Did Fidel Kill Kennedy?

[Tim Gratz]

My interest in the JFK assassination was rekindled when I discovered, reading Gaeton Fonzi's work on the assassination, that my adopted home town of Key West may have played an important part in the events leading to the assassination. For Fonzi reports that while working for the Church Committee he traveled to Key West to meet George Faraldo, the former manager of the Key West airport, who reported to then Sen. Richard Scheweiker (a Church Committee member) that he had seen Ruby and Oswald together at the Key West airport in the fall of 1963, awaiting a flight to Cuba. (Later in this thread I will discuss reports that LHO indeed visited Cuba.)

I then started to investigate other links between the Keys and the assassination. Obviously I soon discovered the Interpen group from No Name Key and all of you are familiar with that group, its members, and their possible links to the assassination.

Then I discovered that a former resident of Key West may have even been one of the shooters. His name was Gilberto Policarpo Lopez. In 1961, he came to Key West from Cuba. He stayed in Key West for two years but some time in 1963 he moved to Tampa, Florida. Tampa, of course, was the home city of Santo Trafficante, Jr., one of the three mafia leaders involved in the CIA/Mafia plots against Castro (and the only one of the three to die a natural death). (Shortly before his murder in 1967, Eladio del Valle reported to U.S, authorities that Trafficante was close to Rolando Cubela.)

According to Manuel Atrtime's secretary, Policarpo's brother was a high-ranking member of Castro's military.

On November 20, 1963, Policarpo obtained, in Tampa, a fifteen day VISA to visit Mexico City. He was in Texas the date of the assassination. On November 23, 1963 he used his Tampa-issued visa to enter Mexico from Nuevo Laredo. At 4:00 on the afternoon of Monday, November 25, 1963 he checked into Room 203 of the Hotel Roosevelt in Mexico City. Two days later, he checked out of the hotel and at 9:00 in the evening he boarded Cubana Flight 465 bound for Havana. He was the only passenger on board the flight. He was traveling on a hurriedly issued Cuban courtesy visa, despite the fact that his American passport had expired.

Of course, he never returned to the United States.

The House Select Committee on Assassinations concluded that his movements around the assassination "all amount to a troublesome circumstance that the committee was unable to resolve with confidence."

In his book, "The Secret History of the CIA" Trento suggests that Policarpo may fit the description of the driver of the Rambler station wagon that several witnesses said they saw a man looking like LHO enter after the assassination. Does someone have the descriptions of the driver? I also think Policarpo bears a resemblance to LHO.

James, do you have a photo of Policarpo (Lopez)?

Here is a link to the article we wrote for the Key West newspaper re Gilberto Lopez:

http://cuban-exile.com/photo/JFK/KWJFK2003nov20.pdf

Edited January 14, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[James Richards]

One of the men who shot Kennedy was Miguel Casas Sayez. According to James Angleton, Casas was personally selected for the assassination by Raul Castro. (Tim Gratz)

Hi Tim,

I have the spelling as Miguel Casas Saez. He was also known as Angel Dominguez Martinez. There was also a family reference; a spin off like 'Migito' or something like that. Word is he was a fruit loop, a real loose head who was up for anything.

FWIW.

James

[Tim Gratz]

One of the men who shot Kennedy was Miguel Casas Sayez.  According to James Angleton, Casas was personally selected for the assassination by Raul Castro. (Tim Gratz)

Hi Tim,

I have the spelling as Miguel Casas Saez.  He was also known as Angel Dominguez Martinez. There was also a family reference; a spin off like 'Migito' or something like that. Word is he was a fruit loop, a real loose head who was up for anything.

FWIW.

James

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

As always, thanks, James. I'll check the spelling of his name. Do you by chance have his photo?

[Dawn Meredith]

The Kennedy Murder, from Hasbro.  A great gift idea for any occasion.  The number one parlor game in the country.  Intellectuals and academics among us scream it's, "spellbinding".

Castro killing Kennedy is not quite "LHO acted alone," but it's close.

I'll take the Mafia for $400, Alex.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Stan: Trafficante helped (if you are serious about Mafia involvement).

