Morley and MFF press conference

[Michaleen Kilroy]

Not quite sure why this isn’t getting the attention it deserves:

https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Featured_NationalPressClubEvent.html

What I like is Morley and MFF are finally using solid PR tactics to bring attention to the still withheld JFKA files, embarrass the admin and force their hand.

Timed perfectly with sober, respectable third-party experts. On his blog, Jeff is saying he has living witnesses that can attest to a CIA psyops with LHO starting in June ‘63 through to the JFKA. Sounds like he will challenge the agency and admin to confirm or deny by releasing the files Dec. 15.

It’s a great strategy especially if he brings the witnesses or has them on video.

Honestly, this could finally be the ball game on govt intransigence. Here’s hoping and godspeed Jeff and MFF.

Edited December 4, 2022 by Michaleen Kilroy

[James DiEugenio]

This is a good point Michaleen.

The MFF is trying to keep the pressure on.

The actual lawsuit got a lot of coverage even in the MSM.

But calling this press conference is a good idea in order to elucidate some of the issues involved.  IMO, its a no brainer.  Both Trump and Biden have broken both the spirit of the law and the letter of the law.  

And I hope that issue gets some attention.  

[Lawrence Schnapf]

Because we are going to do our media blitz tonite.  This simply went up on the MFF page. I will be sending to my media contacts and FB pages. 

[Michaleen Kilroy]

2 hours ago, Lawrence Schnapf said:

Because we are going to do our media blitz tonite.  This simply went up on the MFF page. I will be sending to my media contacts and FB pages. 

Thanks, Larry.

FYI I’m in PR and could send release to list of DC-based contacts and beyond who have covered the lawsuit and/or JFK files. We have a great media database program.  I would just send the release as is with whatever contact name and info you want. 

Also, Monday morning early ET is best for media distribution unless these friends will be checking email tonite.

 

[Michaleen Kilroy]

3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

This is a good point Michaleen.

The MFF is trying to keep the pressure on.

The actual lawsuit got a lot of coverage even in the MSM.

But calling this press conference is a good idea in order to elucidate some of the issues involved.  IMO, its a no brainer.  Both Trump and Biden have broken both the spirit of the law and the letter of the law.  

And I hope that issue gets some attention.  

Thanks, Jim. Agreed and also hoping for the best.

[Gerry Down]

What does the new info that Morley will reveal on Wednesday relate to?

[Michaleen Kilroy]

9 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:

What does the new info that Morley will reveal on Wednesday relate to?

I think “living witnesses” that can confirm LHO was part of a CIA psychological warfare operation in the months before assassination:

https://jfkfacts.substack.com/p/a-cia-officers-take-on-jfk-a-rogue

https://jfkfacts.substack.com/p/yes-there-is-a-jfk-smoking-gun

 

[Gerry Down]

7 hours ago, Michaleen Kilroy said:

I think “living witnesses” that can confirm LHO was part of a CIA psychological warfare operation in the months before assassination:

https://jfkfacts.substack.com/p/a-cia-officers-take-on-jfk-a-rogue

https://jfkfacts.substack.com/p/yes-there-is-a-jfk-smoking-gun

 

I wonder if he is teaming up with Judyth Vary Baker and Anna Lewis.

Edited December 5, 2022 by Gerry Down

[Larry Hancock]

I'm pretty sure that is not happening (Judyth and Anna)....but keep in mind, this effort is about document release and document collection.  Its about what we know from documents we have gotten in the last two decades, and what leads they give us to other documents and files that exited - as well as who was on what distribution and copy list for the known documents. 

Which means by now we know a good deal about what still needs to be released and what paper trails existed at the time of the assassination - which opens the door to forcing the issue in terms of either "give it to us now or tell us what happened to it and why you can't".

One of the goals of the press conference is to make sure the media knows precisely that and helps keep the legal pressure of the JFK act on both for release and NARA's ongoing collection of JFK records.

For reference, Bill Simpich has provided the following - which is not the complete picture of potential collections but something laid out by the ARRB itself for starters:

from Bill...The Guidelines for an "ARD" (assassination-related document) were provided by Jeremy Gunn in 1996:

 

Deemed highly relevant - documents with the following names, as an example:

 

Lee Harvey Oswald

George de Mohrenschildt

Elena Garro de Paz

Antonio de Varona

Silvia Duran 

Rolando Cubela

CRC

Bay of Pigs

Castro assassination attempts

Warren Commission 

HSCA

Garrison Investigation

 

Staff Preliminary Suggestions to Board:  Factors suggesting possible relevance to assassination

 

The obvious rules of thumb -

 

Documents that obviously are related to the assassination.  CIA internal investigations, Oswald records, 

Garrison investigation, Castro assassination attempts

 

Documents falling within certain dates (dates may vary depending on issue)

- Dates associated with Oswald

- Dates associated with assassination

- Dates of Warren Commission

- Dates of Church Committee, HSCA investigations

 

Individuals of importance

  - CIA officials in Mexico City

     David Phillips

     Win Scott

  - CIA officials involved in investigation

      John Scelso

      JJ Angleton

 

Geographical relevance - USSR, Cuba, Mexico

 

There was a public hearing on 8/6/96 with Tunheim and two of the CIA officials who created the "sequestered collection" also known as the "segregated collection" - 

J. Barry Harrelson and John Pereira.   

 

The sequestered collection is "those records that were made available to the HSCA during its investigation".  It is about 300,000 pages.

