Black Propaganda Ops

[Tim Gratz]

Cliff wrote:

Consider that in 1963 the global real estate most coveted by international

heroin traffickers was the SE Asian Golden Triangle and the Havana-to-Florida

smuggling routes -- not necessarily in that order.

Santo was the big fish in both. Now why do you think Fidel allowed drugs to flow from France through Cuba and then to Trafficante's Florida criminal enterprise?

I wonder what Fidel got from Santo in return?

By the way, do 'yall remember who it was who visited Trafficante when he was imprisoned in Cuba before he made some sort of deal with Fidel or Raul to get out? He had at least a bit part in Dallas.

And do you by chance remember who it was who allowed Trafficante out of prison to attend his daughter's wedding in Havana? Well, I'll give you a clue. That man has an irob-clad alibi. You see he was in Paris on November 22, 1963, receiving a CIA-devised "assassination device" from Nestor Sanchez.

Come to think of it, there was a Cuban exile who was living in my adopted home town who happened to move to Santo's home town around the time the assassination was being planned. If I recall right, he returned to Cuba (from Texas via Mexico) within days of the assassination. But that was no doubt just a coincidence!

Now if we can only put the pieces of this puzzle together!!

[Tim Gratz]

Bill wrote:

So that the CIA was conflicted over the bogus Castro stories does not imply [that there was] another section of the agency was behind it.

By golly, I think he's getting it, to-wit: There is no implication any other section of the CIA was "behind" the assassination. Just as Bill says!

Edited November 1, 2007 by Tim Gratz

[William Kelly]

The publication put out immediately after the assassination of John F. Kennedy by the Cuban Student Directorate/DRE says in pertinent part (my bold emphasis added, but all-caps in original):

Considering it of top importance we want to reproduce a letter from our Delegate in New Orleans

showing how the International Communism operates.

...The

Americans

started to shout [at Lee Harvey Oswald], "TRAITOR",

"COMMUNIST"

, "GO TO CUBA", "KILL HIM". ...I asked Oswald to explain to me...whether it was "The Fair Play for Cuba Committee" or

"The Fair Play for Russia Committee"

. ...After newspaperman Stuckeley's question,

he [Oswald] declared himself a MARXIST.

...In the debate with the delegate of the Cuban Student Directorate in New Orleans

he [Oswald] proclaimed himself as a marxist-leninist

... .

In the PBS Frontline presentation, Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald, FBI agent James P. Hosty says (my emphasis added):

The original complaint that the police department filed on Lee Oswald, around midnight on the 22nd of November, said that Lee Oswald did,

"in furtherance of an international communist conspiracy,

assassinate President John F. Kennedy." Johnson was fearful that if this had gotten out, it would inflame public opinion and could possibly lead to World War III. This is exactly how World War I began, with an assassination.

From Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach's memo of 25 November 1963 (my emphasis added):

Speculation about Oswald's motivation ought to be cut off, and we should have some basis for

rebutting thought that this was a Communist conspiracy

... . Unfortunately the facts on Oswald seem about too pat - too obvious (Marxist, Cuba, Russian wife, etc.).

The Dallas police have put out statements on the Communist conspiracy theory,

and it was they who were in charge when he was shot and thus silenced.

"Too pat," indeed. "Too obvious," indeed.

But not too pat for a patsy.

The CIA propaganda message for Lee Harvey Oswald—black propaganda and every shade of grey—was that he was any and every shade of Communist.

Ashton Gray

[Ashton Gray]

I submit deM was more interested in identifying the best embarkation points on the Haitian coast for smuggling operations.

I wish you wouldn't keep making me answer you in this thread, but, damn it, I can't resist mentioning very briefly that one of the most extraordinary events (among many) that has been shaking out of this research is the fact that on 5 March 1963, the U.S. Army Area Analysis Intelligence Agency was discontinued as a Department of the Army activity. Its functions were transferred to the Defense Intelligence Agency.

Now, maybe you don't find that to be terribly extraordinary on its face. But let me put it into timeline perspective with a few other ancillary events, reaching back a few months to the fall of 1962:

21 November 1962

Department of Defense Directive 5105.27, “Defense Intelligence Agency (Mapping, Charting and Geodesy),” provides for control of the mapping activities of the armed forces by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).

