A List of All CIA Officers and Agents Alleged to Have Either Planned the Assassination, Carried It Out, or Wittingly Participated in the Cover-Up

[Thomas Graves]

19 minutes ago, Mike Kilroy said:

The CIA risked a lot over the decades to keep this secret. Helms never told the WC as CIA liaison.  Joannides never told the HSCA as Congressional liaison.  Helms perjured himself to the HSCA when he said he knew nothing more related to the assassination.  If discovered, both would've faced obstruction of justice charges and prison and the CIA might have been dismantled.  In fact, I think both men were put in those liaison positions precisely for what they needed to keep secret.

The agency later fooled the JFK Records folks from including Joannides' files in that release.  And they are still fighting lawsuits from Jefferson Morley to release the files.

You don't take these kinds of measures for decades over "embarrassment," IMO.   What's left to be embarrassed about?  We've known for nearly 2 decades they lied about the DRE. 

My personal belief is they are hiding guilt of some kind.  Unless they provide a better explanation someday, I'll stick with that.  They've earned it.

 

Okay.

 

 

--  TG

[Kirk Gallaway]

What are we up to, about 40 people? The irony of this to me is this great proliferation of theories and perpetrators only reflects how clueless we are, which to me is a completely contrarian indicator meaning this was a smaller group. The greater the group of people the more we'd know, people just can't keep a secret. The fact that we know so little reflects a smaller group of highly disciplined people. Obviously there were people needed to execute this, some consciously carrying out the plot, and some finding themselves  ordered by superiors  or threatened loss of life, bodily harm, loss of pensions, loss of status, livelihood, etc.  And would some really need that much convincing that it's their patriotic duty to possibly avoid a nuclear war?

There are a number of who-did-it theories here that most of us don't subscribe to, the Russians, the Dallas police, Walker, the Cubans, and we debate them. But there's a lot more openness about largely government/Micc/Cia theories that lend themselves to speculating about  greater and greater factions within the conspiracy, as has just been evidenced here. Since there is such uncertainty about the fine details of any suspected theory, There's a general tolerance in this discussion, as there should be. But the results are this political "Big Tent" of anybody in government, intelligence, don't leave out the International conspiracy, ex-Nazis, the Mob, Texas Oil men, anti Castro Cubans. Not to dismiss outright any of these additions, and inclusions.

At a certain point, you have to consider that there were a number of groups of people who may have hated Kennedy, may have wanted JFK killed, but were surprised, maybe happy at his assassination, but weren't involved in planning,  maybe even celebrated with caviar, but had no advanced knowledge.

It's become almost fashionable to think, that the theory becomes more valid if more people are involved. (the more the merrier! or security in numbers?) Hence now it's becoming a big industry and media figures being born speculating about huge conspiracies that supposedly have been passed on from generation to generation  since. I personally am  working toward honing this theory down and rejecting theories. 

[Jeffrey Reilley]

28 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

What are we up to, about 40 people? The irony of this to me is this great proliferation of theories and perpetrators only reflects how clueless we are, which to me is a completely contrarian indicator meaning this was a smaller group. The greater the group of people the more we'd know, people just can't keep a secret. The fact that we know so little reflects a smaller group of highly disciplined people. Obviously there were people needed to execute this, some consciously carrying out the plot, and some finding themselves  ordered by superiors  or threatened loss of life, bodily harm, loss of pensions, loss of status, livelihood, etc.  And would some really need that much convincing that it's their patriotic duty to possibly avoid a nuclear war?

There are a number of who-did-it theories here that most of us don't subscribe to, the Russians, the Dallas police, Walker, the Cubans, and we debate them. But there's a lot more openness about largely government/Micc/Cia theories that lend themselves to speculating about  greater and greater factions within the conspiracy, as has just been evidenced here. Since there is such uncertainty about the fine details of any suspected theory, There's a general tolerance in this discussion, as there should be. But the results are this political "Big Tent" of anybody in government, intelligence, don't leave out the International conspiracy, ex-Nazis, the Mob, Texas Oil men, anti Castro Cubans. Not to dismiss outright any of these additions, and inclusions.

