Greg Doudna @Tom Gram Instead of waiting for the motherlode — as if to suggest Albarelli withheld vital information — and rather than attack his integrity, let's allow forum readers to decide whether the late Albarelli's published accounts deserve consideration: 

Albarelli writes in Chapter 5 Jacks of All Trades


At the time [September 1963], I don’t think I knew what his name was; only that he was an American. He was easy to remember. Tall, lanky, blond hair, that lethargic, drawling manner, easy going cowboy-like. In Mexico, he stood out like a lone orchid among thorny cacti… I saw him at the Hotel Luma before Elena spotted him at the Duran’s party, but I knew who she was talking about right away. He and Oswald made quite the pair, I would imagine.

                          —Viola June Cobb, November 2015             

. . . Had any investigators found [Thomas] Proctor’s New York address at East 94th, they may also have discovered that Lee Harvey Oswald’s good friend, George de Mohrenschildt, had once lived at the same address. Oddly, fifteen years after State Department officials failed to locate Proctor, investigators for the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA), which had reopened the investigation into JFK’s murder in 1978, also “were unable to locate” Thomas Proctor. This, even though Proctor’s family was still publicly listed at the New York City address. Proctor passed away in 1967, of cirrhosis of the liver, one year before his son, Philip Proctor’s Firesign Theatre was designated by Rolling Stone magazine as “the funniest team in America today.” Phil Proctor, who is today, a well-respected actor, all-round likeable fellow, and author of among other works, Where’s My Fortune Cookie, graciously shared with these authors some personal family photos, including one that captured his father in a bold Nazi salute. (seen in photo section of this book.)

            Apparently, the Committee, and the State Department, made no inquiry about Proctor (or Davis) to the CIA. Had they done so, and assuming the CIA would have fully cooperated, the fact that Proctor was also associated with CIA assets June Cobb and Warren Broglie, manager of Mexico City’s Hotel Luma, might have come to light. Investigators also might have consulted Martindale-Hubbell Directory of Attorneys to track Proctor’s legal career and current location, but apparently no one thought of this, in spite of the fact that Proctor’s firm had once carried the name of Paul V. McNutt, a former government servant and elected official. Proctor was in fact McNutt’s intended running mate in his presidential bid had FDR not chosen to seek another term.

            Thomas G. Proctor, according to former colleagues—who declined to be identified in this book because of what they claimed could be “possible legal complications”—reported to the authors that Proctor had known both Cobb and Broglie “since at least around 1959… in New York City… maybe having met Cobb at the Hotel Iroquois, when she had lived there briefly before going to Cuba.” The same former colleagues also state that Proctor, during the “early 1960s,” traveled several times to Mexico City, “reportedly for work related to the [United States] embassy there, and something to do with that country’s Olympics bid.” Mexico City won the bid and hosted the Summer Olympics in 1968. In an interview with this author [Albarelli], former CIA Mexico City asset, June Cobb, recalled that New York City politician Paul O’Dwyer, brother of former New York City mayor, William O’Dwyer, accompanied Proctor to Mexico several times. In 1950, President Harry Truman had appointed the former mayor as Ambassador to Mexico. William O’Dwyer resigned as ambassador in 1952 but stayed on in Mexico until 1960. 

and relevant notes from

Chapter 6 Long Shadows

Based on a transcribed interview with an unnamed source in Tampa, Florida and with Viola June Cobb, May–April 2014, Indian Rocks Beach, Florida. The source was a longtime and close associate of Trafficante; June Cobb was a CIA asset in Havana, as well as later, for nearly six years, in Mexico City, Mexico. She encountered Trafficante twice in Cuba, once in the presence of Che Guevara and the other time with William Alexander Morgan, who was executed by Che on March 11, 1961 at Cabana Prison in Havana. Said Cobb, “I met Ruby once in the company of a Dallas businessman, Raymond Cortez, who falsely claimed to be an attorney. The businessman had come to attempt to talk with Che and Fidel about land reform efforts. They never met with him…. I suspected he was with an intelligence group, but, of course, didn’t ask. I ran into the businessman again in Mexico City where he owned a shoe factory. I had no idea who Ruby was until much later, after the assassination.” Cobb had no knowledge about Otto Skorzeny other than conventional news accounts about his wartime exploits, however, she did hear constant reports and rumors about assassination activities originating out of Spain. “There were constant whispers about assassinations, constant. So often I mostly didn’t pay attention. Of course, after Kennedy was killed, Mexico City was abuzz with chatter, everywhere. You couldn’t get into a taxi without hearing something new. People seemed to know about Oswald almost right away. There was no lack of news there. The few people I encountered with the Agency made a concerted effort to not talk about it.” 

I'm familiar enough to know with certainty that @Robert Montenegro has contributed hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of hours worth of research to several authors close to Dr. Newman. Perhaps his frustration is that no one has made overtures with Newman on his behalf. If he has made dozens of attempts himself to no avail, I believe he now rightfully expresses anger on a forum that attracts Newman's admirers who might persuade the Dr. to talk to him directly. Otherwise, what exactly do we mean when we bandy about the term "community"?

