Jump to content
The Education Forum

Towards A Simple, Plausible Yet Explanatory Conspiracy Theory


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

Separate but not unplanned.  I'm convinced the plan was to whack Oswald about 45 minutes after JFK.

That would have been the only way to pin the deed on Castro.

Robert Blakely also thought LOH was supposed to be hit, ASAP post JFKA, but something went awry. So you have good company, and evidently "hitting the hitter" is a known tactic in Mobland.

I think differently. 

In my scenario, LOH was supposed to escape, then perhaps show up in Cuba, or just change ID's and live life as a blond on a 100-acre ranch in Panama, or what have you. 

The fact that LOH was in police custody and alive forced the CIA to pull out all the stops to alter the situation, and ultimately rely on Jack Ruby. 

It sure seems likely that LOH concluded rather quickly after the JFKA that he was in danger. 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

7 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Robert Blakely also thought LOH was supposed to be hit, ASAP post JFKA, but something went awry. So you have good company, and evidently "hitting the hitter" is a known tactic in Mobland.

I think differently. 

In my scenario, LOH was supposed to escape, then perhaps show up in Cuba, or just change ID's and live life as a blond on a 100-acre ranch in Panama, or what have you. 

The fact that LOH was in police custody and alive forced the CIA to pull out all the stops to alter the situation, and ultimately rely on Jack Ruby. 

It sure seems likely that LOH concluded rather quickly after the JFKA that he was in danger.

I don't see Oswald as a "hitter."  He was a patsy sheep-dipped as a Commie agent whose early death would have sparked an invasion of Cuba.

You're right, I have a lot of company in this view.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Benjamin - It’s hard for me to square the Oswald Legend, which I think most would agree was orchestrated by his handlers, with his possible  involvement as a shooter. After all, the footprints of Intelligence surrounding Oswald throughout his life up to New Orleans and beyond would have remained unnoticed were it not for the assassination. They are easily explained as parts of other Intelligence operations. The Legend made him a good patsy, but I cannot imagine him accepting the patsy role wittingly. I agree with the logic that he would have been watching the motorcade, not shooting at it.  Investigators have been plagued with rabbit holes over the 58+ years, and personally I think the biggest of these is Ozzie himself. Can we analyze his movements before and after, and avoid the elements that were part of his Legend, such as firearm ownership, proCastro sympathies, Walker shooting, multiple wallets, trips to the Mexico Embassies etc? Your analysis presumes his guilt in some manner, and you try to fit everything into that envelope. Mine presumes his innocence and does likewise. Meanwhile, the murderers remain unknown, unacknowledged, and unpunished. That’s a Rabbit Hole. There are other ways of seeing his movements, and removing the bits that seem planted is useful in my opinion. 

I do think the idea of a piggyback operation is very logical, and it has been posited by others. Your theory needs the guilty being named, or guessed at anyway, and I’m talking about the Cabal that hijacked the false flag operation. If Oswald, involved or not, drinking a coke or not, expecting help disappearing afterwards or not, having and using a handgun or not, going to MC or not, shooting a police officer or not, etc etc, didn’t kill JFK, who did? 

Link to post
Share on other sites

One point of speculation: if Oswald wasn't involved in the plot, how would he know to meet a contact at Texas Theater?  Would that contact have been there if Oswald hadn't needed to beat it out of town?  The timing - only about an hour and ten minutes after the assassination - speaks of premeditation.

Edited by David Andrews
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, David Andrews said:

One point of speculation: if Oswald wasn't involved in the plot, how would he know to meet a contact at Texas Theater?  Would that contact have been there if Oswald hadn't needed to beat it out of town?  The timing - only about an hour and ten minutes after the assassination - speaks of premeditation.

If Oswald wasn't involved in the plot, even if by name only, how was he supposed to be on the sixth floor shooting?  Why was he employed there?  By coincidence?

The Texas Theater.  The half of a torn dollar bill recorded in evidence, but not preserved.  His moving around sitting by different patrons.  Two Oswald's escorted out.  Premeditation seems a sure thing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to say here that your "piggyback" theory is incredibly compelling. I think it is a perfect analysis of how the plan was carried out by a small group at the very top, a plan that allowed them to both utilize the full force of the CIA without underlings knowing that their actions were in furtherance of a conspiracy to assassinate the president. 

I differ from your conclusions in that I believe the "piggybackers" -- those who knew the JFK hit was the ultimate goal -- were more than just 3-4 people. I suspect it was probably closer to 6-8 people and that the poison-pills injected into the plot (such as the WW3 virus) guaranteed that everyone at the agency would participate in a cover-up in order to protect themselves, protect their loyal officers, protect the country, protect the agency.

Catch-22: Containing Discovery of the Piggyback

The "poison pills" woven into the plot essentially guaranteed that anyone at CIA who was able to figure out that their various operations were hijacked or piggybacked upon would be forced to cover-up that fact to protect their own job, to protect their officers and assets, to protect the country, and to protect the CIA.

