Is the "Lansdale Hypothesis" of the JFK Assassination the Real Deal?

[W. Niederhut]

8 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

I think its time for me to close on this thread, I've given my best assessments and tried to be as open as possible.  What I do need to say though - for the record - is that in almost thirty years, I have not myself found evidence of the grand conspiracy outlined in the Prouty hypothesis nor of Lansdale's personal role in driving either the attack and its tactical elements in Dallas, the manipulation and framing of Lee Oswald nor all the elements of the cover up (damage control in my parlance). 

Larry,

     Just to clarify, since your research and opinion carries a great deal of weight, what exactly are you referring to here as, "the grand conspiracy outlined in Prouty's hypothesis?"  Which conspiracy?  Which hypothesis?

     Are you referring to Prouty's "grand" theory (in The CIA, Vietnam, and the Plot to Assassinate JFK) that the JFK assassination was very possibly a coup d'etat by Cold War hawks to reverse NSAM 263 and escalate the war in Vietnam, rather than ending it, as JFK intended?

    Or Prouty's "grand" theory that, beginning in the 50s, Allen Dulles and the CIA had established a "secret team" of personnel from diverse government agencies, including the Pentagon, who reported to and worked for the CIA?

    Or Prouty's "Lansdale hypothesis," (outlined in his letter to Garrison) in which Prouty speculated that Ed Lansdale may have been used by Dulles in the Dallas assassination op?

    Thanks for clarifying.

[Matt Allison]

It's very important to know where the line is when it comes to "True Crime" research/investigation, and conspiracy theory/conjecture. That line has been blurred thousands of times in the JFKA case.

[Larry Hancock]

Matt, I was responding to what was posted as his hypothesis as it was posted to open this thread - back on Page 1 in red:

The Lansdale Hypothesis

The U.S. Army has a think-tank at American University. It was called "Operation Camelot". This is where the "Camelot" concept came from. It was anti-JFK's Vietnam strategy. The men running it were Lansdale types, Special Forces background. "Camelot" was King Arthur and Knights of the Round Table: not JFK...then.

Through 1962 and 1963 Mongoose and "Camelot" became strong and silent organizations dedicated to countering JFK. Mongoose had access to the CIA's best "hit men" in the business and a lot of "strike" capability. Lansdale had many old friends in the media business such as Joe Alsop, Henry Luce among others. With this background and with his poisoned motivation I am positive that he got collateral orders to manage the Dallas event under the guise of "getting" Castro. It is so simple at that level. A nod from the right place, source immaterial, and the job's done.

The "hit" is the easy part. The "escape" must be quick and professional. The cover-up and the scenario are the big jobs. They more than anything else prove the Lansdale mastery.

Lansdale was a master writer and planner. He was a great "scenario" guy. I still have a lot of his personally typed material in my files. I am certain that he was behind the elaborate plan and mostly the intricate and enduring cover-up. Given a little help from friends at PEPSICO he could easily have gotten Nixon into Dallas, for "orientation': and LBJ in the cavalcade at the same time, contrary to Secret Service policy.

He knew the "Protection" units and the "Secret Service", who was needed and who wasn't. Those were routine calls for him, and they would have believed him. Cabell could handle the police.

The "hit men" were from CIA overseas sources, for instance, from the "Camp near Athena, Greece. They are trained, stateless, and ready to go at any time. They ask no questions: speak to no one. They are simply told what to do, when and where. Then they are told how they will be removed and protected. After all, they work for the U.S. Government. The "Tramps" were actors doing the job of cover-up. The hit men are just pros. They do the job for the CIA anywhere. They are impersonal. They get paid. They get protected, and they have enough experience to "blackmail" anyone, if anyone ever turns on them...just like Drug agents. The job was clean, quick and neat. No ripples."

 

 

[W. Niederhut]

2 hours ago, Matt Allison said:

It's very important to know where the line is when it comes to "True Crime" research/investigation, and conspiracy theory/conjecture. That line has been blurred thousands of times in the JFKA case.

Matt,

    This is a non sequitur. 

