Reflections of an agnostic...

[David Lifton]

Bill, good luck with your tackling of journalists attempting to pin the assassination on the mafia. I am wondering why it is so easy to associate the mafia with the cover up? Is it the Ruby angle, alone?

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Earl_Warren&oldid=432596658#Controversy

....Drew Pearson hinted in his syndicated column in October 1963 that Clark had told him that the FBI confirmed Ragen's accusations of Chicago mob control by leading businessmen and politicians. This was confirmed in the posthumous publication, eleven years later, of Drew Pearson's Diaries, 1949–1959 edited by Tyler Abell.[46]; Tom Clark had told Pearson that Ragen stated that Henry Crown, the Hilton Hotels chain, and Walter Annenberg controlled the mob.[47][48][46][49][50][51][52][53][54]

Earl Warren and his family were close friends of Henry Crown's investment partner, Conrad Hilton, and Warren's daughter, Virginia was formerly involved in a close relationship with Conrad Hilton.[55][56][57][58] The year following the publication of the Warren Report, Earl Warren selected[59] as his Supreme Court law clerk, the son of Paul Ziffren,[60]former California state Democratic party chairman, forced to resign after allegations of Ziffren's organized crime connections were leveled by Earl Warren's friend,[61] Senator William F. Knowland.[62][63][64][65]

"One of the things that was embarrassing and got national coverage was the Reader's Digest article of July, 1960. It was written by Lester Velie and is called, "Paul Ziffren, The Democrats' Man of Mystery." (The author sets forth a very detailed account of "Ziffren 's connections with the underworld and gambling figures of the period,") "[66]

Despite the disturbing information about Henry Crown, et al., Drew Pearson claimed was provided to him by Clark in 1946, Justice Tom Clark appointed Crown's son, John, as one of two of his 1956 Supreme Court session law clerks.[67] In December 1963, Chief Justice Earl Warren, acting as head of the newly formed Presidential Commission investigating the death of President Kennedy, suggested that Henry Crown's attorney, Albert E. Jenner, Jr., who also, at that time employed Crown's son, John at Jenner's Chicago law firm, be appointed as a senior assistant Warren Commission counsel. Warren gave his fellow commissioners the names of two men who approved of Jenner's appointment, Tom C Clark and Dean Acheson. [68]

The appointment of Albert Jenner to investigate[69] whether either Oswald or Ruby acted alone or conspired with others remains controversial.[70][71] In 1953, Albert E. Jenner, Jr. had represented Michael Frank Darling when he was investigated by the House Committee on Education and Labor.[72]Darling was business manager of IBEW union Chicago local 1031, the first and largest union organization to contract insurance coverage with Allen Dorfman and his father, Paul, an associate of Jack Ruby. [73][74][75]

(Don't worry...the "minders" @wikipedia moved in within two hours to remove everything displayed in the above quote box because the details interfered with the eternal, sanitized version of the wikipedia Earl Warren biography, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earl_Warren )

My guess is that section was deleted because most of the citations were links to Google searches that normally did not support the claim and few, IF any, of the others supported the claims made. Was that your handywork?

Funny that neither the LA Times 3x obits nor the AP or NYT obits of Ziffren mentioned him being accused of ties to the mob. The latter said, “[in 1960 Democratic presidential]Hopefuls like John F. Kennedy and Hubert H. Humphrey sought him out.” Hmmm so if Warren is tainted by supposedly making his son a cleark, what does that say about JFK?

http://articles.latimes.com/1991-06-04/local/me-101_1_paul-ziffren

http://articles.latimes.com/1991-06-02/news/mn-458_1_paul-ziffren

http://articles.latimes.com/1991-06-04/local/me-10_1_los-angeles

http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1916&dat=19910603&id=7gYhAAAAIBAJ&sjid=lXYFAAAAIBAJ&pg=3069,164975

http://www.nytimes.com/1991/06/03/obituaries/paul-ziffren-democratic-leader-in-california-in-1950-s-dies-at-77.html