At a certain point, you have to consider that there were a number of groups of people who may have hated Kennedy, may have wanted JFK killed, but were surprised, maybe happy at his assassination, but weren't involved in planning,  maybe even celebrated with caviar, but had no advanced knowledge.

It's become almost fashionable to think, that the theory becomes more valid if more people are involved. (the more the merrier! or security in numbers?) Hence now it's becoming a big industry and media figures being born speculating about huge conspiracies that supposedly have been passed on from generation to generation  since. I personally am  working toward honing this theory down and rejecting theories. 

I like this post. Thank you.

 

I've always believed it had to be people that were:

A: Experienced- Nobody could have just lucked into such a successful operation as their first attempt, nor would any person capable of pulling off such a feat be willing to swing so big on their first attempt. 

B: Capable- Someone with the ability to get others to go along with the "plan". Not getting people directly involved, but to stand-down at the least...i.e. Hoover, JCS, Warren Commission. A person(s) capable of convincing others that there was no other way. Whether it be because of a possible WWIII scenario or an end to proper democracy because of some weird liberal takeover, the person(s) had to have the ability to reach those in power and convince those in power to either lend a hand or at the least turn a blind eye. 

C: Willing-  The person(s) had to be willing to deal with the consequences. Whether it be a land war with Cuba where a few thousand Americans and a percentage of the population of Cuba died, or reversing Kennedy's withdrawal plan in Southeast Asia and dealing with the fact that thousands of Americans would die and...what, a couple million Vietnamese deaths would ensue, the person(s) had to be willing to let this happen. 

D: Arrogant- The person(s) had to believe they would not be challenged, caught, or punished. The person(s) had to believe they were the smartest in the room at any given time. Good lawd, they were  taking down POTUS, for cryin' out loud. That in and of itself screams arrogance...or desperation.

 

   Who had experience taking down governments? Dulles oversaw the overthrow of Guatemala, right? Others involved in that endeavor were Phillips, Hunt, Shackley, and so on...Why did they do it? Commies running loose through the streets having wild orgies and burning American flags? Or was it some rich old cronies not happy about a new leader trying to add prosperity to impoverished people? How were they so successful? Manipulation of the air waves, and making the people believe they were about to be overrun...controlling the media. Who were in charge of that aspect, Hunt and Shackley(I think). 

Dulles was retired after BOP, but Hunt was busy helping him with his memoir, if memory serves correct, in 1963. Phillips was apparently setting Oswald up for patsy time and in Mexico City, and Shackley was running JMWAVE. As well, Shackley was very close to Mr. Harvey, who I wouldn't put it past to use an Italian rifle as a little signature on his part.

Phillips went on to whack the Chilean guy, Shackley decided the heroin business and mass killings in Southeast Asia were his thing, Dulles decided to get real old, but not before being a part of the Warren Commission, and Hunt, once he became a malcontent was put in prison and his wife was in a well timed aircraft accident. 

 

KGB, no matter what.

[Cliff Varnell]

Kirk, Jeffrey

Great stuff, gentlemen!

Kirk wrote -- What are we up to, about 40 people? The irony of this to me is this great proliferation of theories and perpetrators only reflects how clueless we are, which to me is a completely contrarian indicator meaning this was a smaller group.

Gotta separate the wheat from the chaff, eh?  Out of those 40 I see 10, maybe.  That's why folks need to support their accusations with evidence.

Jeffrey wrote -- Who had experience taking down governments?

W. Averell Harriman, who took down the Diem regime in So Vietnam.

Experienced.  Capable.  Willing.  Arrogant.

 

Edited March 27, 2018 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

32 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Gotta separate the wheat from the chaff, eh? 

I don't buy Allen Dulles or William Harvey as potential perps.