     I assume that we can all agree that Prouty was, in fact, a first hand participant observer of events within the Pentagon and the JFK administration in 1963 -- not some latter day "conspiracy theorist."

     So, my questions (above) are really about the specificity of Larry's criticisms, if any, of Col. L. Fletcher Prouty's observations and theories about the CIA, Vietnam, Lansdale, and the JFK assassination.

     Given the obvious history of orchestrated, on-line disinformation about Prouty during the past thirty years, impugning his reputation on vague, non-specific  grounds is less than appropriate.

     Wouldn't you agree?

 

Below:  Allen Dulles, General Ed Lansdale, Gen Charles Cabell, and Nathan Twining

 

 

   

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Matt,

    This is a non sequitur. 

     I assume that we can all agree that Prouty was, in fact, a first hand participant observer of events within the Pentagon and the JFK administration in 1963 -- not some latter day "conspiracy theorist."

     So, my questions (above) are really about the specificity of Larry's criticisms, if any, of Col. L. Fletcher Prouty's observations and theories about the CIA, Vietnam, Lansdale, and the JFK assassination.

     Given the obvious history of orchestrated, on-line disinformation about Prouty during the past thirty years, impugning his reputation on vague, non-specific  grounds is less than appropriate.

     Wouldn't you agree?

 

Below:  Allen Dulles, General Ed Lansdale, Gen Charles Cabell, and Nathan Twining

 

 

   

 

W.--

Larry H. is more than capable of presenting his arguments, so I am not here to defend him, although I hope we do not lose his participation in this forum as he will weary of explaining and then re-explaining his position.

Yes, Prouty has been bad-mouthed online, probably by people with an agenda.

On the other hand, is there any evidence to support his scenario below, or is it speculation? 

The "hit men" were from CIA overseas sources, for instance, from the "Camp near Athena, Greece. They are trained, stateless, and ready to go at any time. They ask no questions: speak to no one. They are simply told what to do, when and where. Then they are told how they will be removed and protected. After all, they work for the U.S. Government. The "Tramps" were actors doing the job of cover-up. The hit men are just pros. They do the job for the CIA anywhere. They are impersonal. They get paid. They get protected, and they have enough experience to "blackmail" anyone, if anyone ever turns on them...just like Drug agents. The job was clean, quick and neat. No ripples."

OK, in this forum the evidence against LHO in the JFKA is parsed, debated and often refuted, often for good reason. But at least LHO is a person, who was in the TSBD on the day of the JFKA. What role that LHO played in the JFKA can be discussed, debated, parsed. 

But sheesh, we don't even have evidence or names to debate against the mysterious "hit men" from Greece. Or, in other scenarios, hit men associated with anti-Gaullists in France. At least with the anti-Gaullists we have the name Lucien Sarti, or possibly Jean Rene Marie Souetre, or Michel Victor Mertz. Mertz (or somebody) was supposedly deported from Dallas area in the aftermath of the JFKA, although the story is murky.

In conclusion, what Prouty offers on stuff he knows about is very good, and informative.  When it comes to the JFKA, what he is offers strikes me as speculation.

If you applied the same strict standards to Prouty's explanations of the JFKA  that you apply to the Lone Nut theory....you would say Prouty's explanations do not hold water, as there is no vessel to begin with. Prouty's amorphous JFKA explanation may be true, but how to begin to verify? 

Even a reasonable suspicion is not an explanation or a conviction. 

 

Edited September 17, 2021 by Benjamin Cole
typo

[Matt Allison]

7 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

Matt, I was responding to what was posted as his hypothesis as it was posted to open this thread - back on Page 1 in red:

Oh my comment was not meant as a diss to you, Larry, at all, and I apologize if it came off like that in any way.

It was a generalized opinion on how the case is approached.

[Larry Hancock]

No problem at all Matt, I didn't take it that way and actually it clears things up a bit since I had not repeated it and the thread had certainly gotten quite long.  One of my points all along was that particular hypothesis is rather specific in several areas not to mention that it seems to put Lansdale in a seminal position for all parts of the conspiracy - that should seemingly make it easier for some hard nosed, practical and in depth research than a number of more general "suspicions" about groups and people that have been presented over the decades.