Inevitably, some in CIA would have figured out what happened. It was inevitable. However, many of these people were probably loyal intelligence professionals who loved their jobs, believed in the CIA, and supported their subordinates. They dare not share their concerns or speak up for it they did, they not only would likely have had little hard evidence to prove their suspicion, but they would commit career suicide if they spoke up, they would endanger the very agency they believed in and loved, and they would have destroyed what they believed was a necessary institution.

In short, speaking up would have in their view endangered the national security of the country. They would be in a Catch-22: "I know what happened here ... but if I talk about it, it could destroy the CIA and that in turn would gravely damage our national security and do more harm to this country than the KGB or Soviets could ever hope to achieve on their own." The would be stuck. No choice but to keep their mouth shut.  

Win Scott

I believe that Winston Scott is one of the people who did figure out that his station, his assets, and his personnel were used by the piggybackers. He figured it out. Probably rather quickly. It seems the most Scott did (as far as we know) about this was keep some evidence of this in his safe: holding onto recordings of the Oswald impersonator on the phone in Mexico and holding on to photos of Oswald (or an Oswald impersonator) in his safe. He probably kept these things for himself, a memento, a reminder, maybe ... more likely as "insurance" for himself.

Richard Helms said in the PBS Frontline documentary (about Scott having photos and audio of Oswald) "that's fine for Win Scott to say, but he doesn't have any evidence so what he is talking about?". 

What PBS Frontline left out is that Jim Angleton hopped on a plane--in such haste he forgot to even bring his passport--to Mexico where he confiscated the evidence from Scott's safe before Scott could even be buried. When you watch that PBS Frontline documentary, pause it when Richard Helms said "that's fine for when Scott to say ... but what is he talking about?" and then pick-up and read Jim DiEugenio's Destiny Betrayed chapter 16 "Mexico City and Langley." Then pick up John Armstrong's Harvey and Lee and read the chapter "1963, Mexico City- Pandora's Box" (page 614-706) -- regardless of what you may think about Armstrong's central thesis, his chapter on Mexico City serves as the best scholarship on what happened in Mexico City and is without equal in research in this case. It's that important.

The Piggybackers: Compartmentalization is the key

I believe that Angleton and Dulles were at the top of the plot. The WWIII virus and various other "poison pill" components of the plot were Angleton's handiwork. The key really is compartmentalization, where various people involved in things like setting up Oswald don't know they're participating in an assassination plot. All they know is they're handling a sensitive clandestine project. Maybe they think they're working on a Fair Play for Cuba Committee operation, maybe some think it's one of the Castro assassination plots, and more than likely many of the assets and agents utilized had no idea of the bigger picture, they only have very specific direct orders to do (A) (B) and (C) and they don't question why, they just do what they are asked without any need to know why.

Your analysis is astute, it's a very good analysis of the mechanics of how a compartmentalized operation can be carried out without key people in the operation knowing the bigger picture. I do disagree with some of the things you have suggested, however. Here are some of my thoughts on that:

Joannides

You mention a few times Joannides as a possible figure at the top who was part of the piggybacking -- I disagree there and think that Joannides was most probably/most likely participating in what he thought was a Fair Play for Cuba Committee operation where DRE, Ed Butler and INCA and all these assets were part of an operation designed to discredit the FPCC by linking it directly to Russia and Cuba, to try to show the organization was a front for the KGB and DGI. James McCord, however, I suspect may have been one of the people in the FPCC discrediting operation who might have also been aware of how the operation would be piggybacked. 

Once 11/22/63 happened, those DRE boys wasted no time taking advantage of the situation by sending their PR packet on Oswald to newspapers and radio stations to link the assassination to Castro. I view this as DRE being opportunists. They saw an opportunity to spin the assassination in a way that furthered their own goals in a way that aligned with their genuine beliefs. For example, I can see a situation whereby Bringuier or some of his DRE friends really did believe that Oswald was a Castro agent meanwhile Joannides knew better, knew that Oswald's "connections" to Castro were merely part of a legend being put together as part of the FPCC discrediting operation.  

David Phillips

I think he was aware of the piggybacking/assassination plot, and that he is central to the Mexico City stuff.

The things that happened in Mexico City look less like an operation targeting the FPCC than they do an operation designed to make Oswald look like a DGI/KGB assassin frantically seeking an escape route to Cuba for his upcoming starring role in "the big event." What happened in Mexico City makes little sense in terms of a FPCC discrediting operation ... though perhaps it was framed as one by Phillips to his subordinates and co-workers. 

The whole Kostikov and "Department 13" stuff, and the "Oswald trying to get to Cuba" stuff--all this makes sense only in terms of painting Oswald as a DGI/KGB assassination and sabotage agent who was quite clearly trying to seek some kind of escape route to Cuba.   

The Piggyback Players

I have my own suspicions who the 6-8 people aware of the JFK hit were, the "piggybackers" who designed and carried out the plan that Angleton put together. The compartmentalization allowed the piggybackers to have the entire agency at their disposal, every resource and department they needed. All it takes is one key figure in each necessary department. By having these 6-8 people within all these CIA departments not only do they have the full power of the CIA at their disposal to carry out the plan but they also guarantee that everyone in these departments is forced into the cover-up after the fact to protect their own jobs, their own departments, and personnel who contributed to operations that were "piggybacked."