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tim:

Let us remember that CIA sought Mob mechanics for the hits on Castro, not the other way around, in order to provide the Agency with plausible deniability in the event their plots - successful or not - were discovered.

If Mob mechanics were involved in Dealey Plaza, should we not view them - in this instance, too - merely as hired guns working for the Agency?

Or are we to presume the Mob was working for Castro, as you seem to argue?

As I've pointed out elsewhere, there is a clear pattern of CIA plots against Castro - using Mob proxies. Can you cite a single instance of Mob proxies being used by Castro against a US head of state? If so, please share the details.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

_________________________-

Amen to that Charles.

Dawn

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

Dawn once used the famous acronynm, "KISS" (Keep It Simple, Stupid).

Let's try that here:

A has been trying to kill B.

On September 7, 2004, B tells A, "If you try to kill me ahain, I will kill you."

On October 29, 2004, A engages C to murder B.  However, unknown to A, C is secretly working for B, and C immediately reports to B that A is trying to murder him again.

On November 22, 2004, A is killed.

It does not take a rocket scientist to connect the dots.  B made good on his threat.

Let's take the scenario one step further:  B is brought to trial.  B demonstrates that A had, on at least a dozen occasions, tried to kill him.  B is also able to demonstrate that the police were unable or unwilling to protect him.

Query:  would a jury convict B for murdering A?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tim:

I've repeatedly requested that you provide citations and evidence for your assertions, which you have thus far continually failed to do. None of the above feeble reductionism answers a single question, or includes a single piece of evidence, to my chagrin.

I had thought my requests for evidence would give you a soapbox to provide the voluminous data you must have at your disposal in order to have reached your conclusion. Thus far, nada. Certainly, you are entitled to whatever opinion you may hold, but it will be judged here by the quality of evidence you muster to back it up; not the volume and repetition of your replies. There is little point in debating with someone who dodges each question, no matter how simple.

Clearly, after the assassination we were intended to believe that Oswald was acting as an agent for Castro when he fired the rifle. Yet if forty years of dogged research and investigation has taught us anything, it is that Oswald didn't fire the rifle and Castro wasn't his sponsor. So, the questions now are: "Who fired the rifle?" and "Who sponsored the deed?"

As David Atlee Phillips himself averred shortly prior to his death: "My private opinion is that JFK was done in by a conspiracy, likely including rogue American intelligence people."

Since Phillips was clearly more aware of the facts behind this case than were the Warren Commissioners, and/or all the authors [and their sources] that you cite, why do you obdurately refuse to acknowledge the obvious?

As for the KISS aphorism, I thought we were trying to solve a complex assassination. Keeping things simple only keeps us stupid.

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

To Rrobert Chasrles-Dunne:

A simple question for you:

Have you read either: "Live By the Sword" (which was nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, by the way) or "The Secret History of the CIA",

Yes.

or are you rejecting the facts and arguments in those books without even having bothered to read them?

No.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[James Richards]

As always, thanks, James. I'll check the spelling of his name. Do you by chance have his photo? (Tim Gratz)

Tim,

I don't have a photo of Lopez but I do have one of Miguel Casas Saez somewhere. My scanner is not working at the moment and I'll have to locate the image which could be anywhere amongst a stack of boxes.

Nothing like being organized.

James

[Tim Gratz]

To Robert Charles-Dunne (and Dawn):

You wrote:

I've repeatedly requested that you provide citations and evidence for your assertions, which you have thus far continually failed to do. None of the above feeble reductionism answers a single question, or includes a single piece of evidence, to my chagrin. [Emphasis supplied.]

Okay, let's debate this point by point. I have already posted several items of evidence pointing toward Cuban involvement in the assassination, and I will be posting more later. But let the debate commence.

To simplify the debate, I want to go over the evidence item by item to obtain your comments or reply. Of course, anyone else can reply if they want to as well.

First, let's talk about why "KISS" post, that you characterize as "feeble" and "stupid".

Perhaps I do not quite understand, but Dawn should.

