Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

...For instance, McGeorge Bundy calling LBJ on AF1 to announce the lone assassin was in custody, although it was only a few hours after the crime.

How damning is that?

...

Well, Cliff, there's actually a reasonable explanation. The Lone Assassin theory was first created by J. Edgar Hoover "less than one hour after Lee Harvey Oswald was arrested." This is what historian Dr. David Wrone reveals.

Citation please.

From that moment, the FBI immediately swung into action to hide all material evidence of more than one shooter at JFK.

Then why did he call RFK around 5:15 EST to tell his boss that Oswald had been in Cuba? (See Hancock's Someone Would Have Talked pg 288)

If Hoover were trying to frame a lone nut why did he lie about Oswald going to Cuba "on several occasions"?

This was surprisingly quick response -- and to the unwary it looks just like J,. Edgar Hoover was PART of the Kill-Team.

But closer inspection (closer than even Mark Lane or Jim Garrison saw) shows that the Cover-up Team was the opposite of the Kill-Team. (The Cover-up Team said Oswald was the "Lone Assassin" while the Kill Team said that Oswald was a "Communist" and a member of the global Communist Conspiracy.)

Therefore, J. Edgar Hoover's action before 3pm CST on 11/22/1963 was not part of the JFK murder plot.

What action?

FURTHERMORE, this implies that EVERYBODY who spread the "Lone Assassin" theory after 3pm on 11/22/1963 (including McGeorge Bundy) had jumped on board J. Edgar Hoover's strategy to OPPOSE the JFK Kill Team.

But he didn't. He wrote a memo about Oswald going to Cuba. Hoover was part of the blame Castro crowd.

FURTHERMORE, this implies (obviously) that J. Edgar Hoover figured out within an hour after the arrest of Lee Harvey Oswald that the JFK Kill-Team was composed of the US radical right-wing.

So, it's not damning at all -- actually.

...Or the late-night call from the autopsy to the FBI Lab spurred by the questions from the doctors -- autopsy attendee SA James Sibert asked the Lab if there were weapons which fired rounds that wouldn't show up on x-ray.

The question was never answered. The answer: yes, US Army Special Operations Division out of Ft. Detrick, Maryland, had briefed the FBI on the existence of weapons which fired rounds that would not show up on x-ray.

How damning is that? .

...

Again, Cliff, it's the same argument. All of the FBI tampering with the material evidence in the JFK murder -- including the medical evidence -- always had one and only one agenda -- namely -- to force the "Lone Assassin" theory through the legal system.

The medical evidence was perhaps the hardest evidence to change -- so they basically had to destroy it -- including JFK's brain (because it showed evidence of multiple bullets, and not just one).

The X-rays had to be destroyed for the same reason. The doctors had to be silenced as well. In other words, the ballistics evidence had to be suppressed, and the medical evidence was considered part of the ballistics evidence.

At the end, the Warren Commission only showed pencil drawings of JFK's wounds. This was wholly unacceptable to any reasonable court case -- BUT IT WAS TOTALLY ACCEPTABLE IN TERMS OF NATIONAL SECURITY.

Anything more a "Lone Shooter" would probably have caused a Civil War in the USA fifty years ago.

So, once again, I say it was justified. So, it wasn't really damning at all.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I simply don't believe that there is a firm line between the kill team and the coverup team. I don't believe that Hoover acted in the true national interest, and certainly don't believe smoking gun evidence will be released in 2017. Varnell's points are well taken when it comes to McGeorge Bundy and the shenanigans on AF 1. David - what conclusions would you draw if your question had a definitive answer?

Salandria, imo, came to the right conclusion very early, when he pointed out that the research community, even if they suspected the awful truth, would have trouble coalescing around the idea that our own unelected government killed JFK for national security reasons. Paul - when you answered this question earlier you pointed out that most of us think the CIA and those they answer to were guilty of the crime, and thus that was the easy way out, the lazy way to interpret the event. But Salandria, and me, were making a larger point. It's not what we believe the evidence points to, but whether there is enough proof to stop debating technical points like the details of Dealey plaza or the names of the shooters. It's human nature to want to prove beyond a doubt, and scary to believe something so devastating and present it to the nation and the press without the kind of proofs no one could argue with. You yourself are still looking for proof. We all are. But as Greg says, we ain't getting any proof. And the question in that case, whether you want to wait for 2017 or until the the next release date when that one fails to provide anything new, is what to do about it. Time is passing, the national psyche was wounded deeply, and there is no healing in sight. I wish we had listened to Salandria in 1964. 50 years have brought us much more info, but no proof. In the interests of national security our elected government failed to demand the facts, to their everlasting shame.