26 December 1962

Marina Oswald writes in a letter to relatives in Russia: "We meet with one family, they are Russians but have never been to Russia and were born in China. They are very charming and good and travel a lot on foot. He himself is a geologist, loves Negroes and Russia.

Soon he will be leaving to go to work in Haiti.

His name is George de Mohrenschildt."

5 March 1963

From Department of the Army General Orders 12: "I. U.S. Army Area Analysis Intelligence Agency. Effective 5 March 1963, the U.S. Army Area Analysis Intelligence Agency, a class II activity under the under the jurisdiction of the Chief of Engineers, is discontinued as a Department of the Army activity." Its functions are transferred to the Defense Intelligence Agency.

11 c. March 1963

George de Mohrenschildt travels to Haiti via the Dominican Republic.

12 March 1963

Ruth Hyde Paine is at the Oswald house on Neely Street. Lee Harvey Oswald orders a Mannlicher-Carcano rifle with a scope sight from the Klein's Sporting Goods Company of Chicago, Illinois, under the name of A.J. Hidell.

13 March 1963

George de Mohrenschildt is in Haiti and signs a contract with the Haiti government. The enterprise is to "include conducting a geological survey of Haiti to plot out oil and geological resources on the island." The contract guarantees that de Mohrenschildt will be paid $285,000 for the survey, with $20,000 paid in cash, and the remainder to be "paid out in a 10-year concession on a sisal plantation." [NOTE: George de Mohrenschildt's office in Port au Prince, Haiti for the contract is in fact inside the office of the Inter-American Geodetic Survey (IAGS)—which a week earlier, on 5 March 1963, had come under the auspices of the Defense Intelligence Agence (DIA).]

Please keep the safety bar snugly in place and keep arms and legs inside the cars at all times.

Ashton

Edited November 1, 2007 by Ashton Gray

[Cliff Varnell]

Cliff wrote:

Consider that in 1963 the global real estate most coveted by international

heroin traffickers was the SE Asian Golden Triangle and the Havana-to-Florida

smuggling routes -- not necessarily in that order.

Santo was the big fish in both. Now why do you think Fidel allowed drugs to flow from France through Cuba and then to Trafficante's Florida criminal enterprise?

I don't think that, and I have a hard time seeing where you got that impression.

It was a keen desire for the military re-acquisition of Cuba that lead to the

events of Eleven Twenty Two.

Castro wasn't playing ball with the heroin traffickers in 1963, which is why they

sought his removal.

Edited November 1, 2007 by Cliff Varnell

[Charles Drago]

It was a keen desire for the military re-acquisition of Cuba that lead to the

events of Eleven Twenty Two.

Castro wasn't playing ball with the heroin traffickers in 1963, which is why they

sought his removal.

Ah, Cliff,

Here we go again.

Many of the players at the facilitator and mechanic levels of the JFK conspiracy desired the "re-acquisition" of Cuba. They were enlisted into the plot with the promise that just such an act would follow upon the president's demise.

The assassination's sponsors never intended to deliver. Or they would have.

Nothing that transpired on Assassination Weekend -- or later -- was sufficient to change a serious invasion plan.

Nothing.

And the heroin traffickers had made other arrangements.

But why travel down this road again?

Charles

[Ashton Gray]

And the heroin traffickers had made other arrangements.

See my brief timeline above regarding de Mohrenschildt vis a vis DIA and military mapping functions.

The third and almost invisible partner in the de Mohrenschildt/Clemard Joseph Charles operation was Frenchman B. Juindine Tardieu.

How this all ties in with the Diem murders in Viet Nam, orchestrated by CIA through Lucien Conein 20 days before CIA assassinated Kennedy, is for another time, another place...

Ashton

[Charles Drago]

Are you suggesting that jungle and mountain airstrips are not naturally occuring phenomena?

Charles

[Cliff Varnell]

And the heroin traffickers had made other arrangements.

Charles, in the context of the narcotics trade this is an utter non sequitur.

When a beautiful woman dumps a guy, he may make "other arrangements"

and still pine after his lost love, no?