For example, it can be shown that the piggybackers probably had people carrying out actions for them within: the Directorate of Operations, the Domestic Operations Division, the Domestic Contacts Division, Counter-Intelligence, the Office of Security, the Western Hemisphere Division, The Soviet Russia division, the Miami station, and the Mexico City station, just to name a few. 

In doing it this way, it also ensured that virtually every department in the CIA would be required to participate in the cover-up for all the reasons stated previously.

Here are my nominees for the Piggyback Players -- those who knew the JFK was the target and who exploited other "legitimate" operations to that end:

  • Allen Dulles -- no longer DCI but still having meetings with key piggybackers who were still at CIA
  • James Angleton -- I believe he was the leading figure who put the entire plan together 
  • David Phillips -- key to Mexico City and in hijacking Joannides' FPCC operation from New Orleans by telling subordinates in Mexico City that what they were doing there was just an extension of the FPCC operation
  • William K. Harvey -- I haven't figured out his role but suspect it relates to sourcing shooters 
  • Howard Hunt -- a piggybacker embedded in multiple areas at CIA. He was chief of covert operations in Tracy Barnes' Domestic Operations Division, he was "on-loan" to Mexico City Station when the Oswald stuff went down, and he was also embedded into the Soviet Russia division by Angleton. (see Creating the Oswald Legend – Part 5 by Vasilios Vazakas) I believe Hunt was a central person for the piggybackers and served several different roles. He was no "bench warmer" like he claimed in his limited hang-out deathbed confession which curiously omits James Angleton, while absurdly accusing Cord Meyer and LBJ.
  • Sergio Arcacha-Smith 
  • Eladio Del Valle 
  • Herminio Diaz Garcia

Much of this is speculation, but when you have all of the information surrounding these people and their actions, the puzzle pieces begin to fall together.

A plot like this can be carried out with even a dozen people being aware that JFK was the target, basically because the "poison pill" (or "virus" as Newman called it) was embedded into the plot in several different forms which essentially guaranteed that everyone would be forced to participate in the cover-up in order to ensure that the entire CIA wasn't destroyed. Anyone and everyone at CIA who might have figured out what happened was left in a compromising position by having their own officers and departments unknowingly--in many cases--carry out central parts of the plot.

The Most Secret CIA "Family Jewel"

When Angleton's replacement, George Kalaris came on board, he commissioned former CIA officer Cleveland Cram to come out of retirement to do a study of Angleton's reign from 1954 to 1974 to "find out what in hell happened. What were these guys doing."

Cram took the assignment and was given access to all CIA documents on covert operations. The study, entitled History of the Counterintelligence Staff 1954-1974, took six years to complete and was finished in 1981. Cram produced twelve legal-sized volumes, each three hundred to four hundred pages.

Cram's approximately four-thousand-page study has never been declassified.

It remains locked in the CIA's vaults.

I often wonder if Cram put together what happened on 11/22/63, figuring out James Angleton's most egregious, sinister, and successful operation and that this study will never be declassified, so we'll never know. 

However, as Grover Proctor said, I think that the case has been figured out. It has been solved: "Who says that it hasn't come out already?" The marketplace of ideas has been flooded with an enormous number of opposing and contradictory "solutions," some by well-meaning and hard-working researchers, and some which are obvious and blatant attempts at disinformation. Who is to say that, somewhere in that morass of opinion and deception, the real answer hasn't already been revealed?"

I believe that it has been figured out, and this post by Benjamin Cole fits squarely within that description.

IMHO of course.

 

Edited by Richard Booth
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Richard Booth said:

I have to say here that your "piggyback" theory is incredibly compelling. I think it is a perfect analysis of how the plan was carried out by a small group at the very top, a plan that allowed them to both utilize the full force of the CIA without underlings knowing that their actions were in furtherance of a conspiracy to assassinate the president. 

I differ from your conclusions in that I believe the "piggybackers" -- those who knew the JFK hit was the ultimate goal -- were more than just 3-4 people. I suspect it was probably closer to 6-8 people and that the poison-pills injected into the plot (such as the WW3 virus) guaranteed that everyone at the agency would participate in a cover-up in order to protect themselves, protect their loyal officers, protect the country, protect the agency.

Catch-22: Containing Discovery of the Piggyback

The "poison pills" woven into the plot essentially guaranteed that anyone at CIA who was able to figure out that their various operations were hijacked or piggybacked upon would be forced to cover-up that fact to protect their own job, to protect their officers and assets, to protect the country, and to protect the CIA.

Inevitably, some in CIA would have figured out what happened. It was inevitable. However, many of these people were probably loyal intelligence professionals who loved their jobs, believed in the CIA, and supported their subordinates. They dare not share their concerns or speak up for it they did, they not only would likely have had little hard evidence to prove their suspicion, but they would commit career suicide if they spoke up, they would endanger the very agency they believed in and loved, and they would have destroyed what they believed was a necessary institution.

In short, speaking up would have in their view endangered the national security of the country. They would be in a Catch-22: "I know what happened here ... but if I talk about it, it could destroy the CIA and that in turn would gravely damage our national security and do more harm to this country than the KGB or Soviets could ever hope to achieve on their own." The would be stuck. No choice but to keep their mouth shut.  