Link to post
Share on other sites

...Or the late-night call from the autopsy to the FBI Lab spurred by the questions from the doctors -- autopsy attendee SA James Sibert asked the Lab if there were weapons which fired rounds that wouldn't show up on x-ray.

The question was never answered. The answer: yes, US Army Special Operations Division out of Ft. Detrick, Maryland, had briefed the FBI on the existence of weapons which fired rounds that would not show up on x-ray.

How damning is that? .

...

Again, Cliff, it's the same argument.

Naw, it's apples and oranges, Paul. IF JFK was struck with a high-tech weapon the universe of possible perps narrows tremendously.

FBI tampering was part of the cover-up, not the killing,

All of the FBI tampering with the material evidence in the JFK murder -- including the medical evidence -- always had one and only one agenda -- namely -- to force the "Lone Assassin" theory through the legal system.

An agenda Hoover reluctantly shouldered. He never bought into the SBT, remember?

The medical evidence was perhaps the hardest evidence to change -- so they basically had to destroy it -- including JFK's brain (because it showed evidence of multiple bullets, and not just one).

The X-rays had to be destroyed for the same reason. The doctors had to be silenced as well. In other words, the ballistics evidence had to be suppressed, and the medical evidence was considered part of the ballistics evidence.

At the end, the Warren Commission only showed pencil drawings of JFK's wounds. This was wholly unacceptable to any reasonable court case -- BUT IT WAS TOTALLY ACCEPTABLE IN TERMS OF NATIONAL SECURITY.

Anything more a "Lone Shooter" would probably have caused a Civil War in the USA fifty years ago.

So, once again, I say it was justified. So, it wasn't really damning at all.

Again, you missed my point. I'm addressing the killing, not the cover-up.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to post
Share on other sites

I simply don't believe that there is a firm line between the kill team and the coverup team. I don't believe that Hoover acted in the true national interest, and certainly don't believe smoking gun evidence will be released in 2017. Varnell's points are well taken when it comes to McGeorge Bundy and the shenanigans on AF 1.

Thank you, Paul.

Bundy's call to AF1 "solved" the case for all time, officially.

Who pulled Bundy's chain? Sure as hell wasn't Hoover.

From Joseph Trento's Secret History of the CIA, pgs 334-5:

Who changed the coup into the murder of Diem, Nhu and a Catholic priest accompanying them? To this day, nothing

has been found in government archives tying the killings to either John or Robert Kennedy. So how did the tools

and talents developed by Bill Harvey for ZR/RIFLE and Operation MONGOOSE get exported to Vietnam? Kennedy

immediately ordered (William R.) Corson to find out what had happened and who was responsible. The answer he

came up with: “On instructions from Averell Harriman…. The orders that ended in the deaths of Diem and his

brother originated with Harriman and were carried out by Henry Cabot Lodge’s own military assistant.”

Having served as ambassador to Moscow and governor of New York, W. Averell Harriman was in the middle of a long

public career. In 1960, President-elect Kennedy appointed him ambassador-at-large, to operate “with the full

confidence of the president and an intimate knowledge of all aspects of United States policy.” By 1963,

according to Corson, Harriman was running “Vietnam without consulting the president or the attorney general.”

The president had begun to suspect that not everyone on his national security team was loyal. As Corson put it,

“Kenny O’Donnell (JFK’s appointments secretary) was convinced that McGeorge Bundy, the national security advisor,

was taking orders from Ambassador Averell Harriman and not the president. He was especially worried about

Michael Forrestal, a young man on the White House staff who handled liaison on Vietnam with Harriman.”

At the heart of the murders was the sudden and strange recall of Saigon Station Chief Jocko Richardson and his

replacement by a no-name team barely known to history. The key member was a Special Operations Army officer,

John Michael Dunn, who took his orders, not from the normal CIA hierarchy but from Harriman and Forrestal.

