Jump to content
The Education Forum

JFK Conspiracy for Younger Generations


Recommended Posts

CIA Deputy Director Richard Helms was in charge of Phillips and George Joannides in the summer and fall of '63 and approved promotions for both during that time.  I believe Phillips was promoted to running all anti-Castro operations in the Western Hemisphere in October that year from Mexico City.  Joannides was promoted to Chief of Covert Operations likely in July from Miami while continuing to serve as case officer for agency's favorite anti-Castro propaganda group, the DRE. 

So Joannides was overseeing the DRE during Oswald's interactions with the group in NO while Phillips was based in Mexico City during Oswald's visit.  Phillips then visited the CIA station in Miami in mid-October.

And their boss, Helms, lied about it all to successive investigations: https://medium.com/@macgiollarua/a-jfk-assassination-question-that-still-requires-an-answer-377267b73309

As Chuck Berry once sang, that's too much monkey business for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 119
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

36 minutes ago, Michaleen Kilroy said:

CIA Deputy Director Richard Helms was in charge of Phillips and George Joannides in the summer and fall of '63 and approved promotions for both during that time.  I believe Phillips was promoted to running all anti-Castro operations in the Western Hemisphere in October that year from Mexico City.  Joannides was promoted to Chief of Covert Operations likely in July from Miami while continuing to serve as case officer for agency's favorite anti-Castro propaganda group, the DRE. 

So Joannides was overseeing the DRE during Oswald's interactions with the group in NO while Phillips was based in Mexico City during Oswald's visit.  Phillips then visited the CIA station in Miami in mid-October.

And their boss, Helms, lied about it all to successive investigations: https://medium.com/@macgiollarua/a-jfk-assassination-question-that-still-requires-an-answer-377267b73309

As Chuck Berry once sang, that's too much monkey business for me.

I agree. I’ve heard people dismiss Helms as a conspirator, but it stretches the imagination to think he didn’t know what his operatives were up to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Denny, no apologies necessary.

What I am trying to say is that a lot of ruck is being  produced today.  Due to self publishing, plus some houses like Trine Day and Skyhorse will publish anything on JFK.

I am very disappointed in this trend myself.

Therefore, i appreciate books like AAF, and the first edition of Crossfire since they have stood up over time.  Many of these new books should have never been published.

BTW, Crossfire really was a solid book.  Most people did not understand that since its footnotes were skimpy and there was only a partial index in the first printing.  But I talked to Jim about something in it once and he had files and notes on everything in the book.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Denny Zartman said:

Dr. Baxter is quoted in the WC as saying the wound "could well represent either exit or entry wound" but completely contradicts himself in an interview taped in 1979, where he reportedly said it was an entrance wound.

Other than Dr. Baxter, I haven't found any medical professional from Parkland on record as saying JFK's anterior neck wound was possibly one of exit.

I also have not yet found a medical professional at Parkland that opined JFK's anterior neck wound was definitely one of exit.

Using Vincent Palamara's 2015 book "JFK: From Parkland To Bethesda" as my master source, I find that, in addition to Dr. Malcolm Perry and Nurse Audrey Bell, the following persons at Parkland also characterized JFK's anterior neck wound as one of entrance.

  1. Dr. William Clark: "Dr. Kemp Clark...said that there were two wounds, a traumatic wound in the back of the head and a small entrance wound below the Adam's apple..." Pg. 1
  2. Dr. Robert McClelland.: "this [the neck wound] did appear to be an entrance wound." ... "Dr. Robert Mc Clelland ... told me afterward that they still believed it [the neck wound] to be an entry wound." Pgs. 7-8
  3. Dr. Marion Jenkins: saw an entry wound on JFK's neck; would let their 1963 observations stand. Pg. 13
  4. Dr. Charles Carrico: "small penetrating wound of ent. neck" Pg. 14
  5. Dr. Ronald Jones: "The hole [in the throat] was very small and relatively clean cut, as you would see in a bullet that is entering rather than exiting from a patient." ... "compatible with an entrance wound ... I would stand by my original impression." Pgs. 15-16
  6. Dr. Gene Akin: "this [the neck wound] must have been an entrance wound..." Pg. 17
  7. Dr. Paul Peters: "...we saw the wound of entry in the throat..." Pg. 19
  8. Dr. Charles Crenshaw: "There were two wounds to the President that we observed at parkland. The first was a small and neat entrance wound to the throat..." Pg. 22
  9. Dr. Charles Baxter: The wound in the neck was "no more than a pinpoint. It was made by a small caliber weapon. And it was an entry wound." Pg. 24
  10. Dr. Joe Goldstritch: "...I realized how impossible it would have been for the neck wound I saw to have been an exit wound..." Pg. 44
  11. Nurse Diana Bowron: "...the entry wound in his throat...looked like an entry wound." Pg. 33
  12. Nurse Margaret Hinchliffe: "...a little hole in the middle of his neck ... About as big as the end of my little finger...An entrance bullet hole---it looked to me like...I have never seen an exit bullet hole---I don't remember seeing one that looked like that."; "...it was just a small wound and wasn't jagged like most of the exit bullet wounds that I have seen." ... "She also insisted the President had an "entry" wound in his throat." ... "Throat wound---Definitely an entrance wound. Resented Arlen Specter trying to get her to say it might be an exit wound..." Pgs 35-36