Gus Russo however makes similar charges

Wow Glen that is indeed quite an admission. That you have actually STUDIED this case all these years and nothing has convinced you of conspiracy. My study began day one, at age 14. It was clear to me from day one, and totally so by the time LHO was shot, that the fix was in. It would color-and virtually dictate- everything else in my life for the next nearly 50 years. Then in 96 I met a wonderful man, an attorney like myself, and we fell in love. Of course the case came up as it always with me (I have an obsession with the truth) and I asked Erick his view. Much to my shock and dismay he replied that he'd never given it a thought. To his credit he began reading books and by the time of our wedding- a mere four months later- he knew enough to (1.) know it was a conspiracy and (2.) be relatively conversant with longtime students of this case. No he does not read all the stuff I do, he did, more recently, read Brothers and JFK and the Unspeakable...so he KNOWS...but YOU???? It is hard to take seriously what you say. The only people I have ever encountered who refuse to believe conspiracy who have actually studied the evidence are people who are ah...assets of some sort. I am not saying you are...I just find your story amazing beyond all belief. As JIm Garrison once said and I paraphrase, "the only way you can believe in the WC is to not study it".

But I appreciate you telling your most strange tale and I will just take you at your word, no matter how difficult it is for me to comprehend. I mean it was IN- OUR- FACES blatant.imho.

Dawn

Dawn,

Darn, my intention was by no means to shock anyone the way you seem to have been? Are you alright? Beyond that, I'm really glad that I could give you a good laugh, I'm always inclined to look between my fingers whenever I can achieve that.

However, I've admitted nothing - as a lawyer I would expect you to be well aware of the distinction between an admittance and a statement? No? You know, unlike what you seem to think, it's not criminal to have views about this case that differs from yours. I'm not accused of anything, as far as I understand?

One thing that I can detect in this posting of yours is that this is a matter of your way or the highway. You, on the other hand, have been working hard and consistently to throw out any evidence of JVBs lies. Some time ago you commented that "we all know why you are here". Above, you are continuing along the same lines:

"... who have actually studied the evidence are people who are ah...assets of some sort." You just cant help yourself, can you? If I disagree with you, I'm a CIA agent?

Let's sum this up.

You knew from the age of 14 that this was a conspiracy. You have an obsession with the truth. Your partner has now read two books and accordingly I do not know what I'm talking about? Moreover, it was all IN-MY-FACE? If nothing else, perhaps I'm "an asset"?

Dawn Meredith,

I am sincerely glad that I live in a country where I will never be at risk of having you representing me.

Dawn. . do you remember the repeated episodes on Saturday Night Live, where Dan Aykroyd faces off against Jane Curtin? He makes comical faces while she talks, and finally starts his commentary with "Jane, you ignorant slut!"

More and more, this thread has quickly degenerated to that level, which is both funny and sad.

Glenn is the agnostic; you have a tremendous sense of certainty and the correctness of your beliefs (yet, apparently are partial to JVB who, imho--oh, forget that--is without question, a complete fraud). Very smart, I might add; and a good researcher, in some ways. . but I digress. . )

FWIW: A person has the right to be an agnostic.

They also have the right to hold a completely opposite view.

Yesterday, I received a critical document from an agnostic friend of mine--something truly important. I (and another researcher with years of experience) thought this item did not exist. But, it turned out, he had it. And had received it years ago under a rather routine FOIA request. He sent me a nice note saying "Email me when you figure this out". . and of course I will.

I cannot begin to tell you how much I have benefited from relationships with certain agnostic friends, and with lone nutters, too.

There's a whole spectrum of views and people on this case.

That's just the way the world is--and it doesn't just apply to the JFK assassination.

DSL

Edited March 18, 2012 by David Lifton

[Patrick Block]

Ms. Moore posted the CIA eyes-only secret document where the spooks discuss how to discredit researchers who question the Warren Report. They discuss influencing the media and using assets to put forth what they want American's to hear, and generally stample on the Constitution's idea of a Free Press...but there is a more subtle and interesting bit in there too.