In a murder trial, a statement by the defendant threatening to kill the victim is admissible evidence. In fact, it is very strong evidence--almost as strong as an admission after the fact.

In a murder trial, motive is also relevant, though, as Dawn knows, not necessary for a conviction. The fact that the U.S. government (and, per Desmond Fitzgerald, personally approved by RFK) was trying to kill Castro at the time of JFK's assassination is evidence that Castro had the strongest motive for murder.

Parenthetically, there were threats also made against JFK by Santo Trafficante, Jr. and Carlos Marcello, as you know, and they each had motive. Had they been tried, their threats and motive could have been introduced against them. Had it been possible to try Fidel, his lawyer could have (would have) pointed out that others had both threats and motive. But the prosecuting attorney would have argued, convincingly, the primacy of Castro's threat to JFK's assassination.

So my initial questions to you are as follows:

(1) Do you deny that a threat to kill someone is admissible evidence in a

court of law?

(2) Do you deny that self-defense (for that, I think is the best way to characterize it) against an attempt by the victim to kill the defendant is evidence?

If you deny that threats and motive would not constitute evidence in a criminal murder proceeding, let me have your legal citations (Dawn can help you with this). I'll put the ball in your court. I'm sure I can find law in every state in the union that threats and motive are admissible evidence.

If you admit that threats and motive are admissible evidence, then please, sir, and in all respect because I have appreciated the intelligence of your postings in other matters, why would you say I have not cited "a single piece of evidence?"

I think a threat to kill and the strongest possible motive to kill are two of the strongest items of evidence that could be adduced in a court of law.

After we have discussed these two items we'll go on to the two Cubans who fled Texas to Cuba in the days after the assassination. But let's start with the above. I await your reply.

Edited January 15, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[Tim Gratz]

Robert Charles-Dunne wrote:

Clearly, after the assassination we were intended to believe that Oswald was acting as an agent for Castro when he fired the rifle.

To the contrary, sir. As you should know, every effort was made, starting the night of the assassination, to deny any foreign involvement. LBJ's assistant called the assistant district attorney in Dallas to order him to remove an allegation in his complaint or indictment against LHO that he was acting pursuant to a foreign conspiracy. CIA agents and FBI agents in Mexico City were ordered to desist any investigation that would indicate Cuban involvement, which almost caused them to revolt. (I assume you are aware of this--if not I will get you the cite.)

And of course there is the famous Katzenbach memo that all good assassination researchers can probably quote from memory.

From the very night of the assassination, the marching orders were out: LHO did it, and he acted on his own.

Edited January 15, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[Tim Gratz]

To Robert Charles-Dunne:

You wrote:

Yet if forty years of dogged research and investigation has taught us anything, it is that Oswald didn't fire the rifle and Castro wasn't his sponsor. So, the questions now are: "Who fired the rifle?" and "Who sponsored the deed?"

I would agree with you, sir, that LHO was not a shooter. I am still not sure whether he was involved in the assassination in some fashion.

Turn-about being fair play, I would ask you to itemize the evidence that you claim exculpates Senor Castro. I would be rich if I had a penney for every word that has been written pointing fingers at David Atlee Phillips, David Morales, William Harvey, etc. but the only evidence that I have seen against any of these individuals is the statement made by Morales, a statement that John Simkin acknowledges could be dismissed as nothing but drunken braggadocia.

I have said it before but I'll say it again. I do not believe any CIA official participated in the assassination, but I am not a defender of the CIA's activities in the early 1960s. The CIA tried, at least, to kill Castro, Trujillo and Lumumba. It was as wrong for the CIA to plot their murders as it would have been had the CIA plotted the murder of John F. Kennedy.

Let me also say this: Probably the evidence against Castro would not be sufficient to convict him in an American court of law, using the criminal standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt". (And, of course, I have suggested that Castro might very well have been able to use "self-defense" as a defense had he been prosecuted.)

One of the reasons more evidence does not exist, of course, is that investigators were ordered not to pursue evidence pointing to Cuban involvement.