 

[W. Niederhut]

15 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

 

W.--

Larry H. is more than capable of presenting his arguments, so I am not here to defend him, although I hope we do not lose his participation in this forum as he will weary of explaining and then re-explaining his position.

Yes, Prouty has been bad-mouthed online, probably by people with an agenda.

On the other hand, is there any evidence to support his scenario below, or is it speculation? 

The "hit men" were from CIA overseas sources, for instance, from the "Camp near Athena, Greece. They are trained, stateless, and ready to go at any time. They ask no questions: speak to no one. They are simply told what to do, when and where. Then they are told how they will be removed and protected. After all, they work for the U.S. Government. The "Tramps" were actors doing the job of cover-up. The hit men are just pros. They do the job for the CIA anywhere. They are impersonal. They get paid. They get protected, and they have enough experience to "blackmail" anyone, if anyone ever turns on them...just like Drug agents. The job was clean, quick and neat. No ripples."

OK, in this forum the evidence against LHO in the JFKA is parsed, debated and often refuted, often for good reason. But at least LHO is a person, who was in the TSBD on the day of the JFKA. What role that LHO played in the JFKA can be discussed, debated, parsed. 

But sheesh, we don't even have evidence or names to debate against the mysterious "hit men" from Greece. Or, in other scenarios, hit men associated with anti-Gaullists in France. At least with the anti-Gaullists we have the name Lucien Sarti, or possibly Jean Rene Marie Souetre, or Michel Victor Mertz. Mertz (or somebody) was supposedly deported from Dallas area in the aftermath of the JFKA, although the story is murky.

In conclusion, what Prouty offers on stuff he knows about is very good, and informative.  When it comes to the JFKA, what he is offers strikes me as speculation.

If you applied the same strict standards to Prouty's explanations of the JFKA  that you apply to the Lone Nut theory....you would say Prouty's explanations do not hold water, as there is no vessel to begin with. Prouty's amorphous JFKA explanation may be true, but how to begin to verify? 

Even a reasonable suspicion is not an explanation or a conviction. 

 

Ben,

  1)   Ed Lansdale was in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63, as Prouty observed 30 years ago.  John Newman and David Lifton also found some ex post facto evidence indicating that Lansdale was in Texas in November of 1963, following his "retirement" from the CIA/USAF to pursue "fun and games."  Prouty pointed out years ago that Lansdale's comment about "fun and games" after his retirement was a code word for special ops.

  2)   Lansdale was a black ops favorite of Allen Dulles and Cabell-- based on his history with the CIA in the Phillippines and at Saigon Station.

     And let's cut through the forum denial about CIA involvement in the U.S. mainstream and social media.  Prouty has been smeared by government propagandists and "cognitive infiltrators" for years because he blew the whistle on people involved in JFK's assassination.

Why was General Ed Lansdale in Dealey Plaza?
Those who knew him, say this man is Ed Lansdale. Photo taken Nov. 22, 1963.

 

 

 

Edited September 17, 2021 by W. Niederhut

[Benjamin Cole]

7 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

Ben,

  1)   Ed Lansdale was in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63, as Prouty observed 30 years ago.  John Newman and David Lifton also found some ex post facto evidence indicating that Lansdale was in Texas in November of 1963, following his "retirement" from the CIA/USAF to pursue "fun and games."  Prouty pointed out years ago that Lansdale's comment about "fun and games" after his retirement was a code word for special ops.

  2)   Lansdale was a black ops favorite of Allen Dulles and Cabell-- based on his history with the CIA in the Phillippines and at Saigon Station.

     And let's cut through the forum denial about CIA involvement in the U.S. mainstream and social media.  Prouty has been smeared by government propagandists and "cognitive infiltrators" for years because he blew the whistle on people involved in JFK's assassination.

Why was General Ed Lansdale in Dealey Plaza?
Those who knew him, say this man is Ed Lansdale. Photo taken Nov. 22, 1963.

 

 

 

W-

 

I am on board that large parts of the M$M are CIA apparatchiks. At CNN they dispense with the charade, and just hire ex-CIA'ers directly and put them on the air. 