The dope trade is a series of "arrangements" wherein producers and

distributors maximize profits over time by eliminating the middlemen.

Meyer Lansky began developing Havana as a smuggler's paradise in the early

'30's, and proceeded for the better part of three decades to make it the hub of

international narcotics traffic. If other locales in the Caribbean had been of greater

potential to the Lansky organization, Lansky would have developed them instead of

Cuba.

Those "other arrangements" forged after the advent of Fidel -- smuggling ops

staged from the Bahamas, the Dominican Republic, and Haiti -- were never as

attractive as doing business out of Cuba.

It's loss was sorely felt. It's return was keenly desired. The propaganda value

of having a "Castro boogyman" pales in comparison to the concrete value of

having a readily controlled dope pipeline running thru Havana.

Lanksy didn't open his casinos in the Bahamas until 1964. I speculate he was

waiting to see how Cuba would play out. Instead of controlling 3rd-Worlders like

Batista, Lanksy had to pay off British Commonwealth types at a much higher price.

And look at all the names listed in "The deMoh & Charles Show." For the sake

of argument, let's say those guys were opening up Haiti as a narcotics hub. All

of them were middlemen. With the exception of WUBINY/WUSALINE (CIA), they

were all temporary to the on-going arrangements that made up the international

narcotics market.

If tycoons like Averell Harriman and Clint Murchison, Jr. are regarded as possible

sponsors of the JFK assassination, I submit their intent was to reclaim Cuba for its

place in the dope biz.

Heroin is the most tangible and valuable of commodities, whereas "propaganda

value" may bring tangible benefits it isn't, in and of itself, a tangible item. The

hard-eyed men who killed Kennedy were after something far more tangible

than dropping a propaganda "shock" on the American people.

If Oswald had been gunned down Friday afternoon as planned, Castro was toast.

Or so I'll continue to argue going forward...

[Charles Drago]

[1] The propaganda value of having a "Castro boogyman" pales in comparison to the concrete value of having a readily controlled dope pipeline running thru Havana.

[2] If tycoons like Averell Harriman and Clint Murchison, Jr. are regarded as possible sponsors of the JFK assassination, I submit their intent was to reclaim Cuba for its place in the dope biz.

[3] Heroin is the most tangible and valuable of commodities, whereas "propaganda value" may bring tangible benefits it isn't, in and of itself, a tangible item. The hard-eyed men who killed Kennedy were after something far more tangible than dropping a propaganda "shock" on the American people.

[4] If Oswald had been gunned down Friday afternoon as planned, Castro was toast.

[5] Or so I'll continue to argue going forward...

1. If I impart nothing else to anyone viewing these pages, let me be remembered for championing the "third alternative" point of view. For these characters, it wasn't a choice between a "readily controlled dope pipeline" or a "'Castro boogeyman [sic].'" They conspired to create and maintain both. And they succeeded.

2. Big "if," Cliff. One of the glaring and fatal problems with your construction is that it places Harriman and Murchison on the same plane. Nothing could be farther removed from the truth.

3. Off point entirely. Fatally simplistic, too. See "1" above. Again, you are not providing a viable blueprint for the conspiracy in all of its complexities. And until you're able to describe, even hypothetically, how the plot was layered, you have nothing upon which to base these assertions.

4. This is utter nonsense. Neither you nor anyone else on this Forum -- and I've challenged both you and Robert Charles-Dunne, the prime, best informed, most eloquent proponents of the "LHO's survival changed everything" paradigm -- to make the case by refuting my often-detailed counter-position in its entirety and in kind. So far I've read nothing from you but regurgitations of an otherwise baseless proposition.

5. But hey, do have at it. In the final analysis, there is more that unites us than divides us.

Respectfully,

Charles

Edited November 2, 2007 by Charles Drago

[Cliff Varnell]

Charles, in this post I'll go with burgundy...

[1] The propaganda value of having a "Castro boogyman" pales in comparison to the concrete value of having a readily controlled dope pipeline running thru Havana.

[2] If tycoons like Averell Harriman and Clint Murchison, Jr. are regarded as possible sponsors of the JFK assassination, I submit their intent was to reclaim Cuba for its place in the dope biz.

