Jump to content
The Education Forum

Do we have anything to fear?


Tim Gratz
 Share

Recommended Posts

In a 1999 interview on CSPAN, Richard Mahoney, the author of Sons and Bothers: The Days of Jack and Bobby, had an interesting answer to a question:

Q. Mr. Mahoney, while researching for your book, did you ever feel in danger?

A. Yes, for reasons that are better left alone. One thing that I will say is that my research in Havana indicates that Cuban intelligence at the time had a very extensive view of the conspiracy.

CNN, August 20, 1999.

An interesting, if cryptic, comment. I also understand that Steve Rivele felt fear and left some potential leads unfollowed when he was researching the Christian David story.

It would be interesting to determine if the fear was a "feeling" or was somehow communicated.

Unfortunate no law enforcement agency is apparently willing to follow some of the newly discovered "leads".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a 1999 interview on CSPAN, Richard Mahoney, the author of Sons and Bothers: The Days of Jack and Bobby, had an interesting answer to a question:

Q.  Mr. Mahoney, while researching for your book, did you ever feel in danger?

           

A.  Yes, for reasons that are better left alone.  One thing that I will say is that my research in Havana indicates that Cuban intelligence at the time had a very extensive view of the conspiracy.

Richard D. Mahoney’s Sons and Bothers: The Days of Jack and Bobby is a great book. I suspect he got a lot of the information via his father who worked for JFK. I believe he was part of the William Attwood/Lisa Howard network. I think he is right about Cuban intelligence as well. The question is, why have they been very selective about the material they have released on this subject (via Fabian Escalante)?

I emailed him and told him that my page on him was ranked first at Google. I also asked him to join the forum. He did not reply. Maybe he thought I was working for the CIA.

Several of the people I am in contact with who know a great deal about the assassination are scared about the dangers they face. The man they most fear is Bernardo De Torres. Maybe we will have to wait until he dies before the full story can be told.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a 1999 interview on CSPAN, Richard Mahoney, the author of Sons and Bothers: The Days of Jack and Bobby, had an interesting answer to a question:

Q.  Mr. Mahoney, while researching for your book, did you ever feel in danger?

           

A.  Yes, for reasons that are better left alone.  One thing that I will say is that my research in Havana indicates that Cuban intelligence at the time had a very extensive view of the conspiracy.

Richard D. Mahoney’s Sons and Bothers: The Days of Jack and Bobby is a great book. I suspect he got a lot of the information via his father who worked for JFK. I believe he was part of the William Attwood/Lisa Howard network. I think he is right about Cuban intelligence as well. The question is, why have they been very selective about the material they have released on this subject (via Fabian Escalante)?

I emailed him and told him that my page on him was ranked first at Google. I also asked him to join the forum. He did not reply. Maybe he thought I was working for the CIA.

CIA? No, John, with your Spartacus membership # (007) and nationality he must immediately realized that you were working for British intelligence!

Seriously, I sometimes wonder if some of our American spooks (and even JFK) were adversely influenced with respect to assassinations by the James Bond glamor and the "license to kill" mentality. Remember when Bill Harvey was introduced to JFK, JFK reportedly said in disbelief: "You're our James Bond?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember when Bill Harvey was introduced to JFK, JFK reportedly said in disbelief: "You're our James Bond?"

He did not look like James Bond.

It was a clever CIA disguise. Seriously, I think the statement attributed to JFK including the comment that he said it in disbelief was because Harvey did not look like James Bond. I read somewhere that Ted Shackley was very close to Harvey. Given Harvey's shape, he was sometimes refered to as "Pear" so some in the CIA started to refer to Shackley as "son of Pear".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember when Bill Harvey was introduced to JFK, JFK reportedly said in disbelief: "You're our James Bond?"

He did not look like James Bond.

It was a clever CIA disguise. Seriously, I think the statement attributed to JFK including the comment that he said it in disbelief was because Harvey did not look like James Bond. I read somewhere that Ted Shackley was very close to Harvey. Given Harvey's shape, he was sometimes refered to as "Pear" so some in the CIA started to refer to Shackley as "son of Pear".

Tim and John,

Could it be that beyond his physical appearance, JFk may have been referring to Harvey's demeanor. He was a loud and obnoxious alcoholic by all reports who flashed his sidearm in meetings with mob heirarchy whom he idolized. And he was relied upon for the ZR-Rifle program? And then add Lansdale who had his own ego issues that included his reveling at being the Ugly American. Quite the super-secret operation we were running. In the case of Morales, he was nothing more than a shadow on the surface yet went onto head up Phoenix in SE Asia and it wasn't until much later, when he was working on contract for the DOD, that his own alcoholism loosened his tongue and he died of questionable causes.

As to your intention of the thread, is there a fear in being open about aspects of the assassination, ask Tosh, for example.

Al

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember when Bill Harvey was introduced to JFK, JFK reportedly said in disbelief: "You're our James Bond?"

He did not look like James Bond.

The word most used to describe Harvey that I have heard from historians is "corpulant."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Remember when Bill Harvey was introduced to JFK, JFK reportedly said in disbelief: "You're our James Bond?"

He did not look like James Bond.

The word most used to describe Harvey that I have heard from historians is "corpulant."

"Corpulent": obese.

If you (addressed to anyone) have not read Harlot's Ghost by Norman Mailer, I highly recommend it. Mailer has dialogue between Rosselli and Harvey in two scenes that is hilarious. For instance, in one scene (Harvey's farewell dinner with Roselli) Harvey is telling Roselli he could have been a crook and proposes a caper in which he uses three planeloads of Cuban exiles from Nicaraura to take over the entire city of Las Vegas. (He recruits the Cubans by telling them that Castro has taken over the mob, and adds, "Give a Cuban a bazooka and he will do anythng". ) Harvey suggests the "take-over" of Las Vegas would be accomplished "as easily as the company stages a coup in some small Central American country". He goes into the Cubela plot, etc (but he does not attempt to "solve" the assassination). Obvious Mailer has done his research. For instance, he makes a brief, oblique reference to the 1958 Mafia killing of Mr. and Mrs. Gus Greenbaum. In any event, for anyone interested in the histoty of the early sixties, Harlot's Ghost is, I think, a fascinating (and enjoyable) read.

Edited by Tim Gratz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...