Both of those guys were out to pasture.

From Douglas Valentine's The Strength of the Wolf:

<quote on>

[William] Harvey was so dependent on the FBN and its underworld contacts that he scribbled the words “the Magic Button” beside a reference to the Bureau in his notes.

<quote off>

Harvey wasn't the only guy with his finger on "The Magic Button."

 

[Jeffrey Reilley]

35 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Kirk, Jeffrey

Great stuff, gentlemen!

Kirk wrote -- What are we up to, about 40 people? The irony of this to me is this great proliferation of theories and perpetrators only reflects how clueless we are, which to me is a completely contrarian indicator meaning this was a smaller group.

Gotta separate the wheat from the chaff, eh?  Out of those 40 I see 10, maybe.  That's why folks need to support their accusations with evidence.

Jeffrey wrote -- Who had experience taking down governments?

W. Averell Harriman, who took down the Diem regime in So Vietnam.

Experienced.  Capable.  Willing.  Arrogant.

 

 

Just now, Cliff Varnell said:

I don't buy Allen Dulles or William Harvey as potential perps.

Both of those guys were out to pasture.

From Douglas Valentine's The Strength of the Wolf:

<quote on>

[William] Harvey was so dependent on the FBN and its underworld contacts that he scribbled the words “the Magic Button” beside a reference to the Bureau in his notes.

<quote off>

Harvey wasn't the only guy with his finger on "The Magic Button."

 

How do you feel about Ted Shackley? 

[Cliff Varnell]

4 minutes ago, Jeffrey Reilley said:

 

How do you feel about Ted Shackley? 

Big time smack smuggler.  Person of Interest.

.Riffing on the Gary Underhill Scenario it's not so much follow the money but follow the horse.

 

 

Edited March 27, 2018 by Cliff Varnell

[Michael Clark]

4 hours ago, Jeffrey Reilley said:

I like this post. Thank you.

 

I've always believed it had to be people that were:

A: Experienced- Nobody could have just lucked into such a successful operation as their first attempt, nor would any person capable of pulling off such a feat be willing to swing so big on their first attempt. 

B: Capable- Someone with the ability to get others to go along with the "plan". Not getting people directly involved, but to stand-down at the least...i.e. Hoover, JCS, Warren Commission. A person(s) capable of convincing others that there was no other way. Whether it be because of a possible WWIII scenario or an end to proper democracy because of some weird liberal takeover, the person(s) had to have the ability to reach those in power and convince those in power to either lend a hand or at the least turn a blind eye. 

C: Willing-  The person(s) had to be willing to deal with the consequences. Whether it be a land war with Cuba where a few thousand Americans and a percentage of the population of Cuba died, or reversing Kennedy's withdrawal plan in Southeast Asia and dealing with the fact that thousands of Americans would die and...what, a couple million Vietnamese deaths would ensue, the person(s) had to be willing to let this happen. 

D: Arrogant- The person(s) had to believe they would not be challenged, caught, or punished. The person(s) had to believe they were the smartest in the room at any given time. Good lawd, they were  taking down POTUS, for cryin' out loud. That in and of itself screams arrogance...or desperation.

 

   Who had experience taking down governments? Dulles oversaw the overthrow of Guatemala, right? Others involved in that endeavor were Phillips, Hunt, Shackley, and so on...Why did they do it? Commies running loose through the streets having wild orgies and burning American flags? Or was it some rich old cronies not happy about a new leader trying to add prosperity to impoverished people? How were they so successful? Manipulation of the air waves, and making the people believe they were about to be overrun...controlling the media. Who were in charge of that aspect, Hunt and Shackley(I think). 

Dulles was retired after BOP, but Hunt was busy helping him with his memoir, if memory serves correct, in 1963. Phillips was apparently setting Oswald up for patsy time and in Mexico City, and Shackley was running JMWAVE. As well, Shackley was very close to Mr. Harvey, who I wouldn't put it past to use an Italian rifle as a little signature on his part.