 

It is 64 boxes.

 

Boxes 1-34 (Directorate of Operations) - a mix of CIA, third party, and Warren Commission/HSCA material

Boxes 35-36 (Inspector General) - HSCA reports, Senate Select Committee reports, Cuban operations, Church Committee Book V final report

Boxes 37-38 (Office of the General Counsel) - Cuban exile activities, Garrison investigation, name files

Box 39 (Directorate of Science & Technology) - Photo comparisons, of Hunt, Sturgis and the Dallas tramps; chart of frames from Zapruder film

Boxes 40-48 (Office of Security) - Name files

Boxes 49-63 (Office of Legislative Liaison) - HSCA requests, notes, memos, correspondence and final report, plots against Castro, photos of unknown man, defector study, Nosenko, name files, Mexico City station files, FBI reports, Warren Commission reports

Box 64 - 72 reels of microfilm

            Reels 1-20 - individual 201 files

            Reels 21-22 - Cuban defector AMMUG-1

            Reels 23-25 - DO Project Files, Garrison investigation

            Reels 26-28 - Cuban exile organizations

            Reels 28-30 - Office of Personnel files, Mexico City records

            Reels 31-44 - Oswald files - 201 file is duplicate of hardcopy file

            Reels 45-47 - Nosenko, Mexico City records

            Reels 48-49 - CIA-HSCA correspondence, 1967 IG Report, Cuban Mugbook, miscellaneous

            Reels 50-56 - Individual 201 files (including Cubela)

            Reels 57-60 - Office of Personnel files

            Reels 61-62 - Nosenko, Golitsyn, anti-Castro activities

            Reels 62-71 - Cuban Revolutionary Council and other Cuban exile organizations

            Reel 72 - Project Files

 

 

[Joseph Backes]

While I commend Jefferson Morley's quest to get records relating to George Joannides I do worry that Morley is over selling these records as a "smoking gun," or the smoking gun in the case. I think he's building up expectations too much. 

Morley needs to explain who George Joannides was in 1963 and 1964, that all of that was lied about and withheld from everyone during the HSCA. When that truth came out due to the work of the ARRB in the 1990's the HSCA's lead counsel G. Robert Blakey finally realized he was played by the CIA like a $3 fiddle. Blakey had previously always defended the CIA and denounced all conspiracy theories except his own belief that the mob did it. 

Morley should spend some time to mention the CIA's Scott Breckinridge who was Joannides boss during the days of the HSCA. There was a hell of lot more to the story of the CIA's subversion and corruption of the HSCA than the story of one guy, George Joannides.  Joannides was one part of a full throttle attack plan to take control of the HSCA and bury the whole JFK Assassination for decades. They succeeded in doing that for nearly 50 years now.

I wonder what Jim Lesar thinks of this. I wonder why the Assassination Archive and Research Center seems to be dormant and taking a back seek to the Mary Ferrel Foundation. I wonder what John Newman thinks of this.

I've seen and heard Rolf Mowatt-Larssen at a JFK conference before. I was not impressed. I do not believe him. 

John Tunheim recently lied on a podcast that no Secret Service records were destroyed and that the ARRB had back up copies of the material.  Well, that's not what the ARRB's Final Report says. I wonder if he will be asked to clarify his remarks on the Out of the Blank podcast, episode #1255. 

Joe Backes

[Gerry Down]

15 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

I'm pretty sure that is not happening (Judyth and Anna)....but keep in mind, this effort is about document release and document collection.  Its about what we know from documents we have gotten in the last two decades, and what leads they give us to other documents and files that exited - as well as who was on what distribution and copy list for the known documents. 

Which means by now we know a good deal about what still needs to be released and what paper trails existed at the time of the assassination - which opens the door to forcing the issue in terms of either "give it to us now or tell us what happened to it and why you can't".

One of the goals of the press conference is to make sure the media knows precisely that and helps keep the legal pressure of the JFK act on both for release and NARA's ongoing collection of JFK records.