I was present during a conference call that Robert participated in as well, during which he attempted to share a critical piece of research with one of the esteemed participants; it so happened that the material included revelations of Nazi involvement in a certain dynamic.  Robert was instantly, summarily and rudely dismissed with, "get that "Nazi" guy outta here ... shut 'em down."  In some convoluted way — using MAGA tactics I might note — I believe he has since been taunted on the forum as the "Nazi Guy."  Cognitive dissonance on steroids. 

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

Unbelievable. The first time I saw "Amazon review" was from you in this thread just now. Always before you just said "posted a review" and I thought you meant my comments on the Education Forum.

How was I to know you were accusing me of posting a review on Amazon, when you didn't say that (or if you did say it somewhere I missed it), and I didn't post an Amazon review in the first place. I never did, and if you have been meaning and telling others that all this time, you are wrong and I hope you will get straight to your circle that I did not.  

I wasn't an active member at the time, but soon after your initial Coup-related post on EF just days after our book was published, I was advised by a member that I should probably read what you had to say. 

Understandably, I was astonished that anyone would write such a knee jerk analysis without paying the coauthor the courtesy of personal inquiry.

From there, I began tracking the Amazon reviews, particularly interested in how the "stars" were aligning as it were; Coup was hovering at 4.5 until a series of negative reviews - all 1 and 2 star - began to appear.  I recall distinctly that your review had an immediate impact on the general star rating, otherwise I might consider the possibility I dreamt you posted an Amazon review that matched your purely subjective conclusion  posted on Ed Forum just days after Coup hit the stands.  Why did no one on this forum ask if you had actually READ the book? Appeal to "academic" authority comes to mind in this particular instance.

Subsequently just after Matthew Koch had reached an apex of his obnoxious posts including misogynistic insults that may have contributed to his banishment, Mr. Koch added a review of Coup at Amazon.  I doubt you'll take the time, but you might read it before insisting that rolling out academic credentials has no affect on the impressionable and venge-filled unstable personalities lurking around Kennedy assassination venues.

24 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

Here is the full quotation with context: 

"Many other people unselfishly assisted the author in writing this book. They are former CIA asset in New York, Cuba, and Mexico City, Viola June Cobb; three of June's CIA handlers who must remain anonymous; Doug Valentine, a very brave soul; Malcom Blunt, for expert advice; Damien Albarelli, David Albarelli, and Nicole Albarelli Centellas, the best children a man can have; Michael J. Briggs, another great book editor; my friend, Michael J. Petro; Jeanne-Marie Thomas Byron, a friend and a very, very brave woman; Tammy and Samantha Ryea; Dick Crandlemire, a great editor; Kris Newby, a friend, a great researcher and writer; David Gill for great backup research; Ashley Crout, an excellent editor; attorney Steve Rosen for always expert advice; Ran Daniel, whose insights proved significant; author Peter Janney; and Charles d'Autremont, a good friend."

(A second paragraph starting words "My great friends ..." with more names continues. A third paragraph starting words "And especially:..." with more names continues.)

I read that as saying the ones listed had various roles in assisting the author in the writing of the book, and that the three of June's CIA handlers were included among those named as having assisted the author in writing the book.

Is that a "patently absurd" reading, in the absence of clarification? Now that I have explained what I meant, and fulfilled your condition, can you keep your part of your bargain and clarify? Have I misunderstood, or was perhaps the wording in the acknowledgements poorly construed and that was not the nature of the relationship of the three CIA handlers with Hank?

I am not wishing to misrepresent. Please accurately represent?

Those who have read hundreds of authors' acknowledgements over the years know precisely what Hank means with his opening sentence: assisted the author in writing this book.

Please site passages in Coup that you believe anyone other than co-authors Sharp and Kent might have authored: show me June Cobb's writing, or that of her three handlers; Doug Valentine's contribution other than direct quotes from his own work; or Hank's children or his friends Tammy and Dick; or Steve Rosen ... ask Steve if he penned a single word of Coup?

I'm not suggesting you are "wishing to misrepresent;" I'm stating unequivocally that you misrepresent.





 

6 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Trump Co-Conspirator Was a GOP Koch Machine Vote Suppressor

Mike Roman: Placing Obscure Trump Co-Defendants

joycevance.substack.com/p/mike-roman-placing-obscure-co-defendants?utm_source=substack&utm_medium

by Joyce Vance

August 17, 2023

Donald Trump has 18 co-defendants in Georgia. While some of them are familiar names, others may only register dimly or be complete unknowns. But they’ll take on more importance in the next few weeks. Some of them, like David Shaker, Shawn Still, and Cathy Latham, who were among Georgia’s fake electors, show up in roles where it’s unlikely they had much, if any, direct contact with the former president. Then, there’s Mike Roman.

Roman has had an interest in propagating false claims of voter fraud for a long time. He was doing it as far back as the early 1990s, when he was involved in a Pennsylvania race that was overturned based on allegations of voter fraud. Before becoming an advisor to Trump, he ran a secretive in-house intelligence unit for the conservative Koch brothers organization, making upwards of $250,000.00 a year for his voter suppression work. He worked on the 2016 election, took on a White House role doing special projects that was never well defined, and was back on the campaign staff by 2018. He became Trump’s director of Election Day Operations for 2020. Traditionally that’s the type of position that involves efforts to get out the vote, but in Roman’s case, many people familiar with his work believed he would focus again on undercutting the legitimacy of the election results by pushing fake claims of fraud.