I also believe more than one gun was used to shoot at JFK and JBC that day, based upon research on primary materials. 

But really, you are convinced, beyond reasonable doubt, that the photo in question is Lansdale? 

Prouty implies the two Dallas police are fakes and in on the gag, by the "casual" way they are holding their weapons. Not much to go on, and yet that implies yet two more people who have information regarding the JFKA, and who have to be trusted to keep quiet. 

The "Lansdale" in the picture---he would walk around Dealey Plaza in the immediate aftermath of an presidential assassination he plotted? With cameras blinking everywhere? That is spycraft?  "Lansdale" doesn't even doff a fedora (still worn back then) and sunglasses? A little brazen, no? 

If the three tramps were truly involved in the JFKA, and the two Dallas "cops" in on the gag, why parade the trio in public as suspects? Why not squeeze the three men into a car near the railroad cars-tracks and send them on their way? 

Other probable participants in the JFKA simply melted onto the crowds, such as the phoney "Secret Service agent" accosted by Dallas police officer Joe Smith and Dallas Sheriff Seymour Weitzman.

Why parade tramps around in public? In ordinary civilian clothing, the "tramps" could have simply walked away from the scene, melted into the crowds. 

Nothing about this makes sense. 

If we applied such loose standards to LHO as are applied in the Lansdale Hypothesis, we would have LHO convicted and hung on the JFKA in two minutes. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[W. Niederhut]

8 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

W-

I am on board that large parts of the M$M are CIA apparatchiks. At CNN they dispense with the charade, and just hire ex-CIA'ers directly and put them on the air.

But really, you are convinced, beyond reasonable doubt, that the photo in question is Lansdale?

If we applied such loose standards to LHO as are applied in the Lansdale Hypothesis, we would have LHO convicted and hung on the JFKA in two minutes.

 

Ben,

      Prouty was a Deep State whistle blower who has been the target of a CIA smear campaign for many years-- the same type of disinformation campaign that has been directed at Jim Garrison and Oliver Stone. 

      That is why I object to vague, non-specific criticisms of Prouty's observations and commentaries about the CIA, Vietnam, and the JFK assassination-- especially from people who have seen the CIA disinformation on-line but haven't read Prouty's own books and commentaries.

     No one has posted any evidence here debunking Prouty's "hypothesis" that Ed Lansdale was involved on some level in the JFK assassination op.

    Prouty worked with CIA black ops expert Ed Lansdale for many years, and was intimately familiar with Lansdale's appearance and work.

     So, yes, I trust Prouty's identification of his long-time colleague Ed Lansdale in the Dealey Plaza photo.

     That isn't a "loose standard," IMO.  Prouty was a rare, primary source historical witness.

     Also, there were a number of other first hand observations (besides the photo of Lansdale in Dealey Plaza) that led Prouty to suspect that his colleague Ed Lansdale was involved in the Dallas assassination op.

   

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

Ben,

      Prouty was a Deep State whistle blower who has been the target of a CIA smear campaign for many years-- the same type of disinformation campaign that has been directed at Jim Garrison and Oliver Stone. 

      That is why I object to vague, non-specific criticisms of Prouty's observations and commentaries about the CIA, Vietnam, and the JFK assassination-- especially from people who have seen the CIA disinformation on-line but haven't read Prouty's own books and commentaries.

     No one has posted any evidence here debunking Prouty's "hypothesis" that Ed Lansdale was involved on some level in the JFK assassination op.

    Prouty worked with CIA black ops expert Ed Lansdale for many years, and was intimately familiar with Lansdale's appearance and work.

     So, yes, I trust Prouty's identification of his long-time colleague Ed Lansdale in the Dealey Plaza photo.

     That isn't a "loose standard," IMO.  Prouty was a rare, primary source historical witness.

     Also, there were a number of other first hand observations (besides the photo of Lansdale in Dealey Plaza) that led Prouty to suspect that his colleague Ed Lansdale was involved in the Dallas assassination op.