Win Scott

I believe that Winston Scott is one of the people who did figure out that his station, his assets, and his personnel were used by the piggybackers. He figured it out. Probably rather quickly. It seems the most Scott did (as far as we know) about this was keep some evidence of this in his safe: holding onto recordings of the Oswald impersonator on the phone in Mexico and holding on to photos of Oswald (or an Oswald impersonator) in his safe. He probably kept these things for himself, a memento, a reminder, maybe ... more likely as "insurance" for himself.

Richard Helms said in the PBS Frontline documentary (about Scott having photos and audio of Oswald) "that's fine for Win Scott to say, but he doesn't have any evidence so what he is talking about?". 

What PBS Frontline left out is that Jim Angleton hopped on a plane--in such haste he forgot to even bring his passport--to Mexico where he confiscated the evidence from Scott's safe before Scott could even be buried. When you watch that PBS Frontline documentary, pause it when Richard Helms said "that's fine for when Scott to say ... but what is he talking about?" and then pick-up and read Jim DiEugenio's Destiny Betrayed chapter 16 "Mexico City and Langley." Then pick up John Armstrong's Harvey and Lee and read the chapter "1963, Mexico City- Pandora's Box" (page 614-706) -- regardless of what you may think about Armstrong's central thesis, his chapter on Mexico City serves as the best scholarship on what happened in Mexico City and is without equal in research in this case. It's that important.

The Piggybackers: Compartmentalization is the key

I believe that Angleton and Dulles were at the top of the plot. The WWIII virus and various other "poison pill" components of the plot were Angleton's handiwork. The key really is compartmentalization, where various people involved in things like setting up Oswald don't know they're participating in an assassination plot. All they know is they're handling a sensitive clandestine project. Maybe they think they're working on a Fair Play for Cuba Committee operation, maybe some think it's one of the Castro assassination plots, and more than likely many of the assets and agents utilized had no idea of the bigger picture, they only have very specific direct orders to do (A) (B) and (C) and they don't question why, they just do what they are asked without any need to know why.

Your analysis is astute, it's a very good analysis of the mechanics of how a compartmentalized operation can be carried out without key people in the operation knowing the bigger picture. I do disagree with some of the things you have suggested, however. Here are some of my thoughts on that:

Joannides

You mention a few times Joannides as a possible figure at the top who was part of the piggybacking -- I disagree there and think that Joannides was most probably/most likely participating in what he thought was a Fair Play for Cuba Committee operation where DRE, Ed Butler and INCA and all these assets were part of an operation designed to discredit the FPCC by linking it directly to Russia and Cuba, to try to show the organization was a front for the KGB and DGI. James McCord, however, I suspect may have been one of the people in the FPCC discrediting operation who might have also been aware of how the operation would be piggybacked. 

Once 11/22/63 happened, those DRE boys wasted no time taking advantage of the situation by sending their PR packet on Oswald to newspapers and radio stations to link the assassination to Castro. I view this as DRE being opportunists. They saw an opportunity to spin the assassination in a way that furthered their own goals in a way that aligned with their genuine beliefs. For example, I can see a situation whereby Bringuier or some of his DRE friends really did believe that Oswald was a Castro agent meanwhile Joannides knew better, knew that Oswald's "connections" to Castro were merely part of a legend being put together as part of the FPCC discrediting operation.  

David Phillips

I think he was aware of the piggybacking/assassination plot, and that he is central to the Mexico City stuff.

The things that happened in Mexico City look less like an operation targeting the FPCC than they do an operation designed to make Oswald look like a DGI/KGB assassin frantically seeking an escape route to Cuba for his upcoming starring role in "the big event." What happened in Mexico City makes little sense in terms of a FPCC discrediting operation ... though perhaps it was framed as one by Phillips to his subordinates and co-workers. 

The whole Kostikov and "Department 13" stuff, and the "Oswald trying to get to Cuba" stuff--all this makes sense only in terms of painting Oswald as a DGI/KGB assassination and sabotage agent who was quite clearly trying to seek some kind of escape route to Cuba.   

The Piggyback Players

I have my own suspicions who the 6-8 people aware of the JFK hit were, the "piggybackers" who designed and carried out the plan that Angleton put together. The compartmentalization allowed the piggybackers to have the entire agency at their disposal, every resource and department they needed. All it takes is one key figure in each necessary department. By having these 6-8 people within all these CIA departments not only do they have the full power of the CIA at their disposal to carry out the plan but they also guarantee that everyone in these departments is forced into the cover-up after the fact to protect their own jobs, their own departments, and personnel who contributed to operations that were "piggybacked."

For example, it can be shown that the piggybackers probably had people carrying out actions for them within: the Directorate of Operations, the Domestic Operations Division, the Domestic Contacts Division, Counter-Intelligence, the Office of Security, the Western Hemisphere Division, The Soviet Russia division, the Miami station, and the Mexico City station, just to name a few. 

In doing it this way, it also ensured that virtually every department in the CIA would be required to participate in the cover-up for all the reasons stated previously.