I've always found this line, where they talk about their direct involvement in the assassination, quite enlightening.

The CIA-"Our organization itself is directly involved: among other facts, we contributed information to the investigation."

No wonder they didn't want to let that scrap of paper loose, eh?

[Glenn Viklund]

yes David... in for more ??

The page below comes from the Executive Session of the WC on =

January 27, 1964.=20

It was kept classified, though Harold Weisberg attempted to =

obtain a copy of

from the FOIA. After 6 years, with the help of

Jim Lesar, the transcript was finally given to him in 1974.

Specter sent this to J.Lee Rankin in April 1964......Specter =

I believe was aware of forseeing many problems.. MEMORANDUM

April 30, 1964

TO: Mr. J. Lee Rankin

FROM: Arlen Specter SUBJECT: Autopsy Photographs and X-rays of President John F. =

Kennedy In my opinion it is indispensable that we obtain the =

photographs and x-rays of President Kennedy's autopsy for the following =

reasons:=20

1. THE COMMISSION SHOULD DETERMINE WITH CERTAINTY WHETHER =

THE SHOTS CAME FROM THE REAR. Someone from the Commission should review =

the films to corroborate the autopsy surgeons' testimony that the holes =

on the President's back and head had the characteristics of points of =

entry. None of the doctors at Parkland Hospital in Dallas observed the =

hole in the President's back or the small hole in the lower portion of =

his head.=20

With all the outstanding controversy about the direction of =

the shots, there must be independent viewings of the films to verify =

testimony which has come only from Government doctors.=20

2. THE COMMISSION SHOULD DETERMINE WITH CERTAINTY WHETHER =

THE SHOTS CAME FROM ABOVE. It is essential for the Commission to know =

precisely the location of the bullet wound on the President's back so =

that the angle may be calculated. The artist's drawing prepared at =

Bethesda (Commission Exhibit #385) shows a slight angle of declination.=20

It is hard, if not impossible, to explain such a slight =

angle of decline unless the President was farther down Elm Street than =

we have heretofore believed.=20

Before coming to any conclusion on this, the angles will =

have to be calculated at the scene; and for this, the exact point of =

entry should be known.=20 3. THE COMMISSION SHOULD DETERMINE WITH CERTAINTY THAT THERE =

ARE NO MAJOR VARIATIONS BETWEEN THE FILMS AND THE ARTIST'S DRAWINGS.=20

Commission Exhibits Nos. 385, 386, and 388 were made from =

the recollections of the autopsy surgeons as told to the artist.=20

Some day someone may compare the films with the artist's =

drawings and find a significant error which might substantially affect =

the essential testimony and the Commission's conclusions.=20

In any event, the Commission should not rely on hazy =

recollections, especially in view of the statement in the autopsy report =

(Commission Exhibit #387) that:=20

"The complexity of those fractures and the fragments thus =

produced=20

tax safisfactory verbal description and are better =

appreciated in the photographs and roentgenograms which are prepared."=20

B....

The W/C didn't reach any final conclusion of three shots =

from the one shooter ( Oswald ) and from one location......TSBD....that =

was done for them... There was only one government agency responsible for the =

investigation of the murder of the President...and it was never the =

W/C..... The FBI produced 5 books re their investigation in less than =

three weeks....for the W/C.... See U.S Federal Bureau of Investigations ..Investigation of =

Assassination of President John F.Kennedy,Nov 22,1963.Washington =

D.C..Federal Bureau of Investigation, Dec.9 1962.....Five Volumes.. It was error prone, as well as deceptive let alone =

distorted..report......and it proceeded the formation of said W/C..and =

it became the basis for it's none investigation.... See...Warren Commission Document number CD 1.

