Jason Ward Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 The document below is among those released this summer of previously redacted files. It is unclear to me how much of this document was redacted or available before this year, so apologies if this is old news to everyone. Did Garrison knowingly lie about Shaw and did he knowingly present perjured testimony in trial? Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 (edited) Jason: I can see you have a lot to learn about the JFK case in general and the Garrison inquiry specifically. If you read the NODA memos concerning the testing of not just Russo but also other witnesses Garrison had, he put them through three stages: hypnosis, truth serum and polygraphs. He first used a police polygraph technician. It turned out that this guy was a plant from Shaw's defense team who deliberately tried to unglue Russo in advance and then lied about it. When Garrison found out about this, he fired him. But he made another mistake by next going to the Gurvich team for his polygraphing. The Gurviches had a very large private investigative office which included all kinds of surveillance and police tactics, including polygraphing. (See Destiny Betrayed second edition pgs. 230-31) Well, I hope I don't have to tell you that Gurvich ended up being a double agent in Garrison's midst. And it was not until months later that Garrison decided that many of the lie detector tests administered by that office were ersatz. The FBI source you quote here, Leonard Harrelson, shows just how bad Hoover was on the Garrison case, as if anyone needs to know. Harrelson and his former partner Lloyd Furr worked for Walter Sheridan on more than one occasion. This included the polygraphing of witnesses like Ed Partin for the Hoffa inquiry, and for Sheridan's NBC special, during which they tested Gordon Novel. When asked if Garrison's inquiry was a fraud, Gordon said yes and the reply was rendered truthful.He was then shipped off to Ohio, safe housed and placed under guard there, and Governor Rhodes would not return him to New Orleans. (ibid, pgs. 234-35) It turned out when the professional academy got hold of the test for Partin, they denounced it as an absolute fraud in which Harrelson lied about the result. Harrelson was later prosecuted for fraud in St Louis over polygraphs of certain police officers. (ibid p. 235) This is the kind of BS the FBI was putting out on Garrison, because he was exposing their original inquiry as a multi layered cover up. I hate to ask again: Does anyone besides Sandy read my books? Edited September 13, 2017 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Ward Posted September 13, 2017 Author Share Posted September 13, 2017 1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said: Jason: I can see you have a lot to learn about the JFK case in general and the Garrison inquiry specifically. If you read the NODA memos concerning the testing of not just Russo but also other witnesses Garrison had, he put them through three stages: hypnosis, truth serum and polygraphs. He first used a police polygraph technician. It turned out that this guy was a plant from Shaw's defense team who deliberately tried to unglue Russo in advance and then lied about it. When Garrison found out about this, he fired him. But he made another mistake by next going to the Gurvich team for his polygraphing. The Gurviches had a very large private investigative office which included all kinds of surveillance and police tactics, including polygraphing. (See Destiny Betrayed second edition pgs. 230-31) Well, I hope I don't have to tell you that Gurvich ended up being a double agent in Garrison's midst. And it was not until months later that Garrison decided that many of the lie detector tests administered by that office were ersatz. The FBI source you quote here, Leonard Harrelson, shows just how bad Hoover was on the Garrison case, as if anyone needs to know. Harrelson and his former partner Lloyd Furr worked for Walter Sheridan on more than one occasion. This included the polygraphing of witnesses like Ed Partin for the Hoffa inquiry, and for Sheridan's NBC special, during which they tested Gordon Novel. When asked if Garrison's inquiry was a fraud, Gordon said yes and the reply was rendered truthful.He was then shipped off to Ohio, safe housed and placed under guard there, and Governor Rhodes would not return him to New Orleans. (ibid, pgs. 234-35) It turned out when the professional academy got hold of the test for Partin, they denounced it as an absolute fraud in which Harrelson lied about the result. Harrelson was later prosecuted for fraud in St Louis over polygraphs of certain police officers. (ibid p. 235) This is the kind of BS the FBI was putting out on Garrison, because he was exposing their original inquiry as a multi layered cover up. I hate to ask again: Does anyone besides Sandy read my books? Ok, Jim, I will look into this further. Thanks for keeping it civil. Jason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 (edited) 13 