Here are my nominees for the Piggyback Players -- those who knew the JFK was the target and who exploited other "legitimate" operations to that end:

  • Allen Dulles -- no longer DCI but still having meetings with key piggybackers who were still at CIA
  • James Angleton -- I believe he was the leading figure who put the entire plan together 
  • David Phillips -- key to Mexico City and in hijacking Joannides' FPCC operation from New Orleans by telling subordinates in Mexico City that what they were doing there was just an extension of the FPCC operation
  • William K. Harvey -- I haven't figured out his role but suspect it relates to sourcing shooters 
  • Howard Hunt -- a piggybacker embedded in multiple areas at CIA. He was chief of covert operations in Tracy Barnes' Domestic Operations Division, he was "on-loan" to Mexico City Station when the Oswald stuff went down, and he was also embedded into the Soviet Russia division by Angleton. (see Creating the Oswald Legend – Part 5 by Vasilios Vazakas) I believe Hunt was a central person for the piggybackers and served several different roles. He was no "bench warmer" like he claimed in his limited hang-out deathbed confession which curiously omits James Angleton, while absurdly accusing Cord Meyer and LBJ.
  • Sergio Arcacha-Smith 
  • Eladio Del Valle 
  • Herminio Diaz Garcia

Much of this is speculation, but when you have all of the information surrounding these people and their actions, the puzzle pieces begin to fall together.

A plot like this can be carried out with even a dozen people being aware that JFK was the target, basically because the "poison pill" (or "virus" as Newman called it) was embedded into the plot in several different forms which essentially guaranteed that everyone would be forced to participate in the cover-up in order to ensure that the entire CIA wasn't destroyed. Anyone and everyone at CIA who might have figured out what happened was left in a compromising position by having their own officers and departments unknowingly--in many cases--carry out central parts of the plot.

The Most Secret CIA "Family Jewel"

When Angleton's replacement, George Kalaris came on board, he commissioned former CIA officer Cleveland Cram to come out of retirement to do a study of Angleton's reign from 1954 to 1974 to "find out what in hell happened. What were these guys doing."

Cram took the assignment and was given access to all CIA documents on covert operations. The study, entitled History of the Counterintelligence Staff 1954-1974, took six years to complete and was finished in 1981. Cram produced twelve legal-sized volumes, each three hundred to four hundred pages.

Cram's approximately four-thousand-page study has never been declassified.

It remains locked in the CIA's vaults.

I often wonder if Cram put together what happened on 11/22/63, figuring out James Angleton's most egregious, sinister, and successful operation and that this study will never be declassified, so we'll never know. 

However, as Grover Proctor said, I think that the case has been figured out. It has been solved: "Who says that it hasn't come out already?" The marketplace of ideas has been flooded with an enormous number of opposing and contradictory "solutions," some by well-meaning and hard-working researchers, and some which are obvious and blatant attempts at disinformation. Who is to say that, somewhere in that morass of opinion and deception, the real answer hasn't already been revealed?"

I believe that it has been figured out, and this post by Benjamin Cole fits squarely within that description.

IMHO of course.

 

Extremely thought provoking.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/4/2021 at 2:30 PM, Benjamin Cole said:

That witness was Amos Lee Euins, a then 15-year-old youth on hand to watch the motorcade. Euins described to the WC a bald man, of undetermined race, shooting at JFK from about the fifth-floor of the TSBD. Euins’ eyesight was fine.

Let's home in on a "bald" person seen in the sniper window who was there 5 or 6 minutes before Euins looked up.

Mr. SPECTER - Mr. Rowland, a couple of other questions.
Are you able to give us any other type of a description of the Negro gentleman whom you observed in the window we marked "A" with respect to height, weight, age? 
Mr. ROWLAND - He was very thin, an elderly gentleman, bald or practically bald, very thin hair if he wasn't bald. Had on a plaid shirt. I think it was red and green, very bright color, that is why I remember it. 
Mr. SPECTER - Can you give us an estimate as to age? 
Mr. ROWLAND - Fifty; possibly 55 or 60. 
Mr. SPECTER - Can you give us an estimate as to height? 
Mr. ROWLAND - 5'8", 5'10", in that neighborhood. He was very slender, very thin. 
Mr. SPECTER - Can you give us a more definite description as to complexion? 
Mr. ROWLAND - Very dark or fairly dark, not real dark compared to some Negroes, but fairly dark. Seemed like his face was either--I can't recall detail but it was either very wrinkled or marked in some way. 

......

Mr. SPECTER - Over how long a time span did you observe the Negro man to be in the window marked "A"? 
Mr. ROWLAND - He was there before I noticed the man with the rifle and approximately 12:30 or when the motorcade was at Main and Ervay he was gone when I looked back and I had looked up there about 30 seconds before or a minute before. 
Mr. SPECTER - How long after you heard the motorcade was at Main and Ervay did the motorcade pass by where you were? 
Mr. ROWLAND - Another 5 minutes. 
Mr. SPECTER - So that you observed this colored man on the window you have marked "A" within 5 minutes prior to the time the motorcade passed in front of you? 
Mr. ROWLAND - Approximately 5 minutes prior to the time the motorcade came, he wasn't there. About 30 seconds or a minute prior to that time he was there. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Richard Booth said:

I have to say here that your "piggyback" theory is incredibly compelling. I think it is a perfect analysis of how the plan was carried out by a small group at the very top, a plan that allowed them to both utilize the full force of the CIA without underlings knowing that their actions were in furtherance of a conspiracy to assassinate the president. 