Only 450 words appear on the murder of the President =

within, excluding the shot that wounded citizen James Tague and the =

wound on=20

President Kennedy's throat......... From this lacking base =

the FBI asserted that Oswald was the lone, psycholologically disturbed =

assassin, which also was a conclusory statement.. In advance of the delivery to the W/C of the 5 FBI =

books...... Hoover secretly, released the findings to the press in a =

effort to mold the public's opinion... this in regarding both the =

validity of the FBI's finding and the presumption of Oswald's guilt is =

found in the W/C's executive session transcripts...they are available at =

the Mary Ferrel site...

The seven men were very busy officials, and they had little =

time nor any expertise for research. ...nor investigations....

They selected 84 men for their staff .......and they named =

as chief council Rankin, a former Solicitor General of the US.....

They did not select nor assembled a body of criminal law =

specialists, inspectors, or field investigators....they chose to rely =

entirely on several Gov agencies, mainly the FBI, to whom the others =

handed their information to........and they in turn witheld....... Their decisions doomed the W/C from the start, and on =

Dec.9/63 the W/C based it's inquiry on the FBI's five volume =

report...... The five volumes contain less than 450 pages on the murder =

of the President ....they are mainly on the psychological profile of LHO =

and biographical details of his Marine Corps youth.=20

On such a report and in so short a time, they closed the =

investigation and drew the pre- conclusion....Oswald.....3 shots from =

the 6th floor of the TSBD....he alone...was guilty....

They had shut down the Dallas Police Dept.inquiry, as well =

as the Texas Att.Gs office by Warren's personal ....interference...The =

SS as well were left to watch from the sidelines... The FBI took all of =

the evidence and such...and took full control.......and their man =

Gerald Ford a member of the W/C , reported to Hoover on the W/Cs =

information from their executive sessions.

On Jan 22 /1964.... Dulles.......Why would it be in their ( FBI) interest to say =

he ( Oswald) is clearly the only guilty one? Rankin..They would like us to fold up and quit.... Boggs....This closes the case, you see. Don't you see? Rankin...They found the man. There is nothing more to do. =

The commission supports their conclusions, and we can go on home and =

that is the end of it....... Boggs...I don't even like to see this being taken down...... Dulles...Yes.I think this record ought to be destroyed.... There was perhaps one could say a meeting of closed =

minds....within the Government agencies...... the SS handed their =

information over to the FBI..But the FBI only passed along to the W/C =

from any of the other agencies, what they felt would not damage their =

findings...Aside from all that, scullduggery , the CIA did not comply =

with handing over any information whatsoever.......when requested and =

never did...... Therefore the Commission by controlling it's own record did =

lead to a deliberate suppression, by all agencies that were involved... Keep in mind also the witnesses who stated that their info =

given to the FBI was recorded improperly....such as omitted or changed.. =

Also the investigation that the FBI was working on in New Orleans( see =

Weisberg... "LHO in N.O " ) ....... information found, statements

taken from witnesses to anything found within in that area, =

were at times not recorded till as long as ten days later....from memory =

and at times scribbled notes......Then they were told to close shop, by =

Hoover.... even though they had not completed their work, they did so =

and walked away... B......=20 "=85Secret Service men literally seized the body from local =

officials at Parkland Hospital, who were demanding that an autopsy be =

performed in accordance with Texas law. If the law had been observed, =

there might have been no controversy, and the Bethesda doctors, the FBI =

and the Secret Service would have escaped the heavy responsibility they =

now bear. Sadly and ironically, the report of the autopsy performed on =

the murdered Oswald in Dallas is a model of clarity and precision =

alongside the sloppy, ambiguous and incomplete record of the autopsy =

President Kennedy received=85the President's body remains the object of =

obscene speculation, and the country suffers needless, disruptive =

controversy. As matters stand, no single element of the (Warren) =

Commission's version of the assassination is more suspect than the =

official account of the President's autopsy."---"The Saturday Evening =

Post", January 14, 1967 The page below comes from the Executive Session of the WC on =

January 27, 1964.=20

It was kept classified, though Harold Weisberg attempted to =

obtain a copy of

from the FOIA. After 6 years, with the help of

Jim Lesar, the transcript was finally given to him in 1974.