In summary,

Adding Dr. Perry and Nurse Bell, that seems to total 11 Parkland doctors and 3 nurses characterizing JFK's anterior neck wound as an entrance wound, with only one (Dr. Baxter) once saying that it could have either been entrance or exit, and then later contradicting himself and claiming that he believed it was one of entrance.

On the opposite end of this, there seems to be not one medical professional at Parkland who saw JFK's neck wound and consistently said that they believed it could have been either one of entrance or exit, or that they believed it was one of exit.

Denny, this is terrific work, congratulations!

Let's add the consensus witness testimony of the T3 back wound:

1) Dr. Admiral George Burkley, JFK's personal physician observed the body at Parkland and Bethesda, wrote on the Death Certificate that the back wound was "about the level of the third thoracic vertebra."

2) The autopsy face sheet diagram prepared under the supervision of Dr. J. Thornton Boswell shows a wound location consistent with the holes in the clothes (4 inches below the bottom of the collars).

The diagram was filled out in pencil and signed off as "verified," also in pencil, also in accordance to proper autopsy protocol. The "14cm from the mastoid" notation was made in pen, which is a violation of proper autopsy protocol.

3) Dr. John Ebersole attended the autopsy and told David Mantik in a 1992 interview that the back wound was at T4. (Harrison Livingstone's KILLING THE TRUTH pg 721)

4) James Curtis Jenkins was a lab tech at the autopsy and made this statement to David Lifton:

 (quote on)

I remember looking inside the chest cavity and I could see the probe...through the pleura [the lining of the chest cavity]...You could actually see where it was making an indentation...where it was pushing the skin up...There was no entry into the chest cavity...it would have been no way that that could have exited in the front because it was then low in the chest cavity...somewhere around the junction of the descending aorta [the main artery carrying blood from the heart] or the bronchus in the lungs.

(quote off)

5) Chester H. Boyers was the chief Petty Officer in charge of the Pathology Department at Bethesda November 1963. This is from Boyers signed affidavit:

 (quote on)

Another wound was located near the right shoulder blade, more specifically just under the scapula and next to it.

(quote off)

The location just below the upper margin of the scapula is consistent with T3:

6) SSA Will Greer in his WC testimony (Vol 2 pg 127) placed the back wound “in the soft part of that shoulder,” consistent with the testimony of Boyers.

7) SSA Roy Kellerman testified before the WC (Vol. 2 pg 93) that the wound in the back was “the hole that was in his shoulder.” Kellerman expanded on this for the HSCA witha diagram which placed the back wound in the vicinity of T-3.

8 )  FBI SA  Francis O'Neill said that the first location for the back wound that Humes gave was "below the shoulder." Here's O'Neill's HSCA wound diagram:

http://www.jfklancer.../md/oneill1.gif

9) FBI SA James Sibert also diagrammed a lower back wound:

http://www.jfklancer.../md/oneill1.gif

10) Autopsy photographer Floyd Reibe stated that the back wound was a lower marking on the Fox 5 autopsy photo (Harrison Livingstone's Killing the Truth, pg 721).

11) Parkland nurse Diana Bowron stated the same thing to Livingstone: the back wound was lower than the "official" wound in the autopsy photo (KTT, pg 183).

12) Bethesda lab assistant Jan Gail Rudnicki told Livingstone that he saw "what appeared to be an entry wound several inches down on the back." (Livingstone's High Treason 2, pg  206). This consistent with T3.