According to Corson, “John Michael Dunn was known to be in touch with the coup plotters,” although Dunn’s role

has never been made public. Corson believes that Richardson was removed so that Dunn, assigned to Ambassador Lodge

for “special operations,” could act without hindrance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cliff, its probably not mysterious enough but as I recall if you look at a time line of communications into and out of the Situation Room, Bundy's remark was made immediately after the AP and TV news carried the story out of Dallas that the President's assassin had been captured and was in custody. If you really dig into the communications out of the Sit room that day, they are pretty much doing nothing but repeating what the press was saying.....the entire crisis response system had fallen apart with everybody just watching TV broadcast news.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cliff, its probably not mysterious enough but as I recall if you look at a time line of communications into and out of the Situation Room, Bundy's remark was made immediately after the AP and TV news carried the story out of Dallas that the President's assassin had been captured and was in custody. If you really dig into the communications out of the Sit room that day, they are pretty much doing nothing but repeating what the press was saying.....the entire crisis response system had fallen apart with everybody just watching TV broadcast news.

In a different thread you gave a free pass to the PRESS for their poor coverage of all things JFK assassination related when you said:

"...the press, in general, along with many of those original participants being interviewed, had no idea of the extent of the weaknesses which have been revealed in the evidence brought before the Warren Commission."

And now you give a pass to Bundy who, according to you, was merely "...repeating what the PRESS was saying."

The question for you is: Was Bundy repeating what was reported by the competent PRESS or what was said by the incompetent PRESS? Surely the National Security Advisor to the President of the United States must

have known the difference else we would all be enjoying a bowl of Borscht with sour cream for our daily lunch!

Link to post
Share on other sites

A simple answer - Bundy was repeating what was coming off the wire and over TV. That was an evolving story covered by a variety of media folks who were reporting on all sorts of events, many of those reports contained ample suggestion of conspiracy....examples would be the interview with Fritz where he talks about Oswald being driven off in a station wagon by a suspicious person or even my friend Connie Krtizberg''s quoting of a Doctor speaking of a shot from the front. As far as I can tell the media coverage during the first six hours or so was as good or bad as it ever is during a crisis. However over the weekend the national media began to be "subverted" into the party line of a single assassin and no conspiracy. You should know quite well that I write about that story and direct orders to avoid discussion of conspiracy coming down from Washington starting early that evening....I also write about Connie's story being changed by the FBI, according to her editor. By Sunday Johnson was privately talking to Henry Luce and the implications of that are obvious. So to answer your larger question, by that weekend the media was being manipulated and the major national media began to fall in line to what became a truly shameful job of investigative reporting and denial that has lasted for decades.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cliff, its probably not mysterious enough but as I recall if you look at a time line of communications into and out of the Situation Room, Bundy's remark was made immediately after the AP and TV news carried the story out of Dallas that the President's assassin had been captured and was in custody.

If you really dig into the communications out of the Sit room that day, they are pretty much doing nothing but repeating what the press was saying.....the entire crisis response system had fallen apart with everybody just watching TV broadcast news.

Larry, it's news to me that the exact time of Bundy's call to LBJ has been nailed down.

And it's a bit of a stretch to go from "a suspect has been captured" to "the lone assassin has been captured."

By 4:22 EST it was annonced that Oswald had been in the Soviet Union.

That very much does not fit a profile of a "lone assassin."

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to post
Share on other sites

A simple answer - Bundy was repeating what was coming off the wire and over TV.

How did Bundy get from "suspect lived in Soviet Union" to "lone assassin..."?

That was an evolving story covered by a variety of media folks who were reporting on all sorts of events, many of those reports contained ample suggestion of conspiracy....examples would be the interview with Fritz where he talks about Oswald being driven off in a station wagon by a suspicious person or even my friend Connie Krtizberg''s quoting of a Doctor speaking of a shot from the front. As far as I can tell the media coverage during the first six hours or so was as good or bad as it ever is during a crisis. However over the weekend the national media began to be "subverted" into the party line of a single assassin and no conspiracy. You should know quite well that I write about that story and direct orders to avoid discussion of conspiracy coming down from Washington starting early that evening...

Where did those direct orders come from? As soon as he landed and got into the copter for the ride to the WH LBJ had George Ball in his face talking about foreign involvement or lack thereof. As soon as he got to the WH LBJ had W. Averell Harriman in his face telling him the USG's top Soviet experts were unanimous the Soviets had nothing to do with it.

There's no evidence any such meeting of Soviet experts took place.

The authors of the "lone assassin" myth appear to have been high level WASPs.

.I also write about Connie's story being changed by the FBI, according to her editor. By Sunday Johnson was privately talking to Henry Luce and the implications of that are obvious. So to answer your larger question, by that weekend the media was being manipulated and the major national media began to fall in line to what became a truly shameful job of investigative reporting and denial that has lasted for decades.