   

"No one has posted any evidence here debunking Prouty's "hypothesis" that Ed Lansdale was involved on some level in the JFK assassination op."--W.

Not to belabor a point, but this comes close to "guilty until proven innocent." 

Here is a book: 

Mafia Kingfish: Carlos Marcello and the Assassination of John F. Kennedy

by John H. Davis, c 1989.

I just read this book, very readable. Free online, Internet Archives. 

Many connections between LHO, Ruby and Marcello, lots of documented bad blood between the Marcellos and Kennedys, and of course Mafia in bed with the CIA. Many eyewitnesses saw someone who looked liked LHO meeting with so-and-so, thus indicating a connection.

David Ferrie was spending weekends at Marcello's manse before Nov. 22. That is sort of strange. 

What in the heck could the oddball eccentric gay Ferrie have in common with rich mobster Marcello?

No one has debunked that Marcello was the animating force behind the JFKA.

Was Marcello the animating force? 

I doubt it. But I can't debunk it either. 

 

 

 

[W. Niederhut]

5 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

"No one has posted any evidence here debunking Prouty's "hypothesis" that Ed Lansdale was involved on some level in the JFK assassination op."--W.

Not to belabor a point, but this comes close to "guilty until proven innocent." 

 

 Ben,

     Thanks for sharing this off topic information.

    I guess I'll say it for the umpteenth time, then take a break from this overly redundant thread.

    Prouty was, in fact, an important primary source historical witness of CIA special ops and Pentagon activities prior to and during the JFK administration-- the chief Joint Chiefs liaison to the CIA for special ops.

     Comprende? 

    He had worked with Ed Lansdale for years, and was intimately familiar with Lansdale's work for the CIA as one of Allen Dulles's favorite "great scenario" black ops/psy ops experts.

    He wasn't merely a "conspiracy theorist" writing a speculative book about the Dallas op-- as claimed in the CIA disinformation on the internet, including the heavily-edited Prouty article on Wikipedia.

    

   

    

 

[David Andrews]

On 9/18/2021 at 8:49 AM, Benjamin Cole said:

"No one has posted any evidence here debunking Prouty's "hypothesis" that Ed Lansdale was involved on some level in the JFK assassination op."--W.

Not to belabor a point, but this comes close to "guilty until proven innocent." 

Here is a book: 

Mafia Kingfish: Carlos Marcello and the Assassination of John F. Kennedy

by John H. Davis, c 1989.

I just read this book, very readable. Free online, Internet Archives. 

Many connections between LHO, Ruby and Marcello, lots of documented bad blood between the Marcellos and Kennedys, and of course Mafia in bed with the CIA. Many eyewitnesses saw someone who looked liked LHO meeting with so-and-so, thus indicating a connection.

David Ferrie was spending weekends at Marcello's manse before Nov. 22. That is sort of strange. 

What in the heck could the oddball eccentric gay Ferrie have in common with rich mobster Marcello?

No one has debunked that Marcello was the animating force behind the JFKA.

Was Marcello the animating force? 

I doubt it. But I can't debunk it either. 

 

 

 

We have a president's dead body with bullet wounds in it, but no whole bullets found or definitive wound tracks established.

It's no wonder the much more complicated 9/11 scenarios can't be proven nor debunked.

 

[Benjamin Cole]

6 hours ago, David Andrews said:

We have a president's dead body with bullet wounds in it, but no whole bullets found or definitive wound tracks established.

It's no wonder the much more complicated 9/11 scenarios can't be proven nor debunked.

 

David A.--

My understanding of controlled building implosions is that they require multiple charges on every floor, and associated wiring to time the charges. 

There were 110 floors on each of the WTC big towers, and 57 floors in  #7. 

I have no great insights to the 9/11 disaster.  But when it comes to conspiracies, the smaller the number of participants, the better.  

 

 

[David Andrews]

3 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

I have no great insights to the 9/11 disaster.  But when it comes to conspiracies, the smaller the number of participants, the better.  

 

 

Which is why the shenanigans with an undetermined number of hijackers and hijackings, and four disputed crash sites, are so pesky and troublesome to an organized mind