For reference, Bill Simpich has provided the following - which is not the complete picture of potential collections but something laid out by the ARRB itself for starters:

from Bill...The Guidelines for an "ARD" (assassination-related document) were provided by Jeremy Gunn in 1996:

 

Deemed highly relevant - documents with the following names, as an example:

 

Lee Harvey Oswald

George de Mohrenschildt

Elena Garro de Paz

Antonio de Varona

Silvia Duran 

Rolando Cubela

CRC

Bay of Pigs

Castro assassination attempts

Warren Commission 

HSCA

Garrison Investigation

 

Staff Preliminary Suggestions to Board:  Factors suggesting possible relevance to assassination

 

The obvious rules of thumb -

 

Documents that obviously are related to the assassination.  CIA internal investigations, Oswald records, 

Garrison investigation, Castro assassination attempts

 

Documents falling within certain dates (dates may vary depending on issue)

- Dates associated with Oswald

- Dates associated with assassination

- Dates of Warren Commission

- Dates of Church Committee, HSCA investigations

 

Individuals of importance

  - CIA officials in Mexico City

     David Phillips

     Win Scott

  - CIA officials involved in investigation

      John Scelso

      JJ Angleton

 

Geographical relevance - USSR, Cuba, Mexico

 

There was a public hearing on 8/6/96 with Tunheim and two of the CIA officials who created the "sequestered collection" also known as the "segregated collection" - 

J. Barry Harrelson and John Pereira.   

 

The sequestered collection is "those records that were made available to the HSCA during its investigation".  It is about 300,000 pages.

 

It is 64 boxes.

 

Boxes 1-34 (Directorate of Operations) - a mix of CIA, third party, and Warren Commission/HSCA material

Boxes 35-36 (Inspector General) - HSCA reports, Senate Select Committee reports, Cuban operations, Church Committee Book V final report

Boxes 37-38 (Office of the General Counsel) - Cuban exile activities, Garrison investigation, name files

Box 39 (Directorate of Science & Technology) - Photo comparisons, of Hunt, Sturgis and the Dallas tramps; chart of frames from Zapruder film

Boxes 40-48 (Office of Security) - Name files

Boxes 49-63 (Office of Legislative Liaison) - HSCA requests, notes, memos, correspondence and final report, plots against Castro, photos of unknown man, defector study, Nosenko, name files, Mexico City station files, FBI reports, Warren Commission reports

Box 64 - 72 reels of microfilm

            Reels 1-20 - individual 201 files

            Reels 21-22 - Cuban defector AMMUG-1

            Reels 23-25 - DO Project Files, Garrison investigation

            Reels 26-28 - Cuban exile organizations

            Reels 28-30 - Office of Personnel files, Mexico City records

            Reels 31-44 - Oswald files - 201 file is duplicate of hardcopy file

            Reels 45-47 - Nosenko, Mexico City records

            Reels 48-49 - CIA-HSCA correspondence, 1967 IG Report, Cuban Mugbook, miscellaneous

            Reels 50-56 - Individual 201 files (including Cubela)

            Reels 57-60 - Office of Personnel files

            Reels 61-62 - Nosenko, Golitsyn, anti-Castro activities

            Reels 62-71 - Cuban Revolutionary Council and other Cuban exile organizations

            Reel 72 - Project Files

 

 

That's a dizzying amount of content to go through. But I know what I'd go to first - Joannides. Morley is on the right track.

[Larry Hancock]

 

Gerry, its a quandary, there are so many angles - even operational angles - that relate to CIA and FBI pre-knowledge and association with Oswald that its easy to become wrapped up in what you could say, so much so that you quickly lose everyone not intimately familiar with all the aspects of what we have learned in the last two decades. 

What stands out is that the press conference is targeted to the press, and they want something they can build a story around and enough solid information to put with it to make story simple enough for a column and and credible if not conclusive. Plus we want them convinced to the point that at least some of them would jump in and help with the push for pro-active collection of new materials assuming we do have success with the legal action.  

Is there need for enough sensation to make a story - sure, but there has to be enough substance to make it real even if its more limited than it deserves (or would please any one of us...grin).

  --  Larry

[James DiEugenio]

Here is the latest from the best archival researcher that there is, Malcolm Blunt.

Concerning what NARA can do to improve the JFK collection.

 

https://aarclibrary.org/malcolm-blunt-what-nara-could-do-that-would-assist-in-the-jfk-case/

 

 

[Michaleen Kilroy]

Jeff ain’t messing around:

https://jfkfacts.substack.com/p/major-break-coming-in-the-jfk-assassination

[Greg Doudna]

I don't know whether this detail is relevant but to show CIA response to investigation of the assassination of JFK, there is Appendix C in Jeffrey Meek, The Manipulation of Lee Harvey Oswald (2021), 139: HSCA staff researcher Dan Hardway, whose job it was to obtain CIA files for HSCA, told Meek that "when he started his HSCA work at the CIA office he was pitched by the CIA for employment"! By his CIA liaison who was supposed to assist him in finding the requested documents (this was Blahut before Joannides). ("I told them I wasn't interested and went back to the [HSCA] committee and filed an outside contact report".)  

Nothing like taking the direct approach to subverting a congressional investigation! In Meek's Appendix C, Hardway doesn't say what kind of employment was offered or whether it would be covert or overt, but why was "employment" offered at all to that particular person at that particular time?