[3] Heroin is the most tangible and valuable of commodities, whereas "propaganda value" may bring tangible benefits it isn't, in and of itself, a tangible item. The hard-eyed men who killed Kennedy were after something far more tangible than dropping a propaganda "shock" on the American people.

[4] If Oswald had been gunned down Friday afternoon as planned, Castro was toast.

[5] Or so I'll continue to argue going forward...

1. If I impart nothing else to anyone viewing these pages, let me be remembered for championing the "third alternative" point of view. For these characters, it wasn't a choice between a "readily controlled dope pipeline" or a "'Castro boogeyman [sic].'" They conspired to create and maintain both. And they succeeded.

The hypothetical "choice" did indeed involve "a readily controlled

dope pipeline out of Havana," OR the Castro boogy-man scenario. Not both.

As to the former, on 11/22/63 the Lansky/Trafficante syndicate was still struggling to

adequately replace Havana as a distribution hub. It's proximity to the Florida Keys

make Havana eternally attractive to narcotics smugglers.

Having to pull the US Navy off the coast of Haiti so they could stage smuggling runs

was in no way, shape or form a "readily controlled pipeline."

That was Harriman's call when it was all said and done -- or so I speculate.

2. Big "if," Cliff. One of the glaring and fatal problems with your construction is that it places Harriman and Murchison on the same plane. Nothing could be farther removed from the truth.

I submit their respective smuggling instruments were roughly

equivalent -- Zapata Offshore and Murchison Oil Lease. And both owned shipping

lines, of course. I can't quantify their respective roles in dope trafficking, but

given their respective histories, connections etc. it's productive speculation, imho.

Consider: Johnson wasn't in the White House more than 10 minutes 11/22/63

before Harriman shows up to tell him that the Soviets had nothing to do with the

assassination.

How would Harriman know that as a fact unless he had knowledge of the actual plot?

And if Harriman didn't know that as a fact, how does he responsibly present that

conclusion to the President of the United States less than 6 hours after the shooting?

Looks to me like an employer (Harriman) going over to his employee's

house to tell the guy (LBJ) the proverbial What's What.

And then a few days later a Harriman protege by the name of George H. W. Bush

was briefed by the CIA as to the Cuban exile reaction in Miami.

http://newsmine.org/archive/cabal-elite/fa...a-1961-1963.txt

The same George Bush of Houston TX who called the FBI to direct attention

to a right winger.

Is the following a co-incidence? Emphasis mine:

Larry Hancock's Someone would Have Talked:

We were getting all sorts of rumors that the President was going to be

assassinated in Dallas: there were no if's, and's, or but's about it."

Marty Underwood, Democratic National Committee Political Advance Man.

Underwood served as the advance man for Houston on the Texas

trip in November of 1963.

3. Off point entirely. Fatally simplistic, too. See "1" above. Again, you are not providing a viable blueprint for the conspiracy in all of its complexities. And until you're able to describe, even hypothetically, how the plot was layered, you have nothing upon which to base these assertions.

Assertions are to be generally avoided, no doubt. Assertions

are guilty pleasures best taken in the heat of rhetorical battle.

Otherwise, I try to stick to the historical record as closely as possible.

Blueprints and layers are not what I'm about. Simplistic, sure. I'm looking for

consistencies in the evidence. When the consistencies become sufficiently

numerous a preliminary conclusion, a working hypothesis, can be reasonably

formed.

Not one point of historical fact I've presented in this thread has been challenged.

My speculations derived from these facts certainly can be challenged, have been,

and will be. I wouldn't want it any other way, Brother Charles!

Edited November 2, 2007 by Cliff Varnell

[Ashton Gray]

Having to pull the US Navy off the coast of Haiti so they could stage smuggling runs

was in no way, shape or form a "readily controlled pipeline."

That was Harriman's call when it was all said and done -- or so I speculate.

