Cliff Varnell Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 (edited) 30 minutes ago, David Andrews said: I'd like to see that plan delineated. No knock against you, but I can't imagine a world where any CIA officer would go down for the assassination. Tell it to Hunt. Or Morales...By "go down" you mean publicly accused? You can't see a scenario where people screw up and the CIA provides back up patsies? Okay. Quote The Paines would be another matter - damage to the Agency would stop there. I understand that Hunt was dangled over the fire with teases of revealing his involvement in the 1970s, but he had Watergate to answer for, and his protector Dulles was dead. I can't see a scenario where Dulles would agree to family friends of his girlfriend hosting the family of a Commie Prez-killer. Two degrees of separation is a little tight, ain't it? Edited April 25, 2020 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Andrews Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 21 minutes ago, Cliff Varnell said: Tell it to Hunt. Or Morales...By "go down" you mean publicly accused? You can't see a scenario where people screw up and the CIA provides back up patsies? Okay. I can't see a scenario where Dulles would agree to family friends of his girlfriend hosting the family of a Commie Prez-killer. Two degrees of separation is a little tight, ain't it? Not CIA officers as patsies. Too close to home. There's ample reason to believe Dulles would betray anyone as a means to an end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 1 minute ago, David Andrews said: Not CIA officers as patsies. Too close to home. They weren’t ready to give up Hunt? 1 minute ago, David Andrews said: There's ample reason to believe Dulles would betray anyone as a means to an end. There’s ample reason to believe the Agency would betray anyone — even Dulles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Andrews Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 (edited) 13 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said: They weren’t ready to give up Hunt? They didn't until Watergate. Edited April 25, 2020 by David Andrews Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 (edited) 7 minutes ago, David Andrews said: The didn't until Watergate. They were ready to give him up in ‘66. Edited April 25, 2020 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 (edited) Angleton's 1966 Memo to Helms re Hunt's Presence in Dallas" by Joseph Trento & Jacquie Powers Sunday News Journal — August 20, 1978 <quote on> A secret CIA memorandum says that E. Howard Hunt was in Dallas the day President John F. Kennedy was murdered and that top agency officials plotted to cover up Hunt’s presence there. Some CIA sources speculate that Hunt thought he was assigned by higher-ups to arrange the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald. Sources say Hunt, convicted in the Watergate conspiracy in 1974, was acting chief of the CIA station in Mexico City in the weeks prior to the Kennedy assassination. Oswald was in Mexico City, and met with two Soviet KGB agents at the Russian Embassy there immediately before leaving for Dallas, according to the official Warren Commission report. The 1966 secret memo, now in the hands of the House assassination committee, places Hunt in Dallas Nov. 22, 1963. Richard M. Helms, former CIA director, and James Angleton, former counterintelligence chief, initialed the memo according to investigators who made the information available to the Sunday News Journal. <quote off> Edited April 25, 2020 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Andrews Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 If indeed that memo was generated in 1966. And even if it was, they didn't leak it until the 1970s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 16 minutes ago, David Andrews said: If indeed that memo was generated in 1966. And even if it was, they didn't leak it until the 1970s. Riiiiight. The HSCA manufactured a memo implicating E. Howard Hunt? The Agency was ready to throw Hunt to the wolves. In 1966. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirk Gallaway Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 (edited) Cliff said: Two degrees of separation is a little tight, ain't it? I agree, Cliff. But talking specifically about Ruth Paine. Though it is a sort of a heresy on this forum, The degrees of separation are sort of akin to those who believe GHWB was actively involved in the assassination and was present at Dealey. Plaza. Why would either take such an enormous risk? There is no denying her and her husband's suspicious connections. But I've mentioned this before. Ruth Paine would have had extensive experience and be vetted to a point of great confidence because she would become after all, the linchpin of the entire assassination! She was interviewed more than any other witness. At a certain point, if she was directed to befriend the Oswalds, you have to believe she was fanatically behind the assassination of the President, otherwise, why wouldn't she under pressures reveal the plan?, or at least as much of it, as she could have known? But then she was so emboldened to put herself directly in the line of fire to even further incriminate Oswald with the letter and the backyard photos! Her behavior later in her life is very curious. Paul Trejo had a dialog with her. I have no reason to think he would lie about that. So did Bill Brown, apparently she asked some opening questions to find out if you were friend or foe, then she would be accessible, all the way into in her 70's, into her early 80's! She even remarked to Paul that she was open to the idea that LHO was part of a conspiracy. Only a few years ago she talked of her experience, now well into her 80's! It's as if she has some impish compulsion later on in her life to get away with a deception, just like Robert Durst! Why take a chance at all, in any public forum? It strikes me as foolhardy that she would risk that, to what? placate a bunch of JFKA conspiracy theorists? When the public at large has swallowed the story of the WCR? David Talbot doesn't suggest she's or Michael is guilty in the "Devil's Chessboard." I understand , it does seem too perfect, she even has a little shrine of JFK in her room! She's just going to go down to the end to protect JFK's killers!? Her Father, sister, their ties to the CIA, her marrying into the Paine family. It's all so fishy, you can't dismiss it. But at the same time, you have to wonder in what previous arena, did she perform to become such a loyal, dependable, extraordinary agent! Who would put such trust in her? Either way, there are a lot of questions unanswered. Edited April 25, 2020 by Kirk Gallaway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 (edited) 31 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said: Cliff said: Two degrees of separation is a little tight, ain't it? I agree, Cliff. But talking specifically about Ruth Paine. Though it is a sort of a heresy on this forum, The degrees of separation are sort of akin to those who believe GHWB was actively involved in the assassination and was present at Dealey. Plaza. Why would either take such an enormous risk? There is no denying her and her husband's suspicious connections. But I've mentioned this before. Ruth Paine would have had extensive experience and be vetted to a point of great confidence because she would become after all, the linchpin of the entire assassination! She was interviewed more than any other witness. At a certain point, if she was directed to befriend the Oswalds, you have to believe she was fanatically behind the assassination of the President, otherwise, why wouldn't she under pressures reveal the plan?, or at least as much of it, as she could have known? Kirk, Why do you assume she *knew* she’d signed up for the job of lefty hostess to the family of a KGB/Castro Kennedy-killer? Why would she “need to know” anything about the murder plot? Edited April 25, 2020 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirk Gallaway Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 (edited) That's precisely the point I'm trying to make. I'm making arguments questioning her guilt. Aren't you? Edited April 25, 2020 by Kirk Gallaway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 (edited) 18 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said: That's precisely what I'm presenting. I'm making arguments questioning her guilt. Aren't you? A back-up patsy. Dulles may have set Oswald up with Ruth the junior as a favor to Agency friends who wanted to stash an asset in Dallas. 2 degrees of separation is hot! Under any scenario Dulles would be highly motivated to spearhead the cover-up — of the conspiracy, and his own ass. Edited April 25, 2020 by Cliff Varnell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirk Gallaway Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 I get your general theory. What I'm not clear about is, what is the extent of Ruth's knowledge? Is she just a complete unwitting dupe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cliff Varnell Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 2 minutes ago, Kirk Gallaway said: I get your general theory. What I'm not clear about is, what is the extent of Ruth's knowledge? Is she just a complete unwitting dupe? I’d speculate that when Oswald was captured as a lone assassin Ruth got real wise real quick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kirk Gallaway Posted April 25, 2020 Share Posted April 25, 2020 Ok, So, at that point she became aware that she had been set up with Oswald? Is she an agent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now