Michele Metta's CMC. THE ITALIAN UNDERCOVER CIA AND MOSSAD STATION AND THE ASSASSINATION OF JFK

[Paz Marverde]

2 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Paz - since there is no index in the English version of the book, could you give some page numbers for the info on De Vosjoli? If you have the Italian version you can use those page numbers. It will be similar. Does the Italian book have an index?

Paul, 

sure. Pages 126-128, chapter's name is THE OAS AND THE KILLING OF JFK. Notes showing the sources are – they are footnotes – those from 268 to 271. Notes in the book are just progressive, and not chapter related, as you for sure already noticed.

[Paul Brancato]

On 10/26/2018 at 2:19 AM, Steve Thomas said:

Anthony,

 

This is a new name to me, so I did a quick search.

From, Our Man in Haiti, by Joan Mellen. page unknown.

 

At this point in my life, I'm a little skeptical of Vosjoli.

Steve Thomas

According to Metta’s book, a special branch of the Italian Carabiniere concluded that two men recruited Yves Guérin-Serac for the CIA -  De Vosjoli and Jean Souetre. De Vosjoli was close to several top CIA men including Angleton, Bissell, and Helms, Guérin-Serac founded Aginter Press in 1964-65 and named Souetre commander of mercenaries recruited by Aginter Press. Guérin-Serac’s right hand man was Nazi sympathizer Robert Leroy, who according to Italian documents that surfaced during investigations into the Piazza Fontana bombing, was an instructor during WW11 at a Sabotage school commanded by Otto Skorzeny. The Italian documents make clear that Aginter Press was strongly linked to the CIA and to the Strategy of Tension.

When I first came upon this passage from Our Man in Haiti I was taken aback by the meeting as described by De Vosjoli. Now I think it is a clue. If, for Colonel De Lannurien, Chief of Intelligence for SDECE, the French spy agency that De Vosjoli claimed was heavily infiltrated by KGB, including De Lannurien himself, we substitute a member of OAS, which had splintered of from SDECE in opposition to DeGaulle’s Algerian policies, it makes more sense. After all, it’s hard to imagine KGB enlisting Right wing Texans in an assassination of JFK, but easy to imagine such a meeting with a CIA-connected OAS member like Guérin-Serac, known to have been involved later in terrorist attacks in Italy, or with Captain Jean Souetre, who apparently was in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963. Note that it’s a small step from Guérin-Serac to Otto Skorzeny, who according to documents released by the US government under the Nazi War Crimes Disclosure Act, was involved in CIA operations against Castro in 1961.

Edited November 10, 2018 by Paul Brancato

[Steve Thomas]

On 11/10/2018 at 4:41 PM, Paul Brancato said:

According to Metta’s book, a special branch of the Italian Carabiniere concluded that two men recruited Yves Guérin-Serac for the CIA -  De Vosjoli and Jean Souetre.

 

Deleted.

Edited August 17, 2022 by Steve Thomas

[Paz Marverde]

8 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

it’s hard to imagine KGB enlisting Right wing Texans in an assassination of JFK, but easy to imagine such a meeting with a CIA-connected OAS member like Guérin-Serac, known to have been involved later in terrorist attacks in Italy, or with Captain Jean Souetre, who apparently was in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963.

Ditto. I add that the Italian investigators were absolutely sure Souètre was in Dallas at the time of the assassination. Besides, as Metta explains in his book, there is a declaration under swear made by Guido Giannettini. Giannettini was deeply connected to the Italian Strategy of Tension and, at the same time, an agent of the Italian espionage and a prominent member of both OAS and Aginter Press. This is the English translation – it was never translated into English before – of the Italian document containing that Giannettini's declaration, once more from Metta's book:

Quote

GUIDO GIANNETTINI, in an interview on 06-08-1993 (related with paper 169/22 of 06-09-1993) and then on record given to the Judge, explained he had met GUERIN SERAC in 1964 in Lisbon, and presented him to Captain SOUETRE of the O.A.S., in the presence of an official of the P.I.D.E. [Polícia Internacional e de Defesa do Estado, a Portuguese Intelligence Agency].
[…]
Capt. SOUETRE is mentioned in the report of the [Portuguese Intelligence Agency] S.D.C.I. [Serviço de Detecção e Coordenação de Informações] […] as chief of an operational squad in Angola under JACQUES DEPRET. SOUETRE’s squad received information from SERAC, which in turn came from the P.I.D.E.. The aim was to assist a surprise attack by MOISE TSCHOMBE in Congo [aiming to eliminate the socialist Lumumba, who was then effectively assassinated] (the matter was narrated by DEPRET himself in the book “Coup d’Etat at Brazzaville”, published in Brussels in 1976).
JACQUES DEPRET, interviewed by FREDERIC LAURENT for his book “L’Orchestre Noir”, published by Stock, showed on pages 140 and 141 that SOUETRE was given by SERAC the command of mercenaries recruited by AGINTER and it was proposed (to DEPRET) that he be made Information Officer, role that he accepted. He used the pseudonym CONSTANT.
 

 

[Paul Brancato]

18 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

Paul,

 

I don't know how this squares with this CIA memo:

 

Steve Thomas

Thank you Steve. I’ve read this before, but it’s good to see it again in context of new info from Italian investigations. As I see it, the memo squares perfectly. In 1963 Souetre and Guerin-Serac are together in Lisbon, future home of Aginter Press (do I have that right?) talking with unnamed CIA officIals who report to Helms. The only thing that doesn’t square is that according to this memo CIA said no to the OAS. Can you look at this memo and see the possibility that it’s part true part false? Do you read CIA memos as being all true all the time? I look at these memos as combinations of truth and CYA. CIA says one thing in a memo but does something else through cutouts. 

 

[Paul Brancato]

10 hours ago, Paz Marverde said:

Ditto. I add that the Italian investigators were absolutely sure Souètre was in Dallas at the time of the assassination. Besides, as Metta explains in his book, there is a declaration under swear made by Guido Giannettini. Giannettini was deeply connected to the Italian Strategy of Tension and, at the same time, an agent of the Italian espionage and a prominent member of both OAS and Aginter Press. This is the English translation – it was never translated into English before – of the Italian document containing that Giannettini's declaration, once more from Metta's book:

 

I too think Souetre was in Dallas, despite his statements that he wasn’t there or anywhere else in the US in 1963. I believe the French SDECE who were trying to protect DeGaulle. The CIA, in the document quoted in Metta’s book and lots of other places, doesn’t actually say that Souetre was there, as Steve Thomas has pointed out. The document makes abundantly clear however that SDECE thought he was there. 

[Steve Thomas]

On 11/11/2018 at 1:35 AM, Paz Marverde said:

JACQUES DEPRET, interviewed by FREDERIC LAURENT for his book “L’Orchestre Noir”, published by Stock, showed on pages 140 and 141 that SOUETRE was given by SERAC the command of mercenaries recruited by AGINTER and it was proposed (to DEPRET) that he be made Information Officer, role that he accepted. He used the pseudonym CONSTANT.

Paz,

 

This is from L'Orchestre Noir pp. 140-141:

 

 

Roughly translated, by me this reads:

“I was recruited for this operation in Brussels, where I was living, by Captain Souetre, whom I knew from the epoch of the OAS”, explained Jacques Depret, a curious personnage, formerly of the French special services, passed to the OAS during the Algerian War. “Souetre had been charged by Surac as commander of the mercenaries recruited into the Aginter cadre. He proposed to me to be his information officer. I accepted immediately.”

 

Jean René Souetre, former Captain of the air commandos, was yet again in the epoch of one of the celebrities of the ex-OAS. Guérin-Serac had been engaged on the occasion of this operation which had been conferred to him the organization and the command. Under the pseudonym of “Constant”, Captain Souetre, for this circumstance, had been promoted Major. In several months, he had reunited in Lisbon fifty men, for the most part, Belgians and Frenchmen, formerly of the OAS or of Katanga...