Phillips went on to whack the Chilean guy, Shackley decided the heroin business and mass killings in Southeast Asia were his thing, Dulles decided to get real old, but not before being a part of the Warren Commission, and Hunt, once he became a malcontent was put in prison and his wife was in a well timed aircraft accident. 

 

KGB, no matter what.

I think there is room for some “Young Turks” here, as well, who may not have been demonstrably in full possession of all the above mentioned qualities. I am here thinking of YAF members and founders, for example. 

Fletcher Prouty aptly described the generation of cold warriors who were coming of age at the time. These were guys that were fully embroiled in the Cold battle of the Cold War and were not shaken or shocked by the reality and ugliness of men killing each other in foxholes and on ships. His description of these men is a very important one. I can’t, right now, post the video and point to the place where that description occurs.

Edited March 27, 2018 by Michael Clark

[B. A. Copeland]

*CIA Officers, Agents And Assets-(Witting and Unwitting Cooptees)

[Cliff Varnell]

14 hours ago, Kirk Gallaway said:

 I personally am  working toward honing this theory down and rejecting theories. 

Kirk, I regard this as my mission as well.

I'm a student of 3 conspiracy theories regarding the JFK assassination, and one Diem murder conspiracy scenario.

All if these were rendered prior to the murder of Oswald. 

There's the Gary Underhill Scenario -- CIA guys with Far Eastern connections involved in the drug trade.

The Prosectors Scenario -- JFK hit with a high tech weapon that left no trace in the body or on x-ray.

The Salandria/Feldman Scenario, Saturday afternoon 11/23 -- if a Jew is sent in to kill Oswald, it's a high level WASP plot.

Put all those together and open a Persons of Interest file on guys like upper-level WASP George HW Bush -- working with Paul Helliwell, Carl Jenkins, Henry Hecksher and Charles Siragusa's mobbed up FBN men in MKNAOMI.

I don't know if that was the deal-e-o but these guys are solid Persons of Interest.

Edited March 28, 2018 by Cliff Varnell

[Cliff Varnell]

On 3/26/2018 at 3:48 PM, Cliff Varnell said:

Paul Helliwell, paymaster.

From Spartacus:

http://spartacus-educational.com/JFKhelliwell.htm

<quote on, emphasis added>

In 1960 Paul Helliwell was transferred to provide business cover for the CIA’s Cuban operations. According to Peter Dale Scott (The Iran Contra Connection) Helliwell worked with E. Howard Hunt, Mitch WerBell and Lucien Conein on developing relationships with drug-dealing Cuban veterans of the Bay of Pigs invasion. It was during this period that Helliwell met Ted Shackley and Thomas Clines. Helliwell later became CIA paymaster for JM/WAVE. In this way, Shackley was able to finance unofficial CIA operations against Cuba.

From Larry Hancock's Someone Would Have Talked, pg 496:

<quote on, emphasis added>

[Former CIA employee Gary] Underhill's concern was that he had become aware of a "clique" within the CIA--a clique
dealing with weapons and gun-running and making money. These individuals had Far Eastern connections, narcotics was
mentioned, supposedly the clique was manipulating political intrigues to serve their own ends. Underhill believed
that these individuals had been involved with JFK's murder; he felt that JFK had become aware of their dealings and
was about to move against them in some fashion. He also believed that members of the clique knew that Underhill was
aware of their dealings and that his own life could well be in jeopardy.

<quote off>

Whose job in the CIA involved "making money" at high volume?

Paul Helliwell.

[Cliff Varnell]

On 3/27/2018 at 10:00 PM, Cliff Varnell said:

Kirk, I regard this as my mission as well.

I'm a student of 3 conspiracy theories regarding the JFK assassination, and one Diem murder conspiracy scenario.

All if these were rendered prior to the murder of Oswald. 

There's the Gary Underhill Scenario -- CIA guys with Far Eastern connections involved in the drug trade.