13) Bethesda x-ray tech Edward Reed reported seeing a back wound "right between the scapula and the thoracic column," although he thought it was an exit (KTT, pg 720). This location is also consistent with T3.

14) Secret Service Agent Glen Bennett wrote in a note the afternoon of 11/22/63:

(quote on)

I saw a shot hit the Boss about four inches down from the right shoulder.

(quote off)

4 inches below the right shoulder. Fact: the bullet hole in JFK's shirt is 4" below the bottom of the collar. Glen Bennett nailed the back wound.

15) Secret Service Agent Clint Hill, tasked with bearing witness to the location of JFK's wounds, testified before the Warren Commission:

(quote on)

...I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column.

(quote off)

6 inches below the neckline. Fact: the bullet hole in JFK's shirt is 5 & 3/4" below the top of the collar. Clint Hill nailed the back wound.

16) In his notes mortician Tom Robinson wrote: "And wound 5-6 inches below the shoulder".

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Paul:

Even if John is correct, there are other witnesses that say that Phillips used the name of Maurice Bishop.

Phillips was also suspected of being in Banister's office for the Cuban exile telethon in 1961.

He also ran the the anti FPCC campaign along with McCord.

He was also involved in the whole MC  imbroglio. About which he lied his head off.

And he was part of the active cover up about that issue. Which he was smoking 3 cigarettes about when questioned.

Morales was running Oswald in New Orleans, and after?  Where the heck does that come from, Tommy Graves?

Jim,

Can you clear up something for me?

I agree completely that David Atlee Phillips is very, very suspicious. Almost certainly he was deeply involved with MC.

However, I've never seen any evidence that he actually met "Oswald", or John Armstrong's "Harvey", or Jim Hargrove's "Classic Oswald", terms which all refer to the same person. 

We do believe that Phillips met with someone who was impersonating the man arrested in Dallas on 11/22/63, the man married to Marina, the man shot to death by Jack Ruby, though don't we?

I mean, the man that Veciana saw in the company of Phillips could not have been the same man I just described, could he? It was a different "Oswald", wasn't it? Or, do we believe that Phillips did meet with the man later shot by Jack Ruby?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Denny, this is terrific work, congratulations!

Let's add the consensus witness testimony of the T3 back wound:

1) Dr. Admiral George Burkley, JFK's personal physician observed the body at Parkland and Bethesda, wrote on the Death Certificate that the back wound was "about the level of the third thoracic vertebra."

 

2) The autopsy face sheet diagram prepared under the supervision of Dr. J. Thornton Boswell shows a wound location consistent with the holes in the clothes (4 inches below the bottom of the collars).

 

 

 

The diagram was filled out in pencil and signed off as "verified," also in pencil, also in accordance to proper autopsy protocol. The "14cm from the mastoid" notation was made in pen, which is a violation of proper autopsy protocol.

 

3) Dr. John Ebersole attended the autopsy and told David Mantik in a 1992 interview that the back wound was at T4. (Harrison Livingstone's KILLING THE TRUTH pg 721)

 

4) James Curtis Jenkins was a lab tech at the autopsy and made this statement to David Lifton:

 

 (quote on)

 

I remember looking inside the chest cavity and I could see the probe...through the pleura [the lining of the chest cavity]...You could actually see where it was making an indentation...where it was pushing the skin up...There was no entry into the chest cavity...it would have been no way that that could have exited in the front because it was then low in the chest cavity...somewhere around the junction of the descending aorta [the main artery carrying blood from the heart] or the bronchus in the lungs.

 

(quote off)

 

5) Chester H. Boyers was the chief Petty Officer in charge of the Pathology Department at Bethesda November 1963. This is from Boyers signed affidavit:

 

 (quote on)

 

Another wound was located near the right shoulder blade, more specifically just under the scapula and next to it.

 

(quote off)

 

The location just below the upper margin of the scapula is consistent with T3:

 

 

 

6) SSA Will Greer in his WC testimony (Vol 2 pg 127) placed the back wound “in the soft part of that shoulder,” consistent with the testimony of Boyers.

 

7) SSA Roy Kellerman testified before the WC (Vol. 2 pg 93) that the wound in the back was “the hole that was in his shoulder.” Kellerman expanded on this for the HSCA witha diagram which placed the back wound in the vicinity of T-3.