I differ from your conclusions in that I believe the "piggybackers" -- those who knew the JFK hit was the ultimate goal -- were more than just 3-4 people. I suspect it was probably closer to 6-8 people and that the poison-pills injected into the plot (such as the WW3 virus) guaranteed that everyone at the agency would participate in a cover-up in order to protect themselves, protect their loyal officers, protect the country, protect the agency.

Catch-22: Containing Discovery of the Piggyback

The "poison pills" woven into the plot essentially guaranteed that anyone at CIA who was able to figure out that their various operations were hijacked or piggybacked upon would be forced to cover-up that fact to protect their own job, to protect their officers and assets, to protect the country, and to protect the CIA.

Inevitably, some in CIA would have figured out what happened. It was inevitable. However, many of these people were probably loyal intelligence professionals who loved their jobs, believed in the CIA, and supported their subordinates. They dare not share their concerns or speak up for it they did, they not only would likely have had little hard evidence to prove their suspicion, but they would commit career suicide if they spoke up, they would endanger the very agency they believed in and loved, and they would have destroyed what they believed was a necessary institution.

In short, speaking up would have in their view endangered the national security of the country. They would be in a Catch-22: "I know what happened here ... but if I talk about it, it could destroy the CIA and that in turn would gravely damage our national security and do more harm to this country than the KGB or Soviets could ever hope to achieve on their own." The would be stuck. No choice but to keep their mouth shut.  

Win Scott

I believe that Winston Scott is one of the people who did figure out that his station, his assets, and his personnel were used by the piggybackers. He figured it out. Probably rather quickly. It seems the most Scott did (as far as we know) about this was keep some evidence of this in his safe: holding onto recordings of the Oswald impersonator on the phone in Mexico and holding on to photos of Oswald (or an Oswald impersonator) in his safe. He probably kept these things for himself, a memento, a reminder, maybe ... more likely as "insurance" for himself.

Richard Helms said in the PBS Frontline documentary (about Scott having photos and audio of Oswald) "that's fine for Win Scott to say, but he doesn't have any evidence so what he is talking about?". 

What PBS Frontline left out is that Jim Angleton hopped on a plane--in such haste he forgot to even bring his passport--to Mexico where he confiscated the evidence from Scott's safe before Scott could even be buried. When you watch that PBS Frontline documentary, pause it when Richard Helms said "that's fine for when Scott to say ... but what is he talking about?" and then pick-up and read Jim DiEugenio's Destiny Betrayed chapter 16 "Mexico City and Langley." Then pick up John Armstrong's Harvey and Lee and read the chapter "1963, Mexico City- Pandora's Box" (page 614-706) -- regardless of what you may think about Armstrong's central thesis, his chapter on Mexico City serves as the best scholarship on what happened in Mexico City and is without equal in research in this case. It's that important.

The Piggybackers: Compartmentalization is the key

I believe that Angleton and Dulles were at the top of the plot. The WWIII virus and various other "poison pill" components of the plot were Angleton's handiwork. The key really is compartmentalization, where various people involved in things like setting up Oswald don't know they're participating in an assassination plot. All they know is they're handling a sensitive clandestine project. Maybe they think they're working on a Fair Play for Cuba Committee operation, maybe some think it's one of the Castro assassination plots, and more than likely many of the assets and agents utilized had no idea of the bigger picture, they only have very specific direct orders to do (A) (B) and (C) and they don't question why, they just do what they are asked without any need to know why.

Your analysis is astute, it's a very good analysis of the mechanics of how a compartmentalized operation can be carried out without key people in the operation knowing the bigger picture. I do disagree with some of the things you have suggested, however. Here are some of my thoughts on that:

Joannides

You mention a few times Joannides as a possible figure at the top who was part of the piggybacking -- I disagree there and think that Joannides was most probably/most likely participating in what he thought was a Fair Play for Cuba Committee operation where DRE, Ed Butler and INCA and all these assets were part of an operation designed to discredit the FPCC by linking it directly to Russia and Cuba, to try to show the organization was a front for the KGB and DGI. James McCord, however, I suspect may have been one of the people in the FPCC discrediting operation who might have also been aware of how the operation would be piggybacked. 

Once 11/22/63 happened, those DRE boys wasted no time taking advantage of the situation by sending their PR packet on Oswald to newspapers and radio stations to link the assassination to Castro. I view this as DRE being opportunists. They saw an opportunity to spin the assassination in a way that furthered their own goals in a way that aligned with their genuine beliefs. For example, I can see a situation whereby Bringuier or some of his DRE friends really did believe that Oswald was a Castro agent meanwhile Joannides knew better, knew that Oswald's "connections" to Castro were merely part of a legend being put together as part of the FPCC discrediting operation.  

David Phillips

I think he was aware of the piggybacking/assassination plot, and that he is central to the Mexico City stuff.