The Prosectors Scenario -- JFK hit with a high tech weapon that left no trace in the body or on x-ray.

The Salandria/Feldman Scenario, Saturday afternoon 11/23 -- if a Jew is sent in to kill Oswald, it's a high level WASP plot.

Put all those together and open a Persons of Interest file on guys like upper-level WASP George HW Bush -- working with Paul Helliwell, Carl Jenkins, Henry Hecksher and Charles Siragusa's mobbed up FBN men in MKNAOMI.

I don't know if that was the deal-e-o but these guys are solid Persons of Interest.

Above Geo HW Bush I'd put his daddy Prescott Bush, W. Averell Harriman, and John D. Rockefeller 3rd.  Or so I speculate.

I don't put James Angleton, Edward Lansdale, or David Atlee Phillips on the Kill Kennedy Team.

I put those guys on the Kill Oswald Team.

 

[Cliff Varnell]

Larry Hancock's Nexus, pg 36:

<quote on, emphasis in the original>

The Department of Defense's legal counsel conducted the investigation and among other things reported back that MKNAOMI had begun in the early 1950's and was "intended to stockpile severely incapacitating and lethal materials and to develop gadgetry for dissemination of these materials."

A June 29, 1975 CIA memorandum has also been located which documents the SOD/CIA relationship and confirms that no written records were kept; management was by verbal instruction and "human continuity."

<quote off>

Peter Dale Scott's "Deep Events and the CIA's Global Drug Connection"

http://www.globalresearch.ca/deep-events-and-the-cia-s-global-drug-connection/10095

<quote on>

Most people have never heard of Paul Helliwell. Mainstream books about CIA wrongdoings, like Tim Weiner’s Legacy of Ashes, make no mention of him, of his important CIA-related bank, Castle Bank in the Bahamas, or for that matter of an even more important successor bank to Castle, BCCI. In the flood of CIA documents released since 1992, one does not find the name of Helliwell in the archival indices of the National Archive, the National Security Archive, or the Federation of American Scientists. In the million declassified pages stored and indexed on the website of the Mary Ferrell Foundation, Helliwell’s name appears exactly once – and that is on a list of documents that were withheld from review during the CIA’s search in 1974 for records concerning, of all things, Watergate! This silence, even in internal CIA files, about the principal architect of the post-war CIA-drug connection, is eloquent.

<quote off>

Eliminating middlemen is a constant dynamic in the drug trade.

[Cliff Varnell]

Larry Hancock on the "Helliwell's Cat's Paw" thread

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/22415-helliwells-cats-paw/?page=3

Cliff, something else does occur to me. I do discuss in NEXUS that the senior CIA officers who were aware of the chemical project were Harvey , Angleton and the head of the Office of Security. That is because their respective groups were the actual users of the project's developments. Most of the CIA chemicals were non-lethal, to be use in security interrogations and of course in intelligence interrogations, especially in interrogation of suspected foreign agents or informants. There was one thing that Security and one of Staff D shared...that was the use of professional safe crackers, break in men and strong arm guys - they were all used to obtain foreign codes and code machines...one way or the other. It occurs to me that a poison delivery weapon would be very handy for them since they were often operating in "denied" areas and overseas. No time or connections to apply poison in a covert manner. One of the reasons the Office of Security had to be briefed on the Staff D contractors was that they were pros, and when not in use could go off the reservation.

It also occurs to me that in the CIA assassination plans that we know about - which did use poison - the CIA turned to criminals or third party foreign assets to deliver the poison.

The only place I can recall where the Agency was really concerned about going head to head in the use of lethal poison was in Europe, especially in Germany....where the Soviets were using poisons and some pretty high tech delivery tools. I can only guess what the dart gun might have been developed for but given the proclivity to always match Soviet weapons and the fact that the CIA had actually lost defectors to Soviet poison attacks, that might be one place to look for the actual use of such a weapon.

<quote off>

Edited April 7, 2018 by Cliff Varnell