That's a whole lotta' speculating from where I sit; the record says it was a Bundy operation, and its date has everything to do with de Mohrenschildt relocating to Haiti 12 days later and the launching of Operation Red Cross (a.k.a. Operation Crypt/Operation Tilt) five days after that:

Monday, 20 May 1963

Date of a meeting between John F. Kennedy and McGeorge Bundy on the subject of "Future Policy Toward Haiti." [NOTE: Although the TOP SECRET document recording this meeting is not produced by Bundy until 23 May as National Security Action Memorandum No. 246, the text of that NSAM is being placed here to memorialize the outcome of the meeting]:

NATIONAL SECURITY ACTION MEMORANDUM NO. 246

TO:

The Secretary of State

The Secretary of Defense

The Director of Central Intelligence

SUBJECT: Future Policy Toward Haiti

The following conclusions were reached during a meeting with the President on Haiti on May 20, 1963.

1. Ambassador Thurston should be recalled for consultation and a final decision on his return to Haiti will be held in abeyance until the Ambassador can give his views on this matter. (Action: Department of State)

2. Fleet units now positioned off the island of Gonaive may be withdrawn after May 23 if there have been no untoward developments before then indicating reconsideration of this decision.

Tuesday, 21 May 1963

Quoted from CIA memo:

IX-193

21 May 1963

CONTACT REPORT

WUBRINY - George deMOHRENSHILDT [sic: George de Mohrenschildt]

1. WUBRINY/1 telephoned on the sterile line at approximately 1630 hours to pass the following information.

2. Mr. deMOHRENSHILDT dropped into the [illegible handwriting, two letters; could be "01" or "Q1" or "Q/"]SALINE offices this afternoon. He said that M. Clemard Joseph CHARLES has returned to Haiti and is being seriously considered as the next President. Subject said that M. CHARLES is receiving considerable support and in subject's opinion would make an excellent President of Haiti as soon as Duvalier can be gotten out.

3. deMOHRENSHILDT said that he has obtained some Texas financial backing and that he has visited interested people in Washington regarding M. CHARLES candidacy. He did not identify these contacts to WUBRINY/1.

C. FRANK STONE, III

Chief

DO/DOEO

DO/COEO/CFS:jj(22 May 1963)

Distribution:

Orig - EO subject

1 - EO chrono

1 - WUBRINY ops

Wednesday, 22 May 1963

• An unnamed Chargé is sent to Haiti from the U.S., purportedly to attend the "self-coronation" of Duvalier.

• On the same day, William Pawley has a discussion with CIA's JM/WAVE Station Chief Ted Shackley.

Friday, 24 May 1963

Date U.S. fleet units positioned off the island of Gonaive are withdrawn per National Security Action Memorandum No. 246.

Sunday, 26 May 1963

U.S. Ambassador to Haiti Thurston is recalled to Washington, D.C.

Thursday, 30 May 1963

George de Mohrenschildt and his wife return to Dallas from a trip to Washington, D.C., New York City, and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. He will be in Dallas for two days before relocating to Haiti.

Sunday, 2 June 1963

George de Mohrenschildt and his wife arrive in Haiti, having stayed overnight in the Dominican Republic.

Wednesday, 5 June 1963

• John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, John Connally, Cliff Carter, and Fred Korth are all in attendance at a meeting at the Cortez Hotel in El Paso, Texas. Part of the meeting involves a discussion of JFK visiting Dallas. The first date discussed is August 27, 1963, to coincide with Johnson's birthday, but it is rejected as being "too close to Labory Day." The date of 21 November is set as the earliest feasible date considering Kennedy's other committments.

• On the same day, at 6:00 p.m., William Pawley's ship

The Flying Tiger

departs Miami, Florida, launching CIA's Operation Red Cross (a.k.a. Operation Crypt/Operation Tilt).

Ashton

Edited November 3, 2007 by Ashton Gray

[Cliff Varnell]

Having to pull the US Navy off the coast of Haiti so they could stage smuggling runs

was in no way, shape or form a "readily controlled pipeline."

That was Harriman's call when it was all said and done -- or so I speculate.

That's a whole lotta' speculating from where I sit; the record says it was a Bundy operation,

Joseph Trento, The Secret History of the CIA, pg 334-5, emphasis mine:

Having served as ambassador to Moscow and governor of New York, W. Averell Harriman was in the middle of a long public career. In 1960, President-elect Kennedy appointed him ambassador-at-large, to operate “with the full confidence of the president and an intimate knowledge of all aspects of United States policy.” By 1963, according to [Pentagon aide William R.] Corson, Harriman was running “Vietnam without consulting the president or the attorney general.”