Specter sent this to J.Lee Rankin in April 1964......Specter =

I believe was aware of forseeing many problems.. MEMORANDUM

April 30, 1964

TO: Mr. J. Lee Rankin

FROM: Arlen Specter SUBJECT: Autopsy Photographs and X-rays of President John F. =

Kennedy In my opinion it is indispensable that we obtain the =

photographs and x-rays of President Kennedy's autopsy for the following =

reasons:=20

1. THE COMMISSION SHOULD DETERMINE WITH CERTAINTY WHETHER =

THE SHOTS CAME FROM THE REAR. Someone from the Commission should review =

the films to corroborate the autopsy surgeons' testimony that the holes =

on the President's back and head had the characteristics of points of =

entry. None of the doctors at Parkland Hospital in Dallas observed the =

hole in the President's back or the small hole in the lower portion of =

his head.=20

With all the outstanding controversy about the direction of =

the shots, there must be independent viewings of the films to verify =

testimony which has come only from Government doctors.=20

2. THE COMMISSION SHOULD DETERMINE WITH CERTAINTY WHETHER =

THE SHOTS CAME FROM ABOVE. It is essential for the Commission to know =

precisely the location of the bullet wound on the President's back so =

that the angle may be calculated. The artist's drawing prepared at =

Bethesda (Commission Exhibit #385) shows a slight angle of declination.=20

It is hard, if not impossible, to explain such a slight =

angle of decline unless the President was farther down Elm Street than =

we have heretofore believed.=20

Before coming to any conclusion on this, the angles will =

have to be calculated at the scene; and for this, the exact point of =

entry should be known.=20 3. THE COMMISSION SHOULD DETERMINE WITH CERTAINTY THAT THERE =

ARE NO MAJOR VARIATIONS BETWEEN THE FILMS AND THE ARTIST'S DRAWINGS.

Commission Exhibits Nos. 385, 386, and 388 were made from =

the recollections of the autopsy surgeons as told to the artist.=20

Some day someone may compare the films with the artist's =

drawings and find a significant error which might substantially affect =

the essential testimony and the Commission's conclusions.=20

In any event, the Commission should not rely on hazy =

recollections, especially in view of the statement in the autopsy report =

(Commission Exhibit #387) that:=20

"The complexity of those fractures and the fragments thus =

produced

tax safisfactory verbal description and are better =

appreciated in the photographs and roentgenograms which are prepared."

B....

Thanks Bernice, I have read a few of these documents but not all of them. I will have a look at all of this.

[Glenn Viklund]

Glenn -

Yet that's not Hoover wrote.... it was NOT "nail this guy" at all.... at least not from Hoover initially.

Would you say that Allen Dulles - who KNEW of the Castro assassination attempts and ongoing ZR- programs and decided to withhold that information from the WC

that this does not constitute a conspiracy - at least on the part of this one WCC - to cover up some of the basic facts related to WHY JFK might be assassinated OTHER than a disgruntled Lone Nut?

Even Hoover would not let that go... He KNEW something was up with Cuba but could not get the info

Memorandum for Messers. Tolson, Belmont, Mohr, December 12, 1963

page 2

Conrad, Deloach, Evans, Rosen, Sullivan

Mr. Rankin of the difficulty about the Department's desire to issue certain conclusions; that they wanted to issue a statement before the report went to the Commission with the conclusion Oswald was the assassin, no foreign or subversive elements involved, and Rubenstein and Oswald had no connection; that I flatly disagreed; they took it up with the White House and the President agreed with me that we should reach no conclusion; nevertheless the report does reach two conclusions in substance.

I said I personally believe Oswald was the assassin; that the second aspect as to whether he was the only man gives me great concern; that we have several letters, not in the report because we were not able to prove it, written to him from Cuba referring to the job he was going to do, his good marksmanship, and stating when it was all over he would be brought back to Cuba and presented to the chief; but we do not know if the chief was Castro and cannot make an investigation because we have no intelligence operation in Cuba; that I did not put this into the report because we did not have proof of it and didn't want to put speculation in the report; that this was the reason I urged strongly that we not reach conclusion Oswald was the only man.

