Pierre Lafitte datebook, 1963

[Roger Odisio]

12 minutes ago, Leslie Sharp said:

@Andrej Stancak Finally, I am not convinced that deciphering of the handwritten records from the comparatively poor quality records was accurate enough. Here is an example of one record which I find to be the most relevant from the perspective of my reasoning of who was behind the shooting and fabricating evidence to frame Lee Oswald:

We worked with (and continue to) the original datebook.

Can you expand on why this particular entry may be relevant to your perspective — your reasoning of who was behind the shooting and fabricating evidence to frame Lee Oswald?

If authenticated, the date book is a JFKA record and belongs in NARA's JFK Record Collection for all to see.  It would seem, under these circumstances, NARA would want to do its own authentication before including it. I wonder what they do to insure records added to the Collection are authentic.

Andrej, Leslie, would you be in favor of Bill and Larry adding the date book to its list of records it wants the Court to order NARA to pursue in MFF's law suit?

[Leslie Sharp]

37 minutes ago, Roger Odisio said:

If authenticated, the date book is a JFKA record and belongs in NARA's JFK Record Collection for all to see.  It would seem, under these circumstances, NARA would want to do its own authentication before including it. I wonder what they do to insure records added to the Collection are authentic.

Andrej, Leslie, would you be in favor of Bill and Larry adding the date book to its list of records it wants the Court to order NARA to pursue in MFF's law suit?

To your last question, NO, not at the moment.  I'll discuss this in private with you, Roger.

And NO to NARA. I've discussed this with a close colleague who has a direct contact inside the archives.  I think you can appreciate that historically, material has gone missing, suffered damage, etc.. while in custody of the very government many accuse of killing our president.  We're simply not "there" yet.

And, in case you haven't seen my recent post:

1) Why hasn't the Robert Kennedy family allowed access to the files he accumulated during his private investigation into who killed his brother? Isn't RFK Jr. now in the prime position to advance interest in this cold case investigation? Coup was edited by the same editor, published by the same publisher on the same date as Robert's Fauci book. I think Albarelli would have been especially impressed by that particular High Strangeness and Synchronicity.

2) Why haven't expert(s) on Win Scott published the remaining diaries in his private collection?  A single reference is made in Our Man in Mexico to Scott's post as the Western European division of Office of Special Operations "overseeing all espionage operations collecting intelligence in the friendly nations of West Germany, France, and Great Britain.: We know now that the machinations of Madrid-based Otto Skorzeny crossed Win's desk in the early years of the Cold War. 

3) Why hasn't the DC attorney(s) made available to the "community" writ large the Shaw/Fensterwald records and research on Jean Rene Souetre provided to the HSCA?

And we can add NBC/Wiegman - Darnell to the list?  

Or is Mary Ferrell Foundation on top of that?  And if so, why not the other examples I list above?

We're considering other possibilities for public viewing of the physical datebook, as well as publication of a facsimile as supplemental to Coup in Dallas.  (see my previous comments on this thread.) I presented the original at two conferences in Dallas in 2022; I've also invited a number of authors and researchers to see the datebook in (convenient to all) private settings.

Edited July 29, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Roger Odisio]

31 minutes ago, Leslie Sharp said:

To your last question, NO, not at the moment.  I'll discuss this in private with you, Roger.

And NO to NARA. I've discussed this with a close colleague who has a direct contact inside the archives.  I think you can appreciate that historically, material has gone missing, suffered damage, etc.. while in custody of the very government many accuse of killing our president.  We're simply not "there" yet.

And, in case you haven't seen my recent post:

1) Why hasn't the Robert Kennedy family allowed access to the files he accumulated during his private investigation into who killed his brother? Isn't RFK Jr. now in the prime position to advance interest in this cold case investigation? Coup was edited by the same editor, published by the same publisher on the same date as Robert's Fauci book. I think Albarelli would have been especially impressed by that particular High Strangeness and Synchronicity.

2) Why haven't expert(s) on Win Scott published the remaining diaries in his private collection?  A single reference is made in Our Man in Mexico to Scott's post as the Western European division of Office of Special Operations "overseeing all espionage operations collecting intelligence in the friendly nations of West Germany, France, and Great Britain.: We know now that the machinations of Madrid-based Otto Skorzeny crossed Win's desk in the early years of the Cold War. 

3) Why hasn't the DC attorney(s) made available to the "community" writ large the Shaw/Fensterwald records and research on Jean Rene Souetre provided to the HSCA?

And we can add NBC/Wiegman - Darnell to the list?  