Evidence that surfaced during the January 6 committee hearings placed Roman in a central role in the organization of the seven slates of fake Trump electors in battleground states including his home state, Pennsylvania. One of the allegations in the Georgia indictment is that in late November 2020, Roman was encouraging other campaign officials to contact state legislators in Georgia to urge them to unlawfully appoint Trump electors. Roman even kept a spread sheet with names and contact information for fake electors in it.

 

Missing because she wasn't an official within the WH is Cleta Mitchell of the Bradley Foundation which operates in lock step with Koch, ALEC, et al.

The Bradley Foundation traces its roots and financing to the Military arm of the MIC, a.k.a. the Deep State.  How ironic that Trump lied to MAGA that he would drain the swamp? Check out Murdoch's Corp board? A Bancroft / Dow Jones family member and beneficiary. 

The GOP got played, or played itself, with flying Koch/John Birch colors.  

Had Roger Stone's history with Trump been fleshed out even further in the final edition of "Coup in Dallas . . ." as intended by this co-author, perhaps the moccasin telegraph of the JFKA research community might have triggered a review of the damage Stone inflicted when he first infiltrated the tent.

https://newrepublic.com/post/175064/new-explosive-roger-stone-video-dooms-donald-trumps-main-legal-defense?utm_source=social&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=sharebtn&fbclid=IwAR2gZqWhMFEwhAOWJhMj9b5vbx3ujF4RaLxGneZP3-qmnqCJ61zMXJvv89g

@Greg Doudna

1 hour ago, Greg Doudna said:

Let's lower the temperature here. On the ink dating, no you never explained what difficulties prevent you from having the ink dated on the other thread. You told of difficulties in getting access to prior ink analyses that had been done on the datebook years earlier, not by you, that no one today is allowed to see or know, you included, you explained. Nothing prevents you from getting a new ink dating done that is within your power to access results and make open and transparent to the wider field of researchers--a limited forensic examination solely of the ink even if other forms of forensic examination such as handwriting authentication, however desirable, may not be so easy to get done immediately. Dating of the ink is the most important test for forgery in this case and it can be done with a few days turnaround time and cost is not prohibitive. By your own account you are the sole decider standing in the way of deciding to do this. What not to like about that? Why not do it?

On this:

“Many other people unselfishly assisted the author in writing this book [Coup in Dallas] [including…] three of June [Cobb]’s CIA handlers who must remain anonymous…” (Coup in Dallas, 559)

Is that a reference to June Cobb’s CIA handlers in the 1960s, or handlers of June Cobb at the twice-weekly meetings ca. 2012-2013? (suggesting that a seasoned investigative reporter, Albarelli, would agree to being babysat during his sessions with June? are you serious?)

I did not mean it that way. The reference to three anonymous "CIA handlers" of June is written in Coup in Dallas in the present tense, but it could mean handlers of June back in the 1960s when June is known to have been paid by CIA as an operative. Yet, the three CIA handlers are certainly all three in present time in the sense of being including among those credited with having assisted Albarelli in the writing of the book.

Can you clarify, if you know, whether the reference to "June's CIA handlers" refers to handling of June Cobb in ca. 1963 or ca. 2011-2013 range, and if the latter how would that handling work other than being present with her when she was interviewed? That was the reason for the question. 

If an opportunity for hours of interview material with a witness as significant as June Cobb was conditional upon June Cobb having handlers present when interviewed, sure I can imagine a seasoned investigative reporter agreeing, if those were the conditions. 

So, yes, the question in the form I asked it was serious. Do you have sufficient knowledge to be able to answer the question? Thanks. 

I'll respond after you explain to forum members what you meant by the following:

In either case, these three unnamed CIA personnel, whoever they are, are acknowledged for helping in the writing of Coup in Dallas.  (That is patently absurd, Doudna, and you know it. You've lifted from Hank's acknowledgements and slipped in a casual interpretation to suggest  intelligence agents contributed to the writing of Coup in Dallas.  Do members on this forum fall for such tactics?)

8 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

Yes I stand by that. I had no idea that is what you meant or I would have been happy to have made that statement earlier, did not realize that is what you meant or thought. 

No, I never put up any review on Amazon re Coup in Dallas. Nor was I indirectly behind any other review on Amazon of Coup in Dallas. 

 

 

 

What about the phrase "Amazon review" have you not understood since you and I began discussing Coup in Dallas?  Assuming my link will still activate your review, I'll share it here. 

41 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

I’ll attempt to spell this out in the simplest way imaginable:

1. Datebook: unauthenticated

2. Cobb interviews: unverified 

Solution? 

1. Ink analysis, etc. 

2. Proof that Albarelli actually conducted “hundreds of hours” of interviews with June Cobb. Clarification on these alleged “CIA handlers”, etc. 

The only reason you are being met with skepticism is your remarkable lack of transparency and defensiveness towards anyone who ask totally reasonable, legitimate questions about the evidence cited in Coup in Dallas. Call me crazy, but I don’t take anyone’s word for anything in JFK land, especially anyone who claims to have exclusive access to evidence that’s never been independently authenticated. 