 

The staffing of this small army was constituted as follows:

Souetre, called Constantine

Comanders: Piret, a Belgian mercenary, and Delamichel, a South-African mercenary.

Captains: Duculster (A Belgian mercenary who was killed several months later in Bukavu), Jacques Depret, and Jacques Maury.

Lieutenant: “Walter” Bonnet-Gauthier, etc.

 

Theoretically, the operation should have taken place in the month of June. “An air operation had been planned on Elizabethville”, recounted a member of the staff, under the code name, “Matou”, souvenir of the air commandos in Algeria....

 

 

(Just a side note from me: “Matou” was the code name of a helicopter-based assault strike force started by Souetre in 1960. Matou translates as Tomcats. It was unique at the time because it brought infantry directly into front-line battle. It would later be adopted throughout the French air commando units).

 

Steve Thomas

 

Edited August 17, 2022 by Steve Thomas

[Steve Thomas]

17 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Thank you Steve. I’ve read this before, but it’s good to see it again in context of new info from Italian investigations. As I see it, the memo squares perfectly. In 1963 Souetre and Guerin-Serac are together in Lisbon, future home of Aginter Press (do I have that right?) talking with unnamed CIA officIals who report to Helms. The only thing that doesn’t square is that according to this memo CIA said no to the OAS. Can you look at this memo and see the possibility that it’s part true part false? Do you read CIA memos as being all true all the time? I look at these memos as combinations of truth and CYA. CIA says one thing in a memo but does something else through cutouts. 

 

Paul,

 

You're right. One has to take many of the CIA documents with a grain of salt. Some parts are believable and some are not. That's why it's a good idea to cross check as much as you can. The point I was trying to make with this memo is that, if the CIA is talking "to" Souetre, then he's not "from" the CIA. He's not part of it.

As far as the Dallas/Souetre memo, I read it as the CIA saying,  "that's what the French said". Did the French actually say that, or did the CIA say "that's what the French said".

You and I have talked about the language of that memo and how it changes for that one particular declarative sentence. Up to that point, the memo is relating things in the third person. That particular sentence switches to a declarative statement, then the memo reverts back to third person narrative again.

I am suspicious.

 

Steve Thomas

[Paul Brancato]

2 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

Paul,

 

You're right. One has to take many of the CIA documents with a grain of salt. Some parts are believable and some are not. That's why it's a good idea to cross check as much as you can. The point I was trying to make with this memo is that, if the CIA is talking "to" Souetre, then he's not "from" the CIA. He's not part of it.

As far as the Dallas/Souetre memo, I read it as the CIA saying,  "that's what the French said". Did the French actually say that, or did the CIA say "that's what the French said".

You and I have talked about the language of that memo and how it changes for that one particular declarative sentence. Up to that point, the memo is relating things in the third person. That particular sentence switches to a declarative statement, then the memo reverts back to third person narrative again.

I am suspicious.

 

Steve Thomas

Suspicious is a good word for it. The whole nomenclature of who is in CIA, what is an agent, an asset, or .... if the CIA is talking to Souetre and Guerin-Serac they are something. Of course I don’t think they are agents. I have to think that someone can do contract work for CIA and not be ‘in’. 

Yes you pointed out the change of language in that memo. I think we can at least be sure that the French thought he was in Dallas. CIA would not be likely to say they knew he was there, if for no other reason than their previous contact(s). 