The things that happened in Mexico City look less like an operation targeting the FPCC than they do an operation designed to make Oswald look like a DGI/KGB assassin frantically seeking an escape route to Cuba for his upcoming starring role in "the big event." What happened in Mexico City makes little sense in terms of a FPCC discrediting operation ... though perhaps it was framed as one by Phillips to his subordinates and co-workers. 

The whole Kostikov and "Department 13" stuff, and the "Oswald trying to get to Cuba" stuff--all this makes sense only in terms of painting Oswald as a DGI/KGB assassination and sabotage agent who was quite clearly trying to seek some kind of escape route to Cuba.   

The Piggyback Players

I have my own suspicions who the 6-8 people aware of the JFK hit were, the "piggybackers" who designed and carried out the plan that Angleton put together. The compartmentalization allowed the piggybackers to have the entire agency at their disposal, every resource and department they needed. All it takes is one key figure in each necessary department. By having these 6-8 people within all these CIA departments not only do they have the full power of the CIA at their disposal to carry out the plan but they also guarantee that everyone in these departments is forced into the cover-up after the fact to protect their own jobs, their own departments, and personnel who contributed to operations that were "piggybacked."

For example, it can be shown that the piggybackers probably had people carrying out actions for them within: the Directorate of Operations, the Domestic Operations Division, the Domestic Contacts Division, Counter-Intelligence, the Office of Security, the Western Hemisphere Division, The Soviet Russia division, the Miami station, and the Mexico City station, just to name a few. 

In doing it this way, it also ensured that virtually every department in the CIA would be required to participate in the cover-up for all the reasons stated previously.

Here are my nominees for the Piggyback Players -- those who knew the JFK was the target and who exploited other "legitimate" operations to that end:

  • Allen Dulles -- no longer DCI but still having meetings with key piggybackers who were still at CIA
  • James Angleton -- I believe he was the leading figure who put the entire plan together 
  • David Phillips -- key to Mexico City and in hijacking Joannides' FPCC operation from New Orleans by telling subordinates in Mexico City that what they were doing there was just an extension of the FPCC operation
  • William K. Harvey -- I haven't figured out his role but suspect it relates to sourcing shooters 
  • Howard Hunt -- a piggybacker embedded in multiple areas at CIA. He was chief of covert operations in Tracy Barnes' Domestic Operations Division, he was "on-loan" to Mexico City Station when the Oswald stuff went down, and he was also embedded into the Soviet Russia division by Angleton. (see Creating the Oswald Legend – Part 5 by Vasilios Vazakas) I believe Hunt was a central person for the piggybackers and served several different roles. He was no "bench warmer" like he claimed in his limited hang-out deathbed confession which curiously omits James Angleton, while absurdly accusing Cord Meyer and LBJ.
  • Sergio Arcacha-Smith 
  • Eladio Del Valle 
  • Herminio Diaz Garcia

Much of this is speculation, but when you have all of the information surrounding these people and their actions, the puzzle pieces begin to fall together.

A plot like this can be carried out with even a dozen people being aware that JFK was the target, basically because the "poison pill" (or "virus" as Newman called it) was embedded into the plot in several different forms which essentially guaranteed that everyone would be forced to participate in the cover-up in order to ensure that the entire CIA wasn't destroyed. Anyone and everyone at CIA who might have figured out what happened was left in a compromising position by having their own officers and departments unknowingly--in many cases--carry out central parts of the plot.

The Most Secret CIA "Family Jewel"

When Angleton's replacement, George Kalaris came on board, he commissioned former CIA officer Cleveland Cram to come out of retirement to do a study of Angleton's reign from 1954 to 1974 to "find out what in hell happened. What were these guys doing."

Cram took the assignment and was given access to all CIA documents on covert operations. The study, entitled History of the Counterintelligence Staff 1954-1974, took six years to complete and was finished in 1981. Cram produced twelve legal-sized volumes, each three hundred to four hundred pages.

Cram's approximately four-thousand-page study has never been declassified.

It remains locked in the CIA's vaults.

I often wonder if Cram put together what happened on 11/22/63, figuring out James Angleton's most egregious, sinister, and successful operation and that this study will never be declassified, so we'll never know. 

However, as Grover Proctor said, I think that the case has been figured out. It has been solved: "Who says that it hasn't come out already?" The marketplace of ideas has been flooded with an enormous number of opposing and contradictory "solutions," some by well-meaning and hard-working researchers, and some which are obvious and blatant attempts at disinformation. Who is to say that, somewhere in that morass of opinion and deception, the real answer hasn't already been revealed?"

I believe that it has been figured out, and this post by Benjamin Cole fits squarely within that description.

IMHO of course.

 

Richard Booth: Many thanks for reading my piece, amd such a thoughtful and on-target response. I will have to read your reply a few more times, before I respond. 

As I said, I was trying to put together a JFKA with the minimum number of participants, so loose lips would not sink ships, before or after. Consider it thought-inducing design constraint. 