 

8 )  FBI SA  Francis O'Neill said that the first location for the back wound that Humes gave was "below the shoulder." Here's O'Neill's HSCA wound diagram:

 

http://www.jfklancer.../md/oneill1.gif

 

9) FBI SA James Sibert also diagrammed a lower back wound:

 

http://www.jfklancer.../md/oneill1.gif

 

10) Autopsy photographer Floyd Reibe stated that the back wound was a lower marking on the Fox 5 autopsy photo (Harrison Livingstone's Killing the Truth, pg 721).

 

11) Parkland nurse Diana Bowron stated the same thing to Livingstone: the back wound was lower than the "official" wound in the autopsy photo (KTT, pg 183).

 

12) Bethesda lab assistant Jan Gail Rudnicki told Livingstone that he saw "what appeared to be an entry wound several inches down on the back." (Livingstone's High Treason 2, pg  206). This consistent with T3.

 

13) Bethesda x-ray tech Edward Reed reported seeing a back wound "right between the scapula and the thoracic column," although he thought it was an exit (KTT, pg 720). This location is also consistent with T3.

 

14) Secret Service Agent Glen Bennett wrote in a note the afternoon of 11/22/63:

 

(quote on)

 

I saw a shot hit the Boss about four inches down from the right shoulder.

 

(quote off)

 

4 inches below the right shoulder. Fact: the bullet hole in JFK's shirt is 4" below the bottom of the collar. Glen Bennett nailed the back wound.

 

15) Secret Service Agent Clint Hill, tasked with bearing witness to the location of JFK's wounds, testified before the Warren Commission:

 

(quote on)

 

...I saw an opening in the back, about 6 inches below the neckline to the right-hand side of the spinal column.

 

(quote off)

 

6 inches below the neckline. Fact: the bullet hole in JFK's shirt is 5 & 3/4" below the top of the collar. Clint Hill nailed the back wound.

 

16) In his notes mortician Tom Robinson wrote: "And wound 5-6 inches below the shoulder".

 

 

 

 

 

Cliff and Denny, 

It's even a little bit better than that:

On point 2, you wrote "

2) The autopsy face sheet diagram prepared under the supervision of Dr. J. Thornton Boswell shows a wound location consistent with the holes in the clothes (4 inches below the bottom of the collars).

The diagram was filled out in pencil and signed off as "verified," also in pencil, also in accordance to proper autopsy protocol. The "14cm from the mastoid" notation was made in pen, which is a violation of proper autopsy protocol."

All true, but you omitted the fact that Dr. Burkley signed his name beneath the word verified!

And, that the WC version of Boswell's autopsy sketch sheet erased both Burkley's signature and the word "verified"!

The Warren Commission deliberately suppressed the basic primary written evidence that their own version of the wounds was false, and they had the nerve to publish an altered diagram!

It was not until 1967, I believe, that Harold Weisberg found the original sketch (turned over to the Secret Service the night of the autopsy) and "six pink copies" in the National Archives. The difference between the original sketch sheet, completed at the autopsy table by Boswell, "verified" and signed by Burkley,  and the altered copy released by the Warren Commission is egregious, deceitful, immoral, and criminal.

No one can look at the difference between the two versions and claim that what the Warren Commission did was innocent. Here is the unaltered version:

Boswell sketch sheet.PNG

Edited by Paul Jolliffe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And here is the altered version - the one that erased Burkley's signature and his "verified" - as published by the Warren Commission (and, incredibly, still re-published by the Smithsonian Magazine in their 2013 article on the autopsy!):

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/inside-the-autopsy-room-the-details-doctors-gathered-about-jfks-assassination-180947768/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/24/2019 at 12:16 PM, James DiEugenio said:

Paul:

...Morales was running Oswald in New Orleans, and after?  Where the heck does that come from, Tommy Graves?

Well Jim, you don’t think it at least possible? Please correct me if I’m off the rails here but I mean we do have Ernesto Rodriguez down there (who LHO apparently had contact with) and Ernesto was only a few degrees (through his relative) separated from Sforza and we know how he’s tied to Morales. This is only mentioning Rodriguez. Who knows what other extremely important Cuban exile assets (and who may have had a relationship with Morales) were down there and interacting with LHO. Maybe we’ll learn as we continue to dig.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Paul Jolliffe said:

Cliff and Denny, 

It's even a little bit better than that:

On point 2, you wrote "

2) The autopsy face sheet diagram prepared under the supervision of Dr. J. Thornton Boswell shows a wound location consistent with the holes in the clothes (4 inches below the bottom of the collars).

