Into the Storm by John Newman

[Anthony Thorne]

It gets even more interesting if the latter group was doing any work on behalf of the former (and I have no special knowledge or insights, but it seems possible). So both authors could be more correct than not.

[Chuck Schwartz]

Benjamin, the Miami / Cuban / New Orleans nexus may have been a subset of the CIA / Army Intelligence / JCS group- they were not separate entities, in my opinion. In any organization, though, there are differing opinions, which can fracture the  organization.

[Paul Brancato]

7 hours ago, Chuck Schwartz said:

Benjamin, the Miami / Cuban / New Orleans nexus may have been a subset of the CIA / Army Intelligence / JCS group- they were not separate entities, in my opinion. In any organization, though, there are differing opinions, which can fracture the  organization.

Thank you. Certainly no real barrier there. 

[Benjamin Cole]

18 hours ago, Chuck Schwartz said:

Benjamin, the Miami / Cuban / New Orleans nexus may have been a subset of the CIA / Army Intelligence / JCS group- they were not separate entities, in my opinion. In any organization, though, there are differing opinions, which can fracture the  organization.

Chuck S.--

I do not know enough to reply. John Newman seems to take note of different US military organizations, with their own chains of command, and prerogatives, and rivalries, etc. Newman notes that Antonio Veciana switches from a CIA asset to an Army intel asset, for example, as if a River Rubicon has been passed. Never happened before or since. 

On the other hand, it seems to have been a practice for military agencies to loan people to the CIA, or for them to actually retire, "do a job," and then come back somehow. 

My own instinct tells me people participating in a JFKA would keep witting participants at a bare minimum, and within an organization, people known and trusted for years. Like a small clump of Miami guys. 

Let's assume a Miami CIA op, for argument's sake. Adding people in from other intel agencies, or the Dallas Police Department, or the Secret Service etc., would get very dicey and risk exposure (to put it mildly). These added people, say in the Secret Service, would either have to be rogue, or seek superior's approval.  

How does one line up rogue assassins in other agencies, and know they will never squeal? 

My guess is the JFKA op was very small, and contained. Some participants may have ended up dead not long after, perhaps in raids on Cuba, or in gangland drug deals etc. 

 

Edited September 28, 2021 by Benjamin Cole
typo

[Anthony Thorne]

I think you could expand the group of witting participants - Dallas, Secret Service etc - if you figure that some of them knew that something had been planned, and had then been done, but they still had no idea who did it or planned it.

i.e "Do us a favour and let Jack Ruby through the door / keep the crowd at bay while these guys get in a Rambler and escape / stop any nosy journalists from asking questions etc etc etc". Followed by "You don't need to know the details. But keep everyone happy and you'll be rewarded."

There could be plenty of 'insiders' who were on the periphery of the plot, who played a part, and who benefited, yet who truthfully have no idea who planned it, who the triggermen were, what the full details of the plot was. All they likely knew was if they played their part and did their piece and kept their mouths shut, they'd be happy with what they were given afterwards. 

[Paul Brancato]

10 hours ago, Anthony Thorne said:

I think you could expand the group of witting participants - Dallas, Secret Service etc - if you figure that some of them knew that something had been planned, and had then been done, but they still had no idea who did it or planned it.

i.e "Do us a favour and let Jack Ruby through the door / keep the crowd at bay while these guys get in a Rambler and escape / stop any nosy journalists from asking questions etc etc etc". Followed by "You don't need to know the details. But keep everyone happy and you'll be rewarded."

There could be plenty of 'insiders' who were on the periphery of the plot, who played a part, and who benefited, yet who truthfully have no idea who planned it, who the triggermen were, what the full details of the plot was. All they likely knew was if they played their part and did their piece and kept their mouths shut, they'd be happy with what they were given afterwards. 

Agree. Plus several DPD detectives were involved in setting up Oswald, so at least one had to be in the know

[Karl Hilliard]

Does anyone else have trouble loading the Kennedys and King site?

https://www.kennedysandking.com/

[W. Tracy Parnell]

20 minutes ago, Karl Hilliard said:

Does anyone else have trouble loading the Kennedys and King site?

https://www.kennedysandking.com/

Working here.

[Karl Hilliard]

1 hour ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Working here.

Re-boot time....works now🙂

[Benjamin Cole]

15 hours ago, Anthony Thorne said:

I think you could expand the group of witting participants - Dallas, Secret Service etc - if you figure that some of them knew that something had been planned, and had then been done, but they still had no idea who did it or planned it.

i.e "Do us a favour and let Jack Ruby through the door / keep the crowd at bay while these guys get in a Rambler and escape / stop any nosy journalists from asking questions etc etc etc". Followed by "You don't need to know the details. But keep everyone happy and you'll be rewarded."

There could be plenty of 'insiders' who were on the periphery of the plot, who played a part, and who benefited, yet who truthfully have no idea who planned it, who the triggermen were, what the full details of the plot was. All they likely knew was if they played their part and did their piece and kept their mouths shut, they'd be happy with what they were given afterwards. 

Complicity after the fact, tons of it. The "leftie-loser-loner" story was sanctified, and most people believed it.  To not believe the official story was to be a commie-lover, or conspiracy nut. 

Unwitting complicity before the fact? Gets dicey. Even the unwitting might figure out they had been made complicit to the JFKA, and tell their story. 

On this forum, we have a pretty high standard for evidence against LHO, as we should. But then what happens to the standards when someone else is accused of complicity in the JFKA?