1. As noted previously, status of datebook examination is: incomplete pending additional exemplars.

2. I won't distinguish your inuendo with anything other than, how utterly stupid of you.

1. Initial ink analysis in London November 2018, as noted by the parties that financed the examination: . . .  verification of any historical document, including this one, is an inexact science, and we are not seeking incontrovertible proof of authenticity. We feel that the ink and handwriting will, however, show that the DB is authentic beyond reasonable doubt, which is sufficient for our purposes.  Another round of meetings with broadcasters has already been set up, to be triggered as soon as we have that confirmation from O>>> and the ink analyst.  The ink analyst has told me he will have his full report to me shortly. . . .  By then we will have the ink report too, and will proceed to a second round of meetings with broadcasters.

2. see above.

Tom, This is the final exchange I'll have with you on this thread regarding the datebook; if you would like to continue, please do so on the thread labeled, Pierre Lafitte datebook, 1963.

3 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

I have never at any time posted any review in any form on Amazon, concerning Coup in Dallas, or any other work of Albarelli. What are you talking about?

Do you stand by that?

Why haven't you made this definitive statement before now?

I saw your review in early 2022, and shared it with our working group; presumably I saved the email which includes the Amazon link.

 

5 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

I never reviewed Coup in Dallas.

I questioned the security of the authenticity of a source used in Coup in Dallas, in discussions on this forum.  

If you cannot see the difference, and keep repeating that I wrote a book review without reading the book, not much I can say. I read everything in the book relevant to the security of the authenticity of the source, said what I thought, noted widespread incidence of forgeries, suggested forensic examination. I saw that issue the first day the book arrived to me from Amazon when it first came out.  

I have written and published several book reviews, and I assure you if I review a book I will read the book.

 

Please notify Amazon that yours is not a "review" but a challenge of authenticity.

Let's see if Amazon has the integrity to recognize the difference, or might they be in league with disinformationists tracking the latest progress in the cold case murder investigation?

I expect to see your Amazon notification posted on EF as well.

At the risk of repeating, but in light of Greg Doudna's continued questioning of Hank Albarelli's integrity and his final investigation into who killed JFK in Dallas, I believe it bears repeating: Greg Doudna's higher education includes a degree from Armstrong College in Big Sandy – a small community in East Texas.

Apparently, from what I’ve read, Doudna is staunch vocal defender of Ruth Paine. He insists she has been much maligned, yet admits that during his interview with her he failed to ask the most basic questions, i.e., did she know Lee had been arrested in New Orleans, did she not know he had traveled to Mexico City until he returned to Dallas in early October?  Did Greg ask her why —upon discovery of Oswald’s letter sometime around Nov. 7,8,9 which referenced both MC and the Russian Embassy — did she fail to give SA James Hosty a discrete call since he had only recently been in her home to discuss Oswald?  

Doudna also appears to be completely disinterested in the fact that Hosty's partner in the early hours of the investigation, FBI SA Bard Odum was a personal friend of Michael Paine and that Ruth knew the FBI agent by his nickname “Hart” prior to the assassination.

Doudna has also interviewed at length John Curington who subsequently appears to have declined further interviews. (Whether or not the two incidents are related has not been determined.)  Thus far, I’ve not come across anything of substance from that interview other than Curington’s account of Marina’s visit to Hunt Oil headquarters in the Mercantile building.  Did Doudna not know the pertinent questions to ask related to H. L. Hunt?  Perhaps if he had paid attention to Coup, we might have more insight into whether Hunt & Vickers in the Lafitte datebook refers to H. L. or or E. Howard;  we might also have additional understanding of the reference to Rothermel in the PL ledger sheet(s). Did Greg consider the possibility that Ruby was visiting his landlord Leo Corrigan? Had he shown the slightest curiosity essential to a productive investigator he would have discovered that Corrigan's son in law Ed Jordan worked along side Pierre Viliere who is identified in the personal papers of Otto and Ilse Skorzeny; he would then realize that Corrigan's developments in the Bahamas overlapped with those interests of Clint Murchison from Athens, Texas (someone I would think even an amateur historian of the assassination might be interested in), the Skorzeny's, and Hitler's former favorite banker Hjalmar Schacht.  

 * * &

It’s possible that Doudna’s informative years and higher education at Armstrong sheds some light on his general perspective, not dissimilar to the influence a Yale or Harvard education might have on other amateur historians. As mentioned, records indicate that prior to Cornell, Doudna was educated at Armstrong College, Big Sandy, TX, the second campus of the college founded by firebrand evangelist Herbert Armstrong whose apocalyptic providentialism was broadcast across the US and Europe via his radio program,The World Tomorrow. 

So, might Greg Doudna now consider the implications of East Texas in the investigation into the assassination in Dallas, just two hours drive from his alma mater?

Geographically Big Sandy, Tyler and Longview, create a 25-30 mi. triangle in East Texas. I posit there was no cultural or political distinction in the early 1960s.  

For our interests — those of us intent on solving the cold case murder investigation — Tyler was home to Joe Zeppa’s Delta Drilling; Longview was home of LeTourneau Mfg. Big Sandy was home of (soon to be opened) Armstrong College.