As to Rubenstein, I said I did not want a statement about Rubenstein and Oswald; that we have no proof they were ever together. I stated Rubenstein is a shady character from the hoodlum element of Chicago, has a poor background, runs a nightclub in Dallas, and is what would be called a police buff; that the police officers in the precinct have been able to get food and liquor from him at any time they drop in; that while I think there was no connection between him and Oswald, I did not want the report to be 100% sure on that.

Martin,

You are making my point:

They may well have been part of a cover up. But nothing of what you have brought forward here, or for that matter, what has ever been brought forward suggests that the WC knew what it was they - possibly - were covering up. And that, Martin, is a fact, not speculation.

If you have anything that proves the contrary, I will immediately re-evaluate my position. It is, without a doubt, a very different ball game what the answer to this is, would you not agree? Did, or did not, the WC know that they were covering up a conspiracy?

The reasonable answer is that they did what LBJ and Hoover instructed them to, "nail this guy, we can't afford the trouble that might otherwise arise".

And that is exactly what I think their mission was, and what they lived up to.

David,

That was meant literally, more than anything. Sometimes my English language skills plays jokes with me - and others. So please bear with me in that regard.

Now, from the start the WC was setup more or less to confirm the FBI report that Hoover had already put together. Hoover didn't want this at all, but LBJ threw the WC at him and he had to accept that. Later, the entire mission of the WC grew to something that initially had not been foreseen. In my view, the problem with the WC is that as their mission was to confirm LHO as the lone nut assassin, other possibilities were not followed up properly. Nevertheless, I do not believe that the WC was, or became, aware of any conspiracy and therefor they could only indirectly have been part of a cover up. If there indeed was a conspiracy.

Edited March 16, 2012 by Glenn Viklund

[Dawn Meredith]

Ms. Moore posted the CIA eyes-only secret document where the spooks discuss how to discredit researchers who question the Warren Report. They discuss influencing the media and using assets to put forth what they want American's to hear, and generally stample on the Constitution's idea of a Free Press...but there is a more subtle and interesting bit in there too.

I've always found this line, where they talk about their direct involvement in the assassination, quite enlightening.

The CIA-"Our organization itself is directly involved: among other facts, we contributed information to the investigation."

No wonder they didn't want to let that scrap of paper loose, eh?

Yes B. has tons of good stuff....And remember the "we have to satisify the public that LHO acted alone" letter, ....from a very top official...(I don't have time to look all this stuff up.)

Yes David, that is exactly what it has degenerated to, and like Vince Salandria told Fonzi so long ago, it is to wear us down...be it JFK triva or outright dismissal of the staggering amount of evidence on this case. I will not engage with the lone nut here, except to say he also twisted my words...again...I said that in four months my husband had read enough books (about 12) to know, then I added that more recently he read Brothers and JFKU. He also read a college research paper I did in early 75 where I had the use of virtually every book on the case (borrowed) and I was going for an overview, not some specific view of who done it.

I am willing to talk with any LN who is sincerely interested in becoming knowledgable ..indeed I have been doing this my entire life.

And I can see where it might be beneficial to engage with LNs who should know better, as in the case you mentioned. I hope you tell us more about the document you received.

I so admire the scores of people who have poured over all the documents, and have come up with so many gems. The Operation NOrthwoods document, as a result of the JFK Act, jumps out...as it relates not just to the JFK assassination but matters today (9-11).

Yes Joe, it was proven countless years ago. By many courageous people, the first generation of researchers. All that has come since is a monumental amount of further proof.

As to the Warren Commissioners being of integrity...let's just look at two: Dulles, (the fox guarding the henhouse) and Ford, who actually commited fraud and changed crucial evidence in an attempt to prove the nonsense that is known at the MBT.

Carry on folks...but you will never change his mind.

Dawn