Perhaps. But you'd be hard pressed to cite any early news report of a "lone assassin." The fact the guy spent time in the Soviet Union screams conspiracy.

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to post
Share on other sites

Who occupied the highest active levels of civilian US Gov't in Washington DC on 11/22/63?

Ron Ecker has an excellent article about who wasn't active in DC that day -- "The Tokyo Flight -- Coincidence or Conspiracy?"

http://hobrad.angelfire.com/tokyo.html

Most of the cabinet was out of town. Only 4 top ranking cabinet officials were in the DC area -- AG Robert Kennedy, Sec of Defense Robert McNamara,

the head of HEW and the Postmaster General.

The latter two were obviously far from active power. Bobby Kennedy spent the day at his Virgina home making phone calls.

That leaves McNamara. Ecker cites McNamara's own autobiography to show that McNamara was kept in the dark by his own military, and remained

inactive the rest of the day.

According to the USG's line of succession the Sec of State is the top-ranked cabinet position -- take away the entire top level of the Admiistration and we have the #2 guy at the State Department as the top active official in DC that day.

That would be George Ball. #3 at State -- W. Averell Harriman.

From Harriman's biography:


[Harriman] spent the afternoon helping Ball, who was, if anyone truly was, running the United States government, since Rusk and several other Cabinet members were airborne, coming home after turning back from a flight to the Far East.

Rudy Abramson, Spanning the Century, pg 625.

Harriman and Ball were instrumental in the dispatch of the notorious August 24 '63 Cable 243 giving So Viet Amb Henry C. Lodge the green-light to recruit a military coup to overthrow Diem.

So the two guys who usurped JFK's Vietnam policy were the two guys at the pinnacle of power on 11/22/63.

Helluva coincidence...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cliff, first off I'm not talking about Bundy's entire range of activities nor the evolution of the lone nut story. My comment was in regard to the single call from the Situation Room call to Air Force One which corresponds to the timing of the broadcast of Oswald's arrest as announced by the networks. As for your other questions on who was giving orders law enforcement to Dallas and the Texas AG, I detail those calls and directives in SWHT. And finally, there were press reports of the capture and arrest of Oswald's capture and he was portrayed as the individual who shot the President. However there was constant talk of conspiracy of all sorts - on a phone patch from AF1 Ted Clifton asked Bundy directly if there was evidence of an international plot and Bundy put him off with a remark that the Pentagon was handling the situation. Also, an AP bulletin something like an hour after the shooting specifically declared that the President had been shot in the front of the head.

This dialog is way off on a tangent to the thread, but I will note that I will be presenting the most up to date transcripts of the AF 1 traffic later this week in Dallas, courtesy of Bill Kelly. I will also be discussing recent research of my own that suggests - contrary to all official statements - that there were scrambled, security voice circuits in operation to AF1 and such circuits would either have not been captured on tape or if they were would have been an unintelligibly series of squeals. If that is true our picture of the full voice communications traffic to the plane may be very incomplete....and that the secure communications were intentionally concealed as a basic security issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Cliff, first off I'm not talking about Bundy's entire range of activities nor the evolution of the lone nut story. My comment was in regard to the single call from the Situation Room call to Air Force One which corresponds to the timing of the broadcast of Oswald's arrest as announced by the networks.

I may very well have missed something. Is this the same call as the one wherein Bundy informed LBJ the lone assassin was in custody?

As for your other questions on who was giving orders law enforcement to Dallas and the Texas AG, I detail those calls and directives in SWHT.

And you do a great job of it. I'm pointing out that Harriman's WH visit occurred before all those calls and directives were made.

And finally, there were press reports of the capture and arrest of Oswald's capture and he was portrayed as the individual who shot the President. However there was constant talk of conspiracy of all sorts - on a phone patch from AF1 Ted Clifton asked Bundy directly if there was evidence of an international plot and Bundy put him off with a remark that the Pentagon was handling the situation. Also, an AP bulletin something like an hour after the shooting specifically declared that the President had been shot in the front of the head.

This dialog is way off on a tangent to the thread, but I will note that I will be presenting the most up to date transcripts of the AF 1 traffic later this week in Dallas, courtesy of Bill Kelly. I will also be discussing recent research of my own that suggests - contrary to all official statements - that there were scrambled, security voice circuits in operation to AF1 and such circuits would either have not been captured on tape or if they were would have been an unintelligibly series of squeals. If that is true our picture of the full voice communications traffic to the plane may be very incomplete....and that the secure communications were intentionally concealed as a basic security issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...