It is my opinion, however, that there is more evidence pointing to Castro's involvement than there is evidence pointing to involvement by any other person or group. I have already posted some of this evidence (including not only Castro's threat and motive but also the identification of two of the probable shooters who fled to Cuba immediately after the assassination). More evidence will follow.

So my challenge to you is to list specific evidence that exculpates Fidel.

Final comment: John has developed a persuasive case that LBJ had a strong motive to kill JFK: his fear of possible indictment in the ongoing scandals. Fear of jail is certainly a strong motive, but not as strong as the desire for self-preservation. I have been reading with great interest William Reymond's recent postings regarding a tape recording by Cliff Carter in which Carter alleged LBJ's involvement (and his own). And of course we have the issue of the Wallace fingerprint. I believe these matters deserve the most careful scrutiny.

Hey, I lied: here is my final, final comment: I do not believe this is a psychological factor influencing my opinion, but I would point out that only if "Castro did it" can we deduce a lasting important lesson for our country: Do not engage assassination as a tool of foreign policy. What is our lesson if LBJ did it? That one of our former presidents was an amoral murderer? What is our lesson if we learn that "rogue" CIA agents did it? That these rogue agents were evil men who got by with murder? But that does not indict the CIA as an institution.

If, however, "Castro did it", we have the strongest moral. Our country paid a great price for the murderous foreign policy the CIA pursued, starting in the Eisenhower Administration and continued in the Kennedy Administration.

Edited January 15, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[Shanet Clark]

Castro did not "Do It"

Sadly the death of John Kennedy is an internal domestic coup, on the order of Imperial Rome.

John's material lays the political background and a post war anti-communist fervor the containment policy of the Cold War, and McCarthyism fed an aberrant, warlike, reactionary political opposition willing to use violence in its corporate and militant goals.

The domestic coup detat involved the joint paramilitary forces of the pentagon and the agencies, with the support of the treasury secretary and the vice president.

If you find the Warren Commission unsatisfactory, read the contemporaneous document, the 25th amendment...

[Tim Gratz]

Let's continue to conect the dots.

As most of you know, in 1962 Santo Trafficante, Jr. predicted that JFK "is going to be hit" (Indicating foreknowledge of the assassinatio). (To Robert Charles-Dunne: I'm sure you are familiar with this datum. Ron Ecker has a good piece on Jose Aleman on his web-site.)

In his memoirs, Trafficante's attorney Frank Ragano states that as he was close to death, Trafficante admitted to Ragano his involvement in the Kennedy assassination. Source: Ragano's book "Mob Lawyer".

What is significant is that Trafficante had clear links to other people connected to the assassination.

One person we can all agree was involved in the assassination was Jack Ruby. Reliable evidence exists that Ruby visited Trafficante while Trafficante was imprisoned in Cuba in 1959, and many people believe that Ruby was involved in negotiating Trafficante's release from the prison.

Equally significant, I think, is that Trafficante had close associations with Rolando Cubela dating back to 1959. At the 1995 assassination conference in Nassau, Cuban officers Arturo Rodriguez and Fabian Escalante stated that Cubela also intervened on Trafficante's behalf when he was in prison in 1959. Jose Aleman and Eladio del Valle also reported a continuing relationship between Trafficante and Cubela. Aleman also reported that both Trafficante and Cubela were acting as agents for Castro.

And yet when Trafficante testified before the House Select Committee on Assassinations, he perjured himself and denied a friendship with Cubela. The inference is that Trafficante did not want that relationship examined.

In that regard, it is interesting that del Valle was murdered a short time after he reported the Trafficante-Cubela relationship to U.S. authorties.

We previously noted that Gilberto Policarpo Lopez moved from Key West, Florida (where he had lived since 1961) to Tampa (Trafficante's home city) shortly before the assassination. Lopez was in Texas the day of the assassination and departed Texas to Mexico the day afterwards and a few days later fled to Cuba.

As you all know, of the three mafioso involved in the CIA plots to kill Castro, Trafficante was the only one to die a natural death. The clear infererence is that Giancana and Rosselli were murdered to silence them. What's more, two informants separately reported that a member of Trafficante's organization had admitted involvement in the Rosselli murder.