Tyler-based Delta Drilling was a pivotal component of the Meadows-Skorzeny oil concern in Spain in 1952, and in 1963 Zeppa personally was critical once again to the success of another petroleum related scheme involving, again, Jack Crichton with keen interest being expressed from Madrid by Otto Skorzeny. Skorzeny enjoyed the refuge provided him by Spanish fascist dictator Francisco Franco. To underscore these decades-old relationships, the real estate transaction that resulted in the sale of the ranch owned by Joe Zeppa’s partner in Delta Drilling, Ukraine born A. Dorfman, was handled by Ilse Skorzeny’s cover, global real estate concern Previews, Inc.

Longview-based LeTourneau Mfg. produced the first offshore jack-up rig designed by Leon Delong who is named in the Lafitte datebook along with Bill Dalzell who had worked for George Bush in Odessa; Bush purchased the first DeLong-designed jack-up rig from LeTourneau. Zeppa and Bush were together on November 22, along with Al Ulmer who was posted in Madrid at the time of the Meadows-Skorzeny oil scheme and a decade or so latter planned to pursue a business opportunity with Win Scott who had served as the Western Division European head of special operations in the early ‘50s and as such, received reports related to Otto Skorzeny. Unfortunately, we’ve yet to interest Jeff Morley (who recently credits Doudna with significant understanding of Gen. Edwin Walker) in that particular period in Win Scott’s history.

Big Sandy home of Armstrong College campus opened in 1964; 

The World Tomorrow, Pasadena CA letterhead dated April 25, 1952 

- Co-Worker Letter Big Sandy in Escrow signed by Herbert Armstrong

whose evangelism was founded on apocalyptic providentialism

A quick glance at Herbert Armstrong's history in context of my examination of influences (albeit perhaps undetected) that might cause Greg Doudna to ignore Hank Albarelli’s investigation into the Dallas assassination. Is his stated concern that the datebook is a forgery a mere canard? Among those influences, can one ignore … 

Doctrines of Armstrongism

Herbert W. Armstrong taught that the Bible was a divinely inspired book and the authoritative Word of God. However, he taught that the key to interpreting it had been obscured by God until these last days when he, by divine inspiration, discovered it. Thus, Armstrong regarded himself as the only legitimate interpreter of Scripture and his movement as the only true church of God.  

[admittedly, it’s logical to contemplate that Doudna — who I understand in later years published a strong criticism of Armstrong’s rigidity — is subconsciously resistant to any claim that Hank’s investigation is the only true investigation! :-)] 

Another possible influence over Doudna’s resistance to evidence spelled out in Coup is Herbert Armstrong’s later close friendship with King Leopold III of Belgium that opened doors to kings and world leaders for the evangelist. It was Leopold’s son Baudouin, following his father's abdication, who reigned over the Belgian Congo during the struggle for independence and the subsequent assassination of Patrice Lumumba in January 1961. That research leads straight to QJ/WIN, regardless of Pierre Lafitte’s role in the Dallas plot, and Doudna and Morley’s lack in curiosity is astounding still. I

Take note that Katanga was high on the watchlist of Dulles, Crichton, Skorzeny, Lafitte et. al., and that Katanga Freedom Fighters were being recruited from French prison — this, in spite of Ed Forum’s Steve Thomas and Jeffrey Sundberg’ insistence otherwise. And recall that journalist and self-described soldier of fortune Hal du Berrier, a known associate of Gen. Raul Salan of the OAS and close friend of General Edwin Walker, is mentioned by Lafitte three days prior to the Walker shooting about whom - according to Jeff Morley — Doudna is now an expert?

Doudna simply ignores the fact that du Berrier was at Walker’s house on November 22 , and dismisses any possible significance, apparently based solely on his skepticism of the Lafitte datebook that reveals du Berrier’s relationship with Walker as early as April 1963. 

Katanga:

King Bauoudin of Belgium:

During Baudouin's reign the colony of Belgian Congo became independent. During the parade following the last ceremonial inspection of the Force Publique, the royal sabre of the king was momentarily stolen by Ambroise Boimbo. The photograph, taken by Robert Lebeck, was widely published in world newspapers,^[14] with some seeing the act as a humiliation for the king.^[15] The next day the king attended the official reception; he gave a speech that received a blistering response by Congolese Prime Minister Patrice Lumumba.^[16]

As the head of state of Belgium, Baudouin, along with French President Charles de Gaulle, were the two prominent world leaders at the state funerals of two American presidents, John F. Kennedy in November 1963 and his predecessor Dwight D. Eisenhower in March 1969. At Kennedy's funeral, Baudouin was accompanied by Paul-Henri Spaak, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and former three-time Prime Minister of Belgium.^[17] At Eisenhower's funeral, his next visit to the United States, he was accompanied by Prime Minister Gaston Eyskens.^[18]

@Robert Montenegro This is quite serious, Robert, and kudos to you for tackling it in the open. 

46 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

Excuse me, what have I said here that “continues to erode confidence” in Coup in Dallas? What specifically that I have written here do you consider “insulting”? Why?

But on that topic, how is the authenticity forensic analysis proceeding that you said a while ago was underway, even though you would not say what kind or by who or where? Forensic ink analysis can date the year of the ink used, whether 1963 or a later year; is available all over the United States including in New Mexico; and according to online descriptions of professionals offering such has turnaround time of a few days for results. Why not decide this week to get that done, commit in advance to transparency as to the results, and by next week have the matter settled on that point?