Or is Mary Ferrell Foundation on top of that?  And if so, why not the other examples I list above?

We're considering other possibilities for public viewing of the physical datebook, as well as publication of a facsimile as supplemental to Coup in Dallas.  (see my previous comments on this thread.) I presented the original at two conferences in Dallas in 2022; I've also invited a number of authors and researchers to see the datebook in (convenient to all) private settings.

LS:  And NO to NARA. I've discussed this with a close colleague who has a direct contact inside the archives.  I think you can appreciate that historically, material has gone missing, suffered damage, etc.. while in custody of the very government many accuse of killing our president.  We're simply not "there" yet.

RO:  This isn't a case of records being lost or destroyed, Leslie.  You would retain a copy of the datebook.  You could write another book based on it. So could others if it was public. 

One  of the reasons I raised NARA, besides the fact that if it is authentic that's where it belongs (you did say it should be in the public domain), is the possibility that offering it to NARA could get the authentication process off dead center. A good thing, no?

[Leslie Sharp]

9 minutes ago, Roger Odisio said:

LS:  And NO to NARA. I've discussed this with a close colleague who has a direct contact inside the archives.  I think you can appreciate that historically, material has gone missing, suffered damage, etc.. while in custody of the very government many accuse of killing our president.  We're simply not "there" yet.

RO:  This isn't a case of records being lost or destroyed, Leslie.  You would retain a copy of the datebook.  You could write another book based on it. So could others if it was public. 

One  of the reasons I raised NARA, besides the fact that if it is authentic that's where it belongs (you did say it should be in the public domain), is the possibility that offering it to NARA could get the authentication process off dead center. A good thing, no?

That possibility was part of my deliberations with the "insider." I was told it was highly doubtful they would fund the process.  

The records I listed, with exception of possibly Wiegman - Darnell, have not to my knowledge been destroyed.  They are being withheld, private collections or otherwise.  A member of the forum insists that the Datebook belongs to the public (paraphrasing), and I'm asking why don't the Win Scott diaries, the RFK investigation files, and the Jean Souetre research collected at great risk and expense by Shaw and Fensterwald, belong to the public?

Why does a private (albeit cloaked in a foundation) citizen, Oliver Curme OWN the Mary Ferrell Collection (assuming I understand the tax filings accurately)?

How long have Mae Brussell's files been batted around from pillar to post? Where are the prize finds of Talbot, Russell, Scott, O.Stone, di Eugenio at al? The one exception I'm familiar with is Bill Simpich who appears to have operated under the code of ethics ... this belongs in the public domain, full stop.
 

Edited July 29, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Leslie Sharp]

14 minutes ago, Roger Odisio said:

LS:  And NO to NARA. I've discussed this with a close colleague who has a direct contact inside the archives.  I think you can appreciate that historically, material has gone missing, suffered damage, etc.. while in custody of the very government many accuse of killing our president.  We're simply not "there" yet.

RO:  This isn't a case of records being lost or destroyed, Leslie.  You would retain a copy of the datebook.  You could write another book based on it. So could others if it was public. 

One  of the reasons I raised NARA, besides the fact that if it is authentic that's where it belongs (you did say it should be in the public domain), is the possibility that offering it to NARA could get the authentication process off dead center. A good thing, no?

Again, I said public domain, not a government venue per se.

Let's see if America permits Trump to seize our executive branch first.

[Greg Doudna]

17 hours ago, Roger Odisio said:

RO:  This isn't a case of records being lost or destroyed, Leslie.  You would retain a copy of the datebook.  You could write another book based on it. So could others if it was public. 

One  of the reasons I raised NARA, besides the fact that if it is authentic that's where it belongs (you did say it should be in the public domain), is the possibility that offering it to NARA could get the authentication process off dead center. A good thing, no?

 

Edited July 30, 2023 by Greg Doudna

[Leslie Sharp]

21 minutes ago, Greg Doudna said:

"Er ... uh ... er.... ... whaddabout xyz over there ... mumble mumble ..." 🙂

There you go being logical Roger.

She has said the owners have abandoned it. She says she is "considering other possibilities for public viewing", meaning she has the ability and possession of it, to do so, if she chooses. 

Be careful though. Even though you don't have anything to hide from your teenage years fifty years ago, Leslie will offer a trade not to insinuate something unspecified about your teenage years fifty years ago if you quit asking for verification of what is currently on-topic which she snarls and casts as not trusting her!! 

You can't make this up. What a circus.

Pushing a button, Greg?

Woven into your "professional" questions related to verification are flagrant insinuations, to the extent several have asked if I intende to bring this up with the moderators or take it even further.

Do you really think you can pull this wool over everyone, all the time, by clinging to those Dead Sea Scrolls as a credential?

Tell me why you didn't ask Paine about Odum; why you didn't ask Curington about Rothermel; why Armstrong was such friends with a tyrannical regime that likely sanctioned the assassination of Patrice Lumumba; why you won't address the Katanga Freedom Fighters in context of Jack Crichton?

If you're purportedly interested in H. L. Hunt's possible role in the assassination, why have you ignored the information I provided you about Rothermel's appearance in the Lafitte ledger sheets?  

But Mostly, why do you avoid answering my question: HAVE YOU CROSSED PATHS WITH VALERY AGINSKY AND/OR OLIVER THORNE?

and, are you in correspondence with Jeffrey Sundberg?

Edited July 29, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Leslie Sharp]

@Greg Doudna

Extending my list of questions of you and your "professional" efforts toward solving the cold case murder investigation:

 

When you researched Gen. Walker, did you come across the name Hilaire du Berrier?

Edited July 29, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Leslie Sharp]

On 7/28/2023 at 1:49 AM, Greg Doudna said:

Let's see if I have this straight: 

Fact #1: Nobody alleged Skorzeny carried out the JFK assassination in a direct way before Ralph Ganis". {{Bold reflects an edit of an original "was connected to the JFK assassination before Ralph Ganis". A 1984 article by Mae Brussell argued for a possible worldwide post-ww2 Nazi connection to the JFK assassination in which activities of international post-ww2 Nazis are described including Skorzeny.}} 

Fact #2: there is no evidence Skorzeny and Lafitte knew, met, or had anything to do with each other outside of the Lafitte datebook itself (and a decades-later reported and wholly unverified claim that Ilse Lafitte claimed to remember knowing Skorzeny, reportedly told by her in the same sentences as equally unverified claims in which she claimed to relate multiple social meetings with Lee and Marina Oswald, Thomas Eli Davis, and French assassin Souetre). 

Fact #3: In Ganis's book on Skorzeny, The Skorzeny Papers (2018), there is not a single mention of Lafitte. In my paperback edition of Ganis, 2020, the name of Lafitte does not even appear in the index. Also, in Albarelli's two earlier books, A Terrible Mistake (2009) and A Secret Order (2013), I notice Skorzeny is not in either of the indexes of those books. 

Fact #4: This sequence (I found exact dates hard to nail down, due to lack of a published timeline, but this is ca. 2010's). Lafitte dies; followed by Albarelli meeting Ganis; followed by Ganis telling Albarelli about Skorzeny; followed by Albarelli not telling Ganis immediately but later telling Ganis he (Albarelli) had previously seen Skorzeny's name in the Lafitte datebook just before meeting Ganis; followed by publication of the Lafitte datebook (Coup in Dallas, 2021) with multiple entries in the Lafitte datebook referring to Skorzeny.

Prima facie the Skorzeny references in the Lafitte 1963 datebook appear to date the writing of those Skorzeny references in that datebook to the time Albarelli met Ganis, ca. half a century later than 1963.

Prima facie, it appears Lafitte is not the author of the multiple Skorzeny written references in Lafitte's datebook, since the allusions to Skorzeny appear to postdate Lafitte's death.

Provisional conclusion: at least some of the writing in the Lafitte 1963 datebook was written later than Lafitte. 

Suggested means of testing or falsification of provisional conclusion: analysis of handwriting; analysis of ink; recheck known public domain information (e.g. Mary Ferrell Foundation site) for any known references or discussions to Skorzeny as suspected involved in the JFK assassination prior to Ganis.

Suggested method in the absence of a credible, objective vetting/analysis of the datebook's writing for authenticity: distinguish and segregate what is known of the various characters independently of the datebook, from what is derivative from the datebook. Avoid mixing and conflating those two categories unless and until authenticity of the datebook is checked on the basis of physical examination by reputable questioned-document examiners.  

Prima facie there are credible grounds to suspect this may be a forged document, although there appears to be no knowledge or information concerning the identity of the forger, who was witting and who unwitting to the forgery, if that was the case. 

Those who believe the datebook entries dated 1963 are authentically from pre-Nov 22, 1963 may wish to make inquiry whether the entire datebook has been photographed, in a verified dateable record, since only some of the pages of the datebook are reported published in Coup in Dallas, and no authentication has been done. Unless there is a