IMO, Trafficante is the link to Castro, to Cubela, to Ruby and probably to Policarpo as well. Trafficante, the man who not only had foreknowledge of the assassination but also admiited to his involvement!

Edited January 15, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[Tim Gratz]

To Robert Charles-Dunne:

You wrote to me:

Can you cite a single instance of Mob proxies being used by Castro against a US head of state? If so, please share the details.

With all due respect, sir, this seems like one of the silliest arguments I have ever encountered. You seem to be saying Castro must not have done it because he did participate in the assassination of any of the earlier U.S. Presidents who were assassinated, nor did he assassinate any presidents after President Kennedy. Correct me if I misunderstood you.

The logical corrollary of your argument is that NOBODY killed Kennedy.

Since Kennedy was the last president assassinated, whoever you think assassinated Kennedy did not assassinate any Presidents after Kennedy any more than Castro did. And I seriously doubt that you can prove your suspected conspirators participated in the assassinations of Lincoln or McKinley.

So if failure to be involved in another assassination of a U.S. President excludes the involvement of Castro, it must exclude every other suspect, leaving us to only one conclusion--no one did it!

Edited January 15, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[Tim Gratz]

To Robert Charles-Dunne:

At 3:02 pm yesterday(?) you posted a statement that I had thus far produced no evidence ("nada" as you put it) that Castro was involved in the Kennedy assassination. We previously discussed the fact that a threat to kill someone coming a few month's before that persons demise, and a very strong motive to kill someone, is fairly good evidence of that person's involvement. At least it would be so viewed in a court of law.

What is incredible is that, several hours before you maade the statement that I had posted "nada" suggestive of Cuban involvement in the assassination, I had even identified the Cubans who, according to Joseph Trento's sources, participated in the assassination: two men who were in Texas on November 22, 1963 and left the country and returned to Cuba shortly thereafter.

I request that you address the questions raised by those men separately.

MIGUEL CASAS SAEZ

Which, if any, of the following assertions re Miguel Casas Saez do you dispute? For each assertion you dispute, state your basis for disputing it.

(1) That he had been in the Soviet Union to receive training.

(2) That he was a member of DGI.

(3) That the afternoon of the assassination, he fle in a small private plane

from Dallas, Texas to Tijuana, Mexico and then to Mexico City.

(4) That he was met at the Mexico City Airport by people from the Cuban

diplomatic corps.

(5) That on November 22, 1963, he flew from Mexico City to Havana in the cockpit of the airplane.

(6) That, according to James Richards' sources (and let me make it clear that I am confident he does not support my scenario) Saez was a "fruit loop" type who was "up for anything".

Next, sir, please answer the following question. Whether you have any basis for disputing those facts are not, would you agree that the presence of a Cuban intelligence officer in Dallas the day of the assassination, and his flight out of Dallas shortly after the assassination, is in fact fairly strong evidence of the possibility of the involvement of Cuban intelligence in the assassination?

Heck, members of this Forum spend hours trying to decide whether a face in the crowd in Dealey Plaza looks like Rip Robertson or David Morales, or whether E. Howard Hunt was one of the tramps. (And in no way do I beliitle the importance of that line of inquiry and I commend the members who are taking the lead in examining that evidence.) But if the presence in Dallas on November 22, 1963 of a CIA officer raises questions about possible CIA involvement, certainly the presence of a DGI officer raises questions of possible Cuban involvement.

How then, sir, could you say I had offered "nada" (nothing) to support my scenario of Cuban involvement?

Now let us turn to Gilberto Policarpo Lopez.

GILBERTO POLICARPO LOPEZ

Again, which, if any, of the following assertions re Policarpo do you dispute? For each assertion you dispute, state your basis for disputing it.

(1) That he lived in Key West, FL from sometime in 1961 to sometime in 1963.

(2) That a few months (or less) before the assassination he moved from Key

West to the home city of Santo Trafficante, Jr.

(3) That in Tampa on November 20, 1963 he received a visa to visit Mexico City

for only fourteen or fifteen days?