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: I hate to ask again: Does anyone besides Sandy read my books? James, I read your books. And I can say without hesitation that when it comes to Ruth Paine you don't know what you're talking about. Yet you double-down every chance you get. Also, you claim that Edwin Lopez told you that he was unsure if Oswald was ever in Mexico City in September 1963, although Edwin Lopez himself is video-taped publicly saying that he was very sure that Oswald was in Mexico City at that time. Your push to distract attention from the Radical Right CT, and to pull the discourse back to that crippled, 50-year-old CIA-did-it CT is also disappointing. So, you see, some people do read your books -- and just about everything you write. Regards, --Paul Trejo Edited September 13, 2017 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Terry Adams Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 (edited) Paul, Are you saying that the CIA did not kill, or have JFK killed? I thought that was a given among the CTers! I know that everyone, including, but not limited to, LBJ, Jimmy Hoffa and Edwin Walker, to name a few, have been blamed. I have been under the obviously mistaken impression, according to you, that basically anyone connected with the assassination were connected, somehow, with the CIA! I have been believing the government did it since my Dad and I watched Oswald murdered on live television! So, I would greatly appreciate it if you will tell me what to tell the people I talk with, and have been talking with most of my life, about that horrible tragedy on November 22, 1963, NOW! And Paul, I am not really speaking directly to you, I am just trying to grasp onto something real after almost 54 years . Edited September 13, 2017 by Terry Adams Added to a sentence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said: James, I read your books. And I can say without hesitation that when it comes to Ruth Paine you don't know what you're talking about. Yet you double-down every chance you get. Also, you claim that Edwin Lopez told you that he was unsure if Oswald was ever in Mexico City in September 1963, although Edwin Lopez himself is video-taped publicly saying that he was very sure that Oswald was in Mexico City at that time. Your push to distract attention from the Radical Right CT, and to pull the discourse back to that crippled, 50-year-old CIA-did-it CT is also disappointing. So, you see, some people do read your books -- and just about everything you write. Regards, --Paul Trejo "Reading" as you illustrate so well, is not the same as "comprehending"... As for Lopez... you mean to say people said one thing and meant another in this case ??? Especially when it meant appeasing Hoover... ? As for Jim's understanding of Ruth versus your painful explanations of same... your credibility and insight is woefully lacking and without defenders or supporters despite the years... You go on hoping someone will take up your cause and reading other's work... the rest of us will just keep producing the work from which you may learn some day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 23 minutes ago, Terry Adams said: Are you saying that the CIA did not kill, or have JFK killed? I thought that was a given among the CTers! Not a given Terry... but then again is comes down to labels. In my world the CIA of 1960 drew breath from the Military which directed it, funded it, supported it... (IMO the CIA was created to take heat off ONI and MID... the true historic spy organizations of this country... Hoover's SIS was not made of military men the same way OSS was... The first CIA directors were Military with Dulles the first "civilian" despite his close Military history) The military also provided the cover and lockdown... no way ROSE was doing the autopsy in Texas... although he does Tippit and Oswald. As for "had him killed" I'd suggest a deeper dig into TEXTRON's purchase of BELL... and the players involved. Lawyers and Bankers Terry.... All the rules and all the money... look at Cravath, Swain and Moore - law firm. Representation of the .01% and the Military Industrial Congressional Complex... Sun Life, Arthur & Royal Little, Bank of Boston, CIA Gen Cabell, McCloy, Gilpatrick (Asst Sec Def), G William Miller, American Research & Development Corp, Prudential Life, Hancock Life These are from Rothschild/Morgan/Rockefeller partnerships and imo represents those who could make that sort of decision and insure it's success. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Bulman Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 56 minutes ago, David Josephs said: "Reading" as you illustrate so well, is not the same as "comprehending"... As for Lopez... you mean to say people said one thing and meant another in this case ??? Especially when it meant appeasing Hoover... ? As for Jim's understanding of Ruth versus your painful explanations of same... your credibility and insight is woefully lacking and without defenders or supporters despite the years... You go on hoping someone will take up your cause and reading other's work... the rest of us will just keep producing the work from which you may learn some day. I think he probably comprehends just fine. He chooses to interpret the information illogically IMO. I've got all three of your books Jim, multiple page corners folded or pages flagged w/small post it notes, underlined/highlighted passages. All are important and informative. Nobody walks on water, we're all human and make mistakes somewhere from time to time. Destiny Betrayed in particular is one of the to 5 books on the assassination I have or have read. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 (edited) 2 hours ago, Terry Adams said: Paul, Are you saying that the CIA did not kill, or have JFK killed? I thought that was a given among the CTers! I know that everyone, including, but not limited to, LBJ, Jimmy Hoffa and Edwin Walker, to name a few, have been blamed. I have been under the obviously mistaken impression, according to you, that basically anyone connected with the assassination were connected, somehow, with the CIA! I have been believing the government did it since my Dad and I watched Oswald murdered on live television! So, I would greatly appreciate it if you will tell me what to tell the people I talk with, and have been talking with most of my life, about that horrible tragedy on November 22, 1963, NOW! And Paul, I am not really speaking directly to you, I am just trying to grasp onto something real after almost 54 years . Terry, It was never a *given* among CTers that the CIA killed JFK. The CIA-did-it CTers like to believe that, but they have always been mistaken. Before Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested -- a large number of people immediately thought of the Dallas Radical Right as suspects. This included George De Mohrenschildt, Bernie Weismann, and Michael and Ruth Paine. Jack Ruby told Earl Warren directly to consider General Walker and the JBS in Dallas. In 1965, Harry Dean was the first to publicly announce his revelation (on the Joe Pyne Show) that General Walker and the JBS (i.e. the Radical Right) plotted to kill JFK. He was quickly silenced with countless lies and slander. Here is my opinion about Jim Garrison -- when he first got David Ferrie in his clutches, Jim Garrison was contemplating a case against the Radical Right. But the shark attack of the FBI over the years made him change his tune -- terrified in fact -- and so he blamed the nameless, faceless CIA, which he knew would never respond. Gareth Wean (ca. 1971) repeated a story allegedly from Senator John Tower and Bill Decker -- that General Walker started a false flag assassination of JFK, and it got out of control. Professor Walt Brown (1995) tried to interest scholars to investigate the Dallas Police -- to no avail. So, this recent book by Jeff Caufield, namely, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015) is not the first -- perhaps only the best work on this alternative CT so far. The Radical Right in Dallas killed JFK. That's my claim. General Walker worked with Guy Banister to frame Oswald as an FPCC Communist, in revenge for Oswald taking a pot-shot at Walker in April 1963. Also, Walker wanted revenge on JFK and RFK for committing him to an insane asylum on October 1, 1962. He would kill two birds with one stone on the weekend of 11/22/1963. Read Caufield's book, Terry. It will blow your mind. Regards, --Paul Trejo Edited September 13, 2017 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted September 13, 2017 Share Posted September 13, 2017 (edited) Jason, As regards Jim Garrison, like many CTers, I am disappointed in his trial against Clay Shaw. As his loyal supporters said, after David Ferrie was killed, he should have given up, but he refused to give up, hoping against hope that somebody from Dallas would crack, and bring him the truth about Dallas. Nobody did. We got everything we possibly could out of New Orleans, thanks to Jim Garrison -- and probably a lot of useless data in addition to misinterpretations of factual data. Guy Banister was a Radical Right icon in NOLA, who was running Lee Harvey Oswald. Cuban mercenaries helped Guy Banister every step of the way -- and so did Interpen and Frank Sturgis. The key to Oswald in New Orleans is simply 544 Camp Street. Yet JFK wasn't killed in NOLA. JFK was killed in Dallas. The proper place to dig is Dallas, because Jim Garrison has already exhausted the mine of NOLA. There is nothing new to find there, in my reading. In my reading, the link between Guy Banister and Dallas is obviously General Walker. (Jeff Caufield agrees with this.) The real failing of Jim Garrison was that he failed to explore Dallas well. That is also the failing of the CIA-did-it, the Mafia-did-it, and the LBJ-did-it CTers. They're so afraid of what they'll find by going after the Radical Right among the Dallas Police, that they'll resort to anything to keep reviving their old, failed CT's. Regards, --Paul Trejo Edited September 13, 2017 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now