The president had begun to suspect that not everyone on his national security team was loyal. As Corson put it, “Kenny O’Donnell (JFK’s appointments secretary) was convinced that McGeorge Bundy, the national security advisor, was taking orders from Ambassador Averell Harriman and not the president. He was especially worried about Michael Forrestal, a young man on the White House staff who handled liaison on Vietnam with Harriman.”

[Cliff Varnell]

In all of the following emphasis mine

Joseph Trento, The Secret History of the CIA, pg 334-5:

(quote on)

Having served as ambassador to Moscow and governor of New York,

W. Averell Harriman was in the middle of a long public career. In 1960,

President-elect Kennedy appointed him ambassador-at-large, to operate

“with the full confidence of the president and an intimate knowledge of

all aspects of United States policy.” By 1963, according to [Pentagon aide

William R.] Corson, Harriman was running “Vietnam without consulting

the president or the attorney general.”

The president had begun to suspect that not everyone on his national security

team was loyal. As Corson put it, “Kenny O’Donnell (JFK’s appointments

secretary) was convinced that McGeorge Bundy, the national security advisor,

was taking orders from Ambassador Averell Harriman and not the president.

He was especially worried about Michael Forrestal, a young man on the

White House staff who handled liaison on Vietnam with Harriman.”

(quote off)

From JFK's taped notations on the Diem coup:

http://tapes.millercenter.virginia.edu/cli...nam_memoir.html

(quote on)

President Kennedy: Opposed to the coup was General [Maxwell] Taylor, the

Attorney General [Robert Kennedy], Secretary [Robert] McNamara to a somewhat

lesser degree, John McCone, partly based on an old hostility to [Henry Cabot] Lodge

[Jr.] which causes him to lack confidence in Lodge's judgement, partly as a result

of a new hostility because Lodge shifted his [CIA] station chief; in favor of the

coup was State, led by Averell Harriman, George Ball, Roger Hilsman,

supported by Mike Forrestal at the White House.

(quote off)

Via PD Scott:

http://www.history-matters.com/pds/DP3_Chapter5.htm#_ftn41

"Assassinations Report, 173. Cf. FRUS, #320; 777 (Bundy memo of April 21, 1963).

The other two documents are not in FRUS."

(quote on)

As early as January 4, 1963, Bundy proposed to President Kennedy that the

possibility of communicating with Castro be explored. (Memorandum, Bundy

to the President, 1/4/63). Bundy's memorandum on "Cuba Alternatives" of

April 23 [sic, i.e. April 21], 1963, also listed the "gradual development of some

form of accommodation with Castro" among policy alternatives. (Bundy

memorandum, 4/21/63) At a meeting on June 3, 1963, the Special Group agreed

it would be a "useful endeavour" to explore "various possibilities of establishing

channels of communication to Castro." (Memorandum of Special Group meeting,

6/6/63).

(quote off)

David Talbot's Brothers, pg 226:

(quote on)

When Lisa Howard told [envoy William] Attwood that Castro would like to

restore communications with Kennedy and offered to set up an informal meeting

at her apartment between him and Cuba's UN representative, Carlos Lechuga,

the diplomat responded enthusiastically. In a memo he wrote for [Adlai]

Stevenson and Averill Harriman -- who he was told was the best direct channel

to Kennedy -- Attwood suggested that "we have something to gain and nothing

to lose by finding out whether in fact Castro does want to talk"...Stevenson took

the proposal to Kennedy, who gave him clearance to pursue the dialogue.

Harriman too said he was "adventuresome enough" to like the idea...

(quote off)

ad·ven·ture (ăd-vĕn'chər)

n.

1.

1. An undertaking or enterprise of a hazardous nature.

2. An undertaking of a questionable nature, especially one involving

intervention in another state's affairs.

Brothers, pg 217:

(quote on)

By the time Vietnam began to reach a crisis point late in Kennedy's term, much

of his national security bureaucracy -- weary with the president's sly maneuvers

to avoid war -- was in flagrant revolt against him. The Pentagon and CIA were

taking secret steps to sabotage his troop withdrawal plan. And even trusted

advisors like Harriman, the Moscow-friendly globe-trotting tycoon whom Kennedy

thought he could rely on to help broker a deal on Vietnam, were brazenly

undercutting his peace initiatives.