(4) That the day after the assassination, as soon as the border opened, he passed from Nuevo Laredo, Texas into Mexico.

(5) That within a week after the assassination he flew to Havana as the sole

passenger on a Cubana air flight--never to return to the U.S.

(6) That Policarpo's brother was a high-ranking member of Castro's military.

Again, I would ask you if the travels of this Policaropo fellow has, in your opinion, any evidentiary value re possible Cuban participation in the assassination? The HSCA characterized his movements as "troublesome" and deplored the fact that they had not been investigated in 1963-1964.

Edited January 15, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[John Simkin]

As most of you know, in 1962 Santo Trafficante, Jr. predicted that JFK "is going to be hit"  (Indicating foreknowledge of the assassination)....

In his memoirs, Trafficante's attorney Frank Ragano states that as he was close to death, Trafficante admitted to Ragano his involvement in the Kennedy assassination.  Source:  Ragano's book "Mob Lawyer".

The fact that one mobster says that another mobster made a threat against JFK is hardly very good evidence of Mafia being involved in his assassination. If the claim is true it says nothing about if the threat was carried out. We know that a whole range of people made threats against JFK. This in itself tells us very little.

As I have said several times, Trafficante had no real motive to kill JFK. Nor is there any history of the Mafia in America being involved in the killing of politicians.

What is significant is that Trafficante had clear links to other people connected to the assassination.

One person we can all agree was involved in the assassination was Jack Ruby.  Reliable evidence exists that Ruby visited Trafficante while Trafficante was imprisoned in Cuba in 1959, and many people believe that Ruby was involved in negotiating Trafficante's release from the prison.

Equally significant, I think, is that Trafficante had close associations with Rolando Cubela dating back to 1959.  At the 1995 assassination conference in Nassau, Cuban officers Arturo Rodriguez and Fabian Escalante stated that Cubela also intervened on Trafficante's behalf when he was in prison in 1959.  Jose Aleman and Eladio del Valle also reported a continuing relationship between Trafficante and Cubela.  Aleman also reported that both Trafficante and Cubela were acting as agents for Castro.

And yet when Trafficante testified before the House Select Committee on Assassinations, he perjured himself and denied a friendship with Cubela.  The inference is that Trafficante did not want that relationship examined.

Hundreds of people can be associated with Jack Ruby. That in itself means nothing at all.

I cannot see why you are linking with Cubela with Trafficante. Cubela was involved in a plot to kill Castro, not JFK. The reason that the CIA leaked this story about the Mafia being involved in the plot to kill Castro was an attempt to get people to think that there was a connection between the two assassination plots. However, I have yet to discover any evidence at all to show that these two conspiracies were linked.

In that regard, it is interesting that del Valle was murdered a short time after he reported the Trafficante-Cubela relationship to U.S. authorties.

I agree there is evidence to suggest that Eladio del Valle might have been involved in the assassination. However, it is not enough just to show links between Trafficante with del Valle.

As you all know, of the three mafioso involved in the CIA plots to kill Castro, Trafficante was the only one to die a natural death.  The clear infererence is that Giancana and Rosselli were murdered to silence them.  What's more, two informants separately reported that a member of Trafficante's organization had admitted involvement in the Rosselli murder.

IMO, Trafficante is the link to Castro, to Cubela, to Ruby and probably to Policarpo as well.  Trafficante, the man who not only had foreknowledge of the assassination but also admitted to his involvement!

We all know about the existence of these plots but were they really serious attempts to kill Castro? Rosselli admitted very early on that it was pointless organizing the assassination of Castro unless it was part of a plan to invade Cuba. David Atlee Phillips and other CIA agents made the same point. When JFK made it clear he would not support an invasion of Cuba, the plots against Castro was a waste of time.

It is of course ridiculous to claim that just because Giancana and Rosselli were murdered they must have been killed on the orders of Giancana in order to silence them.

It is of course not unusual for mobster to be murdered. It is impossible to obtain any evidence that Giancana was responsible. There is of course another possibility. Giancana and Rosselli were murdered by the CIA in order to persuade people to believe that they were involved in the JFK assassination.