Gaeton Fonzi and the Veciana Allegations

[George Sawtelle]

Tracy

The CIA has admitted they tried to kill Castro. Veciana has admitted he was part of that and other anti Castro activities.

So how does lying about Bishop, David Phillips, keep him from being presecuted for his anti Castro activities.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 minute ago, Michael Clark said:

With all due respect Tracy, like Paul Trejo's exasperated defense of Ruth Paine, it is my opinion that your methods and efforts do discredit Fonzi's and Veciana's claim that this meeting did occur, only serves to add credibility to the story.

Regards,

Michael

OK, fair enough. I just ask people to be a little more skeptical considering the facts I have presented in my article especially with the Veciana book coming out:

· Veciana did not originally believe that Bishop worked for the CIA or the government at all but rather a private organization.

· Veciana was far from sure about key details such as Bishop’s first name.

· The “late August, early September” time frame for the meeting was a Fonzi invention created to fit his own assassination theory.

· The Southland Center as the meeting place was another Fonzi invention designed to fit conspiracy theories.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Just now, George Sawtelle said:

Tracy

The CIA has admitted they tried to kill Castro. Veciana has admitted he was part of that and other anti Castro activities.

So how does lying about Bishop, David Phillips, keep him from being presecuted for his anti Castro activities.

Veciana wanted to show he was being directed by someone else. In other words it wasn't him it was Bishop. As time went on and he realized the CIA was the number one villain in the world because of various revelations, Bishop "became" CIA.

[Michael Clark]

24 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Not with regard to Veciana's LHO story. Take out LHO and it's a big nothing burger. Phillips is an interesting character though, I'll agree on that.

Tracy, from the above, and prior comments, it sounds like you are willing to accept that the meeting occurred, if it did not include LHO. Yet, If LHO is said to be there, then you have numerous objections, including objections to the facts that allow You to believe the possibility or likelihood of a meeting between Bishop and Vecania; and even allowing Bishop to be DAP.

When a LN'er stumbles as hard as you are stumbling here, Tracy, it makes the opposite case much stronger than if he or she had not attempted to do damage to the story in the first place.

Best Regards,

Michael

Edited April 15, 2017 by Michael Clark

[George Sawtelle]

Tracy

Veciana is not that dumb. He is responsible for his actions and must answer for what he did. He is still on the hook and lying about David Phillips will not get him off.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 minute ago, Michael Clark said:

Tracy, from the above, and prior comments, it sounds like you are willing to accept that the meeting occurred, if it did not include LHO. Yet, If LHO is said to be there, then you have numerous objections, including objections to the facts that allow To to believe make the possibility or likelihood of a meeting between Bishop and Vecania; and even allowing Bishop to be DAP.

When a LN'er stumbles as hard as you are stumbling here, Tracy, it makes the opposite case much stronger than if he or she had not attempted to do damage to the story in the first place.

Best Regards,

Michael

Nothing is 100 percent Michael. I am saying that even if 2017 documents prove there was a Bishop and he was Phillips without the LHO connection it is meaningless. Unless the hypothetical documents also name LHO as someone Phillips was running. In that case, I will delete my article and replace it with an apology. As far as my stumbling, the facts I have presented stand regardless of the ultimate truth about Maurice Bishop.

But here is something to think about. I am sure I am not the first person to see these documents. How many years have some unknown people kept silent about the Fonzi-Veciana interviews?

[Michael Clark]

6 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

OK, fair enough. I just ask people to be a little more skeptical considering the facts I have presented in my article especially with the Veciana book coming out:

· Veciana did not originally believe that Bishop worked for the CIA or the government at all but rather a private organization.

· Veciana was far from sure about key details such as Bishop’s first name.

· The “late August, early September” time frame for the meeting was a Fonzi invention created to fit his own assassination theory.

· The Southland Center as the meeting place was another Fonzi invention designed to fit conspiracy theories.

Tracy, with regard to Vecania's description of the building, it can fairly well be said that it is the Southland Center. He described a blue tile facade, and described it as a large office building. It was the largest office building west of the Mississippi at the time.

I am assuming that I have this ID and source correct. I don't have it in front of me.

Cheers,

Michael

[W. Tracy Parnell]

11 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

 Tracy, with regard to Vecania's description of the building, it can fairly well be said that it is the Southland Center. He described a blue tile facade, and described it as a large office building. It was the largest office building west of the Mississippi at the time.

I am assuming that I have this ID and source correct. I don't have it in front of me.