[Paz Marverde]

Quote

Jean SOUETRE aka Michel ROUX aka Michel MERTZ – On 5 March 1964, Mr. Papich advised that the French had hit the Legal Attache in Paris and also the SDECE man had queried the Bureau in New York City concerning subject stating that he had been expelled from the U.S. at Fort Worth or Dallas 48 hours after the assassination. * He was in Fort Worth the morning of 22 No-vember and in Dallas in the afternoon. The French believe that he was expelled to either Mexico or Canada. In January he received mail from a dentist named Alderson living at 5803 Birmingham, Houston, Texas. Subject is believed to be identical with a Captain who is a deserter from the French Army and an activ-ist in the OAS. The French are concerned because of de Gaulle’s planned visit to Mexico. They would like to know the reason for his expulsion from the U.S. and his destination. Bureau files are negative and they are checking in Texas and with INS. They would like to check our files with indications of what may be passed to the French. Mr. Papich was given a copy of CSCI-3/776,742 pre-viously furnished the Bureau and CSDB-3/655,207 together with a photograph of Captain SOUETRE. WE/3Public; CI/SIG; CI/OPS/Evans 

 

[Paz Marverde]

14 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

The only thing that doesn’t square is that according to this memo CIA said no to the OAS.

Paul,

for a series of reason, I do not see the problem. First of all, this document does not say: "Souètre contacted the CIA in order to kill JFK, and the CIA said no". Got my point?

[Steve Thomas]

14 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

Paz,

 

This is from L'Orchestre Noir pp. 140-141:

Souetre, called Constantine

Steve Thomas

 

I'm sorry. This should be Constant.

Eugene Constant.

 

Steve Thomas

[John Kowalski]

Hi Paz:

The Bloomfield court case is ongoing and I have had my first conference with the archive's lawyers, Quebec law society who have intervened in my case, and a court official. At the end of the month we will have another meeting with them to see if we can settle the issue of access to the documents with out going to court. This has been a long process but now that we have had our first meeting, there is a possibility that we can settle this issue without going to court, hopefully sometime early in 2019. 

On page 7 of Michele's book he states that Permindex was founded by Bloomfield, what is the source for this statement?

The documents available online contain the name of different people. Do any of these documents contain the names of CMC's board of directors?

Does Michele have a document that has the names of the board of directors of Permindex?

John

 

 

[Robert Harper]

On 10/27/2018 at 5:18 AM, James DiEugenio said:

Vosjoli was the main author of the disinfo tome Farewell America. 

James, this is, I think, the second time you have referred to this book as "disinformation." I didn't understand your first usage, nor this one. I have the book, published in Belgium in 1968, and it says  on the jacket that the author - James Hepburn - is a PhD in Economic,s who met RFK, and put this book together  "with the assistance of various European and American specialists." The book is well written, and in sync with other non-Warren Commission authors like Lane, Meagher, Salandria, Jones, Joetsen etc. He mentions attempts in Chicago and Miami;. He quotes Dwight MacDonald and the need for skepticism about reported facts. He frequently quotes JFK's speeches on moderation and peace. (A footnote on one page enlightened the reader that the the FBI could only arrest a suspect if it was thought a conspiracy had taken place; otherwise, it was Texas law enforcers in charge. Such was changed later when they made killing a President, a Federal crime) He has a diagram of Dealey Plaza suggesting multiple shooters and covers incompetence and/or corruption, all over the place. The author also wrote one of my favorite sentences on the case: "A secretary whose married boss is planning an amorous weekend in Miami takes more precautions than Ken O'Donnell did for John Kennedy in Dallas." This book looks at Oil money, the Secret service, Texas justice and military interests opposed to JFK. I  found few errors of fact. So how - and why - is this called "disinformation?"

[Paul Brancato]

10 hours ago, John Kowalski said:

Hi Paz:

The Bloomfield court case is ongoing and I have had my first conference with the archive's lawyers, Quebec law society who have intervened in my case, and a court official. At the end of the month we will have another meeting with them to see if we can settle the issue of access to the documents with out going to court. This has been a long process but now that we have had our first meeting, there is a possibility that we can settle this issue without going to court, hopefully sometime early in 2019. 

On page 7 of Michele's book he states that Permindex was founded by Bloomfield, what is the source for this statement?

The documents available online contain the name of different people. Do any of these documents contain the names of CMC's board of directors?

Does Michele have a document that has the names of the board of directors of Permindex?

John

 

 

Key questions - hope to see answers soon.