(quote off)

Vincent Salandria's "The Tale Told by Two Tapes":

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...art=#entry31073

(quote on)

In November of 1966, I read Theodore H. White's The Making of the President, 1964...

[O]n page 33 I read the following about the flight back to Washington, D.C. from Dallas:

On the flight the party learned that there was no conspiracy, learned of the

identity of Oswald and his arrest; and the President's mind turned to the

duties of consoling the stricken and guiding the quick.

...* The Situation Room of the White House first fingered Oswald as the

lone assassin when an innocent government, with so much evidence

in Dealey Plaza of conspiracy, would have been keeping all options open.

Therefore this premature birth of the single-assassin myth points to the

highest institutional structure of our warfare state as guilty of the crime

of killing Kennedy. Such a source does not take orders from the Mafia

nor from renegade elements. But such a source is routinely given to

using the Mafia and supposedly out-of-control renegade sources to do

its bidding.

* McGeorge Bundy was in charge of the Situation Room and was spending

that fateful afternoon receiving phone calls from President Johnson, who

was calling from Air Force One when the lone-assassin myth was

prematurely given birth. (Bishop, Jim, The Day Kennedy Was Shot,

New York & Funk Wagnalls, 1968), p. 154) McGeorge Bundy as the

quintessential WASP establishmentarian did not take his orders from the

Mafia and/or renegade elements.

(quote off)

Max Holland's The Kennedy Assassination Tapes, pg 57:

(quote on)

At 6:55 p.m. Johnson has a ten-minute meeting with Senator J. William Fulbright

(D-Arkansas) and diplomat W. Averell Harriman to discuss possible foreign

involvement in the assassination, especially in light of the two-and-a-half-year

Soviet sojourn of Lee Harvey Oswald...Harriman, a U.S. ambassador to Moscow

during World War II, is an experienced interpreter of Soviet machinations and

offers the president the unanimous view of the U.S. governments top Kremlinologists.

None of them believe the Soviets had a hand in the assassination, despite the Oswald

association.

(quote off)

"The Secret Origins of Skull & Bones":

http://www.voxfux.com/features/scull_bones_opium.html

Partial roster of Yale club "Skull & Bones":

W. Averell Harriman ('13)

McGeorge Bundy ('40)

Edited November 3, 2007 by Cliff Varnell

[William Kelly]

While it is interesting to discover who was behind things at the top - and who, how and why the planted Communist Conspiracy/Castro/Cuba evidence did not go over with those steering the investigation into the assasssination, and it was redirected to the lone-nut (PDS Phase II) scenario, the purpose of this thread was to review the black propaganda operations that were instigated, some before and some after the assassination.

As noted previously, "black propaganda," as opposed to white (press release) and shades of grey, "is specifically attributed to the enemy and allegedly supports the enemy's position," just as the black prop ops related to the assassination specifically brands Castro/Cuba as sponsors of the murder.

PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE – 201 - BLACK PROPAGANDA OPEATIONS

Psychological warfare and propaganda are not subjects found on the curriculum of most colleges, but it is taught in the United States military, who have refined such procedures and techniques to a science.

The primary textbook is a rare one – Psychological Warfare – International Propaganda and Communications by Paul M. A. Linebarger (1948, U.S. Army; Duell, Sloan and Pearce, N.Y. 1954; Arno Press, 1972), which sets the tone for controlling the minds of the masses by simply using the right message.

"Pscyhological warfare, in the broad sense," according to Linebarger, "consists of the application of parts of the science called psychology to the conduct of war; psychological warfare comprises the use of propaganda against the enemy, together with such military operational measures as may supplement the propaganda. Propaganda may be described, in turn, as organized persuasion by non-violent means. War itself may be considered to be, among other things, a violent form of persuasion."

"War is waged against the minds, not the bodies of the enemy," Linebarger tells us.

The term propaganda stems from the name of the department of the Vatican which had the duty of propagating the faith.