Cheers,

Michael

I am starting to doubt that you have actually read my article Michael. It can be assumed. It can be deduced. But everyone is presenting it as a fact which it is not. In his book, Veciana says it is hard to mistake the Southland Center. Why then did he never say it was that building until years and years later. In fact, if someone can provide a citation for when he first mentioned Southland it would be helpful but I don't think it was until after the year 2000.  His first description on the record was a “big bank or insurance company” but he didn’t remember “whether it was blue or white.” Why does this matter? Because people are developing theories based on the Southland Center (Robert Oswald had an attorney there). And Wynne Johnson is wasting everyone's time by "verifying" the "fact" that it was Southland. Veciana didn't remember the building although he could be expected to remember the prominent Southland building.

Edited April 15, 2017 by W. Tracy Parnell

[W. Tracy Parnell]

11 minutes ago, George Sawtelle said:

Tracy

Veciana is not that dumb. He is responsible for his actions and must answer for what he did. He is still on the hook and lying about David Phillips will not get him off.

What hook? He is a celebrity-this is a blurb for his book:

Antonio Veciana is one of the most swashbuckling figures from the underground war against Fidel Castro in the 1960s and '70s. A former bank accountant in pre-revolutionary Havana, Veciana turned himself into a daring leader of the anti-Castro movement, organizing multiple assassination attempts and founding one of the most militant Cuban exile groups, Alpha 66, under the secret guidance of the CIA.

So, I am not sure how he is going to answer for anything.

[Michael Clark]

1 minute ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

I am starting to doubt that you have actually read my article Michael.:) It can be assumed. It can be deduced. But everyone is presenting it as a fact which it is not. In his book, Veciana says it is hard to mistake the Southland Center. Why then did he never say it was that building until years and years later. In fact, if someone can provide a citation for when he first mentioned Southland it would be helpful but I don't think it was until after the year 2000.  His first description on the record was a “big bank or insurance company” but he didn’t remember “whether it was blue or white.” Why does this matter? Because people are developing theories based on the Southland Center (Robert Oswald had an attorney there). And Wynne Johnson is wasting everyone's time by "verifying" the "fact" that it was Southland. Veciana didn't remember the building although he could be expected to remember the prominent Southland building.

Tracy, I did read your article. It did not get the attention that could be described as a study, I am sorry to say. I will look it over more carefully. 

Regards, Michael

[Michael Clark]

8 minutes ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

I am starting to doubt that you have actually read my article Michael. ........

Why does this matter? Because people are developing theories based on the Southland Center (Robert Oswald had an attorney there). And Wynne Johnson is wasting everyone's time by "verifying" the "fact" that it was Southland. Veciana didn't remember the building although he could be expected to remember the prominent Southland building.

Tracy, Wynne's account is first-hand account and can hardly be described as a waste of time. The veracity of Wynne's account is what matters and the credibility of that account can be the subject of debate; It's importance cannot be debated.

Cheers,

Michael

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 minute ago, Michael Clark said:

Tracy, Wynne's account is first-hand account and can hardly be described as a waste of time. The veracity of Wynne's account is what matters and the credibility of that account can be the subject of debate; It's importance cannot be debated.

Cheers,

Michael

I would ask Mr. Johnson to take a look at my article on him and answer a few questions:

http://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2017/04/wynne-johnson.html

For example, Johnson says in the self-produced video that he determined the date of the meeting was Saturday, September 7, 1963 because:

· It had to be a weekend since he and the girl were students.

· Veciana said it was toward the end of the first week in September.

· The busses were running on Saturday.

The key information allowing him  to zero in on the date of September 7 came from Veciana (I assume a latter day interview he doesn't say). But Veciana did not originslly know the date with that degree of specificity as I have shown. So Johnson is "verifying" Veciana's date which he never alleged until years later. Same with Southland-if you understand that Veciana never said that (at first), it destroys Johnson's story. In other words one bad source is "verifying" the other.

 

[George Sawtelle]

Tracy

Your right Veciana has not been prosecuted for his actions in Cuba. No one has.

And that nullifies your reason for Veciana lying about Phillips.

He did not lie because there was no need to lie.

Edited April 15, 2017 by George Sawtelle

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 minute ago, George Sawtelle said:

Tracy

Your right Veciana has not been prosecuted for his actions in Cuba. No one has.

And that nullifies your reason for Veciana lying about Phillips.

But that is using hindsight. In 1976 he was afraid. From Fonzi's book:

When Veciana was released from prison and I showed up at his door, he immediately decided he would use me to build himself a shield against another set up [like his drug arrest].

 

[James DiEugenio]

No connection between Phillips and Oswald?

Phillips was running the anti FPCC campaign in the CIA for God's sakes.

Some Nothing burger.  These guys always leave out the key, declassified points.  To them, there is no ARRB declassified record.

Edited April 15, 2017 by James DiEugenio