You know what I have noticed missing from you? I wish I heard language from you saying something like “I believe this datebook is authentic, but if it isn’t, I want to know as much as anyone.” 

Why not get the ink analyzed? What’s not to like about finding out the date of the ink used in the writing in the datebook over the next few days, allowing the results to be published, and perhaps inviting (with the moderators’ permission) the forensic ink analyst on to this forum as a guest appearance to explain the science, the methodology, and answer questions?

You have ignored my previous contributions that answer every single question you posit here, again.

Why would I repeat myself under the banner of a June Cobb thread?

Go back and review the Pierre Lafitte datebook, 1963 thread, and once you've studied my previous responses and still have questions, post them on that thread.

3 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

Excuse me, what have I said here that “continues to erode confidence” in Coup in Dallas? What specifically that I have written here do you consider “insulting”? Why?

But on that topic, how is the authenticity forensic analysis proceeding that you said a while ago was underway, even though you would not say what kind or by who or where? Forensic ink analysis can date the year of the ink used, whether 1963 or a later year; is available all over the United States including in New Mexico; and according to online descriptions of professionals offering such has turnaround time of a few days for results. Why not decide this week to get that done, commit in advance to transparency as to the results, and by next week have the matter settled on that point?

You know what I have noticed missing from you? I wish I heard language from you saying something like “I believe this datebook is authentic, but if it isn’t, I want to know as much as anyone.” 

Why not get the ink analyzed? What’s not to like about finding out the date of the ink used in the writing in the datebook over the next few days, allowing the results to be published, and perhaps inviting (with the moderators’ permission) the forensic ink analyst on to this forum as a guest appearance to explain the science, the methodology, and answer questions?

I'm not sure why I bother with your disingenuine effort at professional objectivity.  It was clear from early December 2019 that you were not approaching Hank's investigation presented in Coup in Dallas with any degree of professionalism. You used the coauthor's statement as a foil to "review" a book that apparently shook your foundational understanding of the assassination in Dallas.

Had anyone other than you posted the following, I would read it differently.

Even @Tom Gram who to my knowledge (and apologies to Tom if I'm ill-in formed)  is not well-versed in the nuance of the investigation into Kennedy's assassination in Dallas, picked up on the subtle implications of your remarks . . .  and ran with them. 

However (and for those on EF who are unfamiliar with our history), you and I know what is in play here: 

According to Albarelli, the friendship grew out of those twice-weekly interviews ("interviewed...became good friends").

It is not clear if June Cobb was alone or was accompanied by CIA officials during those twice-weekly meetings with Albarelli over the course of the two years. (innuendo?)

“Many other people unselfishly assisted the author in writing this book [Coup in Dallas] [including…] three of June [Cobb]’s CIA handlers who must remain anonymous…” (Coup in Dallas, 559)

Is that a reference to June Cobb’s CIA handlers in the 1960s, or handlers of June Cobb at the twice-weekly meetings ca. 2012-2013? (suggesting that a seasoned investigative reporter, Albarelli, would agree to being babysat during his sessions with June? are you serious?)

In either case, these three unnamed CIA personnel, whoever they are, are acknowledged for helping in the writing of Coup in Dallas.  (That is patently absurd, Doudna, and you know it. You've lifted from Hank's acknowledgements and slipped in a casual interpretation to suggest  intelligence agents contributed to the writing of Coup in Dallas.  Do members on this forum fall for such tactics?)

4 hours ago, Tom Gram said:

You know this, but I’d imagine the person in a position to share these interviews, assuming they actually occurred, is our own “Ms. Sharp” - the only person allowed to post under an alias on the Education Forum… 

I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that the probability of these Cobb interviews ever seeing the light of day are about the same as the datebook being authentic. 

Is there any proof that Albarelli even met Cobb? Until the Coup crew starts demonstrating something resembling transparency, I think it’s fair to assume that any footnote in that book that can’t be independently verified is probably made up. 

Please see my response to Greg.  And I would ask the same of you, Tom: what's your game here?

 

11 hours ago, Greg Doudna said:

CIA asset Viola June Cobb (1927-2015), who in her CIA work went by an alias calling herself Ms. Sharp (https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=799#relPageId=245), was one of the most interesting and important CIA assets of relevance to Lee Harvey Oswald in Mexico City and related to the JFK assassination. Known for being beautiful and savvy, she was the downfall of many targeted men, almost like a female James Bond, working for the CIA. As late as 2017, CIA-withheld records of June Cobb were considered a priority of interest to those who sought compliance with the law requiring disclosure of JFK-assassination related records, disclosures resisted by the CIA.

(For example this article: “What could a mysterious US spy know about the JFK assassination? John F. Kennedy buffs are awaiting the release of documents about June Cobb, a little known CIA operative working in Cuba and Mexico around the time of the President’s assassination…”, May 20, 2017, https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/05/20/what-could-a-mysterious-us-spy-know-about-the-jfk-assassination-215143/.)