Specifically defined, propaganda consists of "the planned use of any form of public or mass produced communication designed to affect the minds and emotions of a given group for a specific public purpose, whether military, economic or political."

Military propaganda consists of "the planned use of any form of communication designed to affect the minds and emotions of a given enemy, neutral or friendly foreign group for a specific strategic or tactical purpose."

Note that if the communication isn't planned it cannot be called propaganda, just as disinformation, is not disinformation if it is not intentionaly misleading information that stems from a national or corporate agency. If not planned, it's no propaganda, and if not intentional and from an official agency, it is not disinformation, but misinformation.

Linebarger says that "Propaganda is directed to the subtle niceties of thought by which people maintain their personal orientation in an unstable interpersonal world. Propaganda must use the language of the mother, the schoolteacher, the lover, the bully, the policeman, the actor, the ecclesiastic, the buddy, the newspaperman, all of them in turn. And the propaganda analysis, in weighing and evaluating propaganda, must be even more discriminating whether the propaganda is apt to hit its mark or not."

Using what he calls the STASM formula for spot analysis, Linebarger explains that propaganda can be distinguished by the consideration of five elements: 1) Source (including the media); 2) Time; 3) Audience; 4) Subject; 5) Mission.

"This formula works best," says Linebarger, "in the treatment of monitored materials of which the source is known. First point to note is the character of the source – the true source (who really got it out?), the ostensible source (whose name is signed to it?); also the first use source (who used it the first time?) and the second source (who claims merely to be using it as a quotation?)."

"It is soon evident that the mere attribution of source is a job of high magnitude. A systematic breakdown of the STASM formula produces the following analysis outline: applicable Offensive-interrupt social action not desired. Conversionary – change allegiance. Divisive – split apart enemy components. Consolidation – insure compliance of occupied civilians. Counter-propaganda – refutes."

As taught by Linebarger, there are various shades of propaganda. White propaganda is a press release, light propaganda is attributed to a friendly government, medium to a neutral government, and black propaganda, is by its definition "specifically attributed to the enemy and allegedly supports the enemy's position."

Ladislas Farago, a journalist and student of the history of intelligence operations, says that "Black propaganda is a fundamental intelligence operation…because…it never identifies its real source, and pretends to originate within or close to the enemy."

"Security is designed to keep useful information from reaching the enemy. Propaganda operations are designed to get information to him."

According to Linebarger, "Qualifications for a successful career as an effective psychological warrior requires the combination of four skills in a single individual – 1) An effective working knowledge of U.S. government administration and policy, so the purposes and plans of the government may be correctly interpreted. 2) An effective neology of correct military and naval procedure and staff operations, together with enough understanding of the arts of warfare. 3) Professional knowledge of the media, whether it stems from publishing, magazines, newspapers, radio or advertising. 4) Intimate, professional level understanding of a given area (Italy, Japan, Kwangtung, Algeria), based on first hand acquaintance, knowledge of its language, traditions, history, practical politics and customs. On top of these, a professional understanding of psychology or some similar profession."

"The man who steps up and says that he meets all five of these qualifications is a xxxx, a genius, or both," says Linebarger. "There is no perfect psychological warrior, ….however, each psychological warfare team represents a composite of these skills. Some members have two or three to start with, others have virtually none."

One of Linebargers's students, Joeseph Burkhalder Smith (in Portrait of a Cold Warrior, G. P. Putnam's Sons, NY, 1976), relates that, "Linebarger's two leading operational heroes whose activities formed the basis for lessons he wished us to learn and whose examples he thought we should follow were Lt. Col. Edward G. Lansdale and E. Howard Hunt….They had what he called 'black minds."

Two of Lansdale's black ops, one from the Philippines and the other from the Vietnam, are featured in the book, The Ugly American (W.W. Norton, 1958, by William Lederer and Eugene Burdick), in the chapters "The Ragtime Kid" and "The Six Foot Swami from Savanna."

The pre-planned black propaganda operations connected with the assassination of President Kennedy were designed to implicate Fidel Castro and Cuba in the murder, and placing the blame on Castro is one clear thread that runs through all of the media propaganda reports.

Edited November 4, 2007 by William Kelly