Thanks again for reading I will get back to you. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Benjamin - It’s hard for me to square the Oswald Legend, which I think most would agree was orchestrated by his handlers, with his possible  involvement as a shooter. After all, the footprints of Intelligence surrounding Oswald throughout his life up to New Orleans and beyond would have remained unnoticed were it not for the assassination. They are easily explained as parts of other Intelligence operations. The Legend made him a good patsy, but I cannot imagine him accepting the patsy role wittingly. I agree with the logic that he would have been watching the motorcade, not shooting at it.  Investigators have been plagued with rabbit holes over the 58+ years, and personally I think the biggest of these is Ozzie himself. Can we analyze his movements before and after, and avoid the elements that were part of his Legend, such as firearm ownership, proCastro sympathies, Walker shooting, multiple wallets, trips to the Mexico Embassies etc? Your analysis presumes his guilt in some manner, and you try to fit everything into that envelope. Mine presumes his innocence and does likewise. Meanwhile, the murderers remain unknown, unacknowledged, and unpunished. That’s a Rabbit Hole. There are other ways of seeing his movements, and removing the bits that seem planted is useful in my opinion. 

I do think the idea of a piggyback operation is very logical, and it has been posited by others. Your theory needs the guilty being named, or guessed at anyway, and I’m talking about the Cabal that hijacked the false flag operation. If Oswald, involved or not, drinking a coke or not, expecting help disappearing afterwards or not, having and using a handgun or not, going to MC or not, shooting a police officer or not, etc etc, didn’t kill JFK, who did? 

Paul B.--

"Your theory needs the guilty being named, or guessed at anyway, and I’m talking about the Cabal that hijacked the false flag operation."--PB

That's the point of my article!

The "guilty" are some relatively low-level exiles who piggybacked on Phillips' PR stunt.  Eladio Del Valle for example, but maybe some other bald guy, or maybe even a guy wearing a fake bald-looking beanie cap as a disguise.   

One could posit "the guilty" are those who intentionally leaked the false-flag plan to the exiles (and that could go up to Dulles or Angleton), or were sloppy and the false-flag assassination plot leaked.  

Or maybe Phillips showed extraordinarily bad judgement, and hired Cuban exiles to do the false-flag job in combo with LOH, and the exiles did it their way, for real. 

As I said, where the CIA higher-ups probably became involved was in the cover-up and murder of LOH. Somebody had to promise something to Marcello (or perhaps a guy named Civello) to get Ruby to do the deed. Marcello was going to extract assurances from the highest levels. 

And Blakely said the LBJ Administration backed off of mob-hunting. 

Anyways, that my guess. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Tony Krome said:

Mr. SPECTER - So that you observed this colored man on the window you have marked "A" within 5 minutes prior to the time the motorcade passed in front of you? 

Any idea where position "A" was, floor and window?  5th floor west or east and which window?  5 minutes from the shooting.  Shouldn't the 3 black men, Norman, Jarman, and Williams, be there according to their testimony? 

Didn't Amos Euins daddy say you can't believe anything the boy says.  Didn't he first describe this fellow as a white man?

 

Edited by John Butler
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Kennedy Assassination was not a simple affair conducted by a small number of people.  From what I understand the assassination was scheduled for:

1. Dallas

2. MIami

3. Chicago

4.  Los Angeles

5, and others

Different teams and patsies were selected for other places.  People in different areas such as New Orleans and Miami knew about the assassination ahead of the time.  What was the Clay Shaw affair about?  This took more involvement of more people than just a handful.  At the autopsy what were all those admirals and generals doing there?  In control?  What was the lights out in Washington at the time of the assassination about?  Troops in the air?  Who did that?  Who turned off the power in the TSBD at that time?  Why did Danny Arce have a hand radio on Houston Street?  Why was William Shelley in New Orleans in August, 1963?  And, so on!  

IMO, Dallas was the premier spot because of Dealey Plaza/ Murder Plaza.  It was the best place for the assassination physically.  It was at the end of the motorcade route with abundant places on the ground, and not in buildings to put snipers in close range to the p. limo's route.

  

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, John Butler said:

Any idea where position "A" was, floor and window?  5th floor west or east and which window?  5 minutes from the shooting.  Shouldn't the 3 black men, Norman, Jarman, and Williams, be there according to their testimony? 

Didn't Amos Euins daddy say you can't believe anything the boy says.  Didn't he first describe this fellow as a white man?

 

"A" was the 6th floor south east sniper window as marked on CE 356.

Rowland went on to mention observing " 2 or 3" "negro" people underneath the sniper window on the 5th floor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tony Krome said:

"A" was the 6th floor south east sniper window as marked on CE 356.

Rowland went on to mention observing " 2 or 3" "negro" people underneath the sniper window on the 5th floor.

Thanks Tony,

Not the fifth, but the 6th.  I keep getting the feeling the various positions for things or sites was not for clarity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

If Oswald wasn't involved in the plot, even if by name only, how was he supposed to be on the sixth floor shooting?  Why was he employed there?  By coincidence?

The Texas Theater.  The half of a torn dollar bill recorded in evidence, but not preserved.  His moving around sitting by different patrons.  Two Oswald's escorted out.  Premeditation seems a sure thing.

Alternately, Oz could have gone to the TT just to get off the street, and the 'contact" legend could have been planted later, or just inferred by researchers from one witness statement.  Still...he needed to get off the street for some reason...

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...