Whether by coincidence or not, Oswald’s last book checked out of a library in his brief life, in Nov 1963, was The Shark and the Sardines, a popular book in Latin America translated into English by June Cobb. (Oddly, the book was neither returned to the library by Oswald nor was it found among Oswald’s belongings.)

June Cobb was not interviewed by the Warren Commission. The ARRB (Assassinations Records Review Board) sought CIA’s assistance in locating June Cobb so she could be questioned but received no cooperation from the CIA on that request and were unable to find her. But a Canadian filmmaker reported that he was able to find June Cobb in the phone book in New York City listed under her own name (https://www.facebook.com/photo/?fbid=1802351063158512&set=up-early-today-scouring-the-last-release-of-jfk-files-in-search-of-my-lady-spy-v).

No post-JFK-assassination interview of June Cobb is known to have been published to my knowledge. She never gave a public talk or lecture. Never wrote an article or a book. Never was interviewed on TV. Just lived reclusively to herself in later years. What did she know? What would she say if she were willing to talk?

June Cobb was willing to talk and did. She was interviewed by the late author Hank Albarelli (1947-2019) for “hundreds of hours”, “at least twice a week for over two years”, ca. 2012-2013.

“… CIA Mexico City asset Viola June Cobb, with whom I became a very good friend.” (Coup in Dallas, xix)

“… my hundreds of hours talking to and interviewing June Cobb” (Albarelli, Coup in Dallas, xx)

“...This author [Albarelli] interviewed Viola June Cobb at least twice a week for over two years. She and I became good friends…” (Coup in Dallas, 179)

According to Albarelli, the friendship grew out of those twice-weekly interviews ("interviewed...became good friends").

It is not clear if June Cobb was alone or was accompanied by CIA officials during those twice-weekly meetings with Albarelli over the course of the two years.

“Many other people unselfishly assisted the author in writing this book [Coup in Dallas] [including…] three of June [Cobb]’s CIA handlers who must remain anonymous…” (Coup in Dallas, 559)

Is that a reference to June Cobb’s CIA handlers in the 1960s, or handlers of June Cobb at the twice-weekly meetings ca. 2012-2013? 

In either case, these three unnamed CIA personnel, whoever they are, are acknowledged for helping in the writing of Coup in Dallas.  

Albarelli was an experienced writer and journalist. There must be tapes and notes of those interviews of June Cobb—hundreds of hours worth. 

But none of those interviews have been published or are available for research. 

This could be a mother lode of information from one of the most important 1963 CIA witnesses with knowledge of some relevant things, who never otherwise in her life spoke publicly about what she knew of Oswald or the JFK assassination. Those interview records conceivably could rival or exceed in significance anything else currently withheld. 

Think of it--hundreds of hours of interviews of one of the hottest CIA sources relative to Oswald in Mexico City—she worked with Castro; was in Mexico City involved with other CIA people at the time of the Oswald trip; active in anti-Castro operations; active in anti-FPCC operations. 

Is anyone in a position to bring this mother lode of notes and tapes of June Cobb interviews to the light of day in the interests of history? I hope that might be done.

Hank's June Cobb / Mexico City project was under contract with University Press Kansas. Efforts have been underway for quite some time to ensure the tapes, his research, and the draft manuscript are secure and that the book, as he intended, will be published eventually.  The decision rests with Hank's estate.

I find it insulting you introduce a thread related to a project Hank had been working on for years and yet continue to publicly erode confidence in  his last investigation, "Coup in Dallas."  Do you intend to challenge the veracity of the Cobb tapes or the professionalism and credibility of those who contribute to seeing Hank's  June Cobb project through to fruition?  What is your game, Greg? 

And, I might ask, why don't you consult John Newman if you're so interested in June Cobb?

8 hours ago, Paul Jolliffe said:

What are the odds that this same Billy Lord would be so harrassed in January of 1977 by non-governmental "investigators" seeking to "locate, interview, monitor and influence every single person who ever knew Lee Oswald . . . " that he, Billy Lord, would seek relief from no less than President Carter?

And that one of those doing the harrassing would be the son of the then CIA director (George H.W Bush) and himself a future president of the United States, George W. Bush? 

I had forgotten this letter.  Thanks for the heads up. I wonder if items 1-4 remain redacted? 

Random thoughts:
What can we read into, if anything, the Iranians in Midland in 1977? The revolution and  hostage crisis were months away.  I know a number of Iranian professionals  settled in West Texas decades later, likely drawn there for training or to provide oil industry expertise; Arbusto Energy as just getting off the ground in '77,  James Bath with ties to the bin Laden Group, and GWB.  

GHWB was agency director in September 1976 when Lord's place was ransacked. There are a number of documents in the agency files from that period created by IG Waller that suggest George HW was on a mission of either clean-up or perhaps falsification of records?  Was GWBush on a specific mission for his father when Lord was approached?

note: Bill Dalzell - known associate of Ed Butler of INCA in New Orleans, worked briefly for Bush in the Permian Basin.
 

2 hours ago, Evan Marshall said:

Yes, and I also read the Communist Manifesto-did not find it of value either!

The Amazon blurb for Roberts reads similar to the m.o. of your source. I wonder if maybe they were friends.

55 minutes ago, Steve Thomas said:

Whether it was what Hitler did to the Jews, or Stalin did to his own people, or what we did to the American Indian, or the North Vietnamese did, or what Genghis Khan and the Mongol Horde did, what the Persian did to the Greeks and the people of the Near East,

I read a line once that I have always tried to take to heart.

"Never underestimate the capacity for man's inhumanity to man".

Steve Thomas

 

 

. . . what the British did to the Irish, and the list goes on.

The distinction during the Holocaust was the overt sadism of medical experiments. 

On 8/15/2023 at 8:41 AM, Evan Marshall said:

I would recommend John Newman's latest interview currently posted on the EF. He talks of all the various "bad guys" including Ex-Nazi's who were there to complicate issues not playing a role in the assassination.

Did you read Kill Zone by Craig Roberts?

Co-conspirator #6?
https://www.msnbc.com/the-beat-with-ari-melber

39 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2022/104-10048-10063.pdf. 
This is the 2022 version of the CIA memos you mention above.

I had encountered him yet had not given him any specific significance.

The "source information" in the memo from which they get the idea Oswald had gone to London is the first page of his 1959 passport with the stamps on them; while they leave out the arrival on the 8th in Le Havre.

You may be aware  - a Woman named Steenbarger and her son recount the story of FLYING to France with a LEE OSWALD despite our Oswald having taken a ship with MAJOR CHURCH and his wife and 1 other on the passenger list BILLY LORD.  The first stamps on the top of this page are from LE HAVRE.

 

 

 

I'm particularly interested in the Helsinki leg of the trip which coincided with a global youth fest as I recall?  Are you familiar with that storyline?

What are the odds that Billy Lord graduated a few years before George W. Bush at the same Midland, Texas High School? and a classmate of Lord's is photographed with George de Mohrenschilldt on Travis St. with George and Jeanne's little wire haired terrier.  (as a personal anecdote:  the Travis St. address is in the same block as an apartment occupied by a receptionist at Professional Travel Service located at Two Turtle Creek in the early 1970s; one of our agency contractor's was the wife of de M's buddy Bruce Calder and on at least one occasion he and George came into the 7th floor office to pick Mitzi up for lunch.)

Wilson-Hudson is one of those characters who the government alleged was "unstable," "crazy," etc., yet for some reason, DCI George H. W. Bush took the time to commit to record:

John Wilson-Hudson: To underscore the potential significance of Wilson-Hudson to the investigation into the 1963 assassination of President Kennedy: Memorandum For: Director of Central Intelligence, From: John H. Waller, Inspector General, Subject: Jack Anderson Reference to 28 November 1963 CIA Cable.  “ . . . The dissemination was based on a 27 November 1963 cable from London . . . raising a question as to his [John Wilson-Hudson] reliability . . . “ The undated memo was from the CIA IG to Director of Central Intelligence George Herbert Walker Bush. www.maryferrell.org

United States. Congress. House. Select Committee on Assassinations. Investigation Of the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy: Hearings before the Select Committee on Assassinations of the US House of Representatives, Ninety-Fifth Congress, Second Session. Washington : US Govt. Print. Off., 19781979.

(734) A memorandum from the deputy director of plans of the CIA to the FBI provided additional information about John Wilson Hudson. (670) A “usually reliable source” reported on August 8, 1951, that Carl John Wilson Hudson was a Spanish citizen of British descent residing in Chile and a contact of Bert Sucharov, a suspected Soviet agent in Santi-ago, Chile. (671) Wilson was born in Liverpool, England, on December 29, 1916. (672) After arriving in Chile in 1939, in his capacity of journalist Wilson reportedly be n “a one-man crusade against the British Government.” (673) Anogfiar source described as “usually reliable” and “whose inform-ation was evaluated as “possibly true” reported in 1952 that Wilson was “very probably an intelligence agent.” (674) _

(735) It was also reported by a “usually reliable source” that on June 18, 1959, Carl John Wilson, a British journalist, sent a cable to the British Parliament and the British Trade Union Federation claiming he had confirmed that the U.S. military attachés in the Caribbean were providing military advice to dictators. In this cable, Wilson reportedly protested these actions “in the name of humanity.” (675) Another report from another “usually reliable source” stated that Wilson was involved in a planned attack from Cuba on Puerto Cabezas, Nicaragua, during the weekend of June 27–28, 1959. (676) Associated Press reported on July 1, 1959, that the Cuban home of Capt. Paul Hughes was raided, leading to the seizure of:

A large arms cache and air-sea invasion plans and the detention of two other Americans, a British journalist, several Cubans, and nearly 200 would be members of an expeditionary force against the regime of Nicaraguan President Luis Somoza. (677)

The article stated that “the British subject was identified as Carl John Wilson, a freelance journalist who had been in Havana several weeks.” (678)

(736) The committee was unable to locate John Wilson Hudson. In response to the committee’s inquiries, the Metropolitan Police in London, England, contacted unspecified government agencies, but these efforts were unsuccessful. (679) It has been alleged that Hudson is dead. (680) Analysis

(742) It has not been possible to corroborate the allegation that Ruby visited Trafficante at Trescornia. John Wilson Hudson was not located, and Trafficante denied any such meeting, although he did recall an individual fitting Hudson’s description. José Verdacia also recalled a British journalist who was at Trescornia.