The diagram was filled out in pencil and signed off as "verified," also in pencil, also in accordance to proper autopsy protocol. The "14cm from the mastoid" notation was made in pen, which is a violation of proper autopsy protocol."

All true, but you omitted the fact that Dr. Burkley signed his name beneath the word verified!

And, that the WC version of Boswell's autopsy sketch sheet erased both Burkley's signature and the word "verified"!

The Warren Commission deliberately suppressed the basic primary written evidence that their own version of the wounds was false, and they had the nerve to publish an altered diagram!

It was not until 1967, I believe, that Harold Weisberg found the original sketch (turned over to the Secret Service the night of the autopsy) and "six pink copies" in the National Archives. The difference between the original sketch sheet, completed at the autopsy table by Boswell, "verified" and signed by Burkley,  and the altered copy released by the Warren Commission is egregious, deceitful, immoral, and criminal.

No one can look at the difference between the two versions and claim that what the Warren Commission did was innocent. Here is the unaltered version:

Boswell sketch sheet.PNG

Is it possible the Warren Commission version is a copy from before Burkley was handed custody of the autopsy papers? Seems unlikely imo, but that may be the next likely possibility besides airbrushing.

Edited by Micah Mileto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, B. A. Copeland said:

Well Jim, you don’t think it at least possible? Please correct me if I’m off the rails here but I mean we do have Ernesto Rodriguez down there (who LHO apparently had contact with) and Ernesto was only a few degrees (through his relative) separated from Sforza and we know how he’s tied to Morales. This is only mentioning Rodriguez. Who knows what other extremely important Cuban exile assets (and who may have had a relationship with Morales) were down there and interacting with LHO. Maybe we’ll learn as we continue to dig.

I have to admit I've wondered if Morales was used by/trough Phillips/Joannides/Bannister/Harvey and Angleton to run Oswald in the summer of 1963. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/24/2019 at 12:10 PM, Paul Brancato said:

Cliff - thanks for the Salandria interview. His words are so prescient, and so timely. 

I wonder if Newman’s revelations on Veciana have changed Salandria’s views on David Atlee Phillips. Gaeton Fonzi, who Salandria admires greatly and whose book The Last Investigation he refers to with great reverence, concluded that Veciana was hiding his Intelligence connection with Phillips. John Newman has, I think successfully, shown Veciana to be a xxxx whose primary relationship was to the Pentagon, not CIA. Of course Phillips would still be a prime suspect even if he was not ‘Bishop’ and had never met Oswald. I personally think if anyone ran Oswald from New Orleans on it was David Morales, the other suspect mentioned by Salandria in this interview. 

Emphasis added.

Paul, in relation to gun/narcotics smuggling and assassinations I think we're looking at a supra-institutional entity involving individuals with backgrounds in CIA, and/or military, and/or FBN

Overseen by State Department types.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have never seen any evidence that Morales was running Oswald in New Orleans. (I thought the stuff Tommy Graves produced was a joke.)

Very few people have spent as much time as I have on the Crescent City.  And this includes three visits there with other researchers.

I mean my God, why would you need someone like Morales there, if you have Ferrie, Banister and Shaw? Not to mention Thornley.

To reply to Paul J, if Veciana is accurate--I know he is under attack right now; and if you subscribe to Armstrong's theory, then I would think that would be Harvey with Phillips. For the reasons that it was Harvey in the FPCC operation, and Harvey in Clinton/Jackson.

Edited by James DiEugenio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

I have to admit I've wondered if Morales was used by/trough Phillips/Joannides/Bannister/Harvey and Angleton to run Oswald in the summer of 1963. 

California security a year after the RFK assassination.

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=rolling+stones+gimme+shelter+1969+altamont&view=detail&mid=1D3950972ED7289691FA1D3950972ED7289691FA&FORM=VIRE

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

I have never seen any evidence that Morales was running Oswald in New Orleans. (I thought the stuff Tommy Graves produced was a joke.)

Very few people have spent as much time as I have on the Crescent City.  And this includes three visits there with other researchers.

I mean my God, why would you need someone like Morales there, if you have Ferrie, Banister and Shaw? Not to mention Thornley.

To reply to Paul J, if Veciana is accurate--I know he is under attack right now; and if you subscribe to Armstrong's theory, then I would think that would be Harvey with Phillips. For the reasons that it was Harvey in the FPCC operation, and Harvey in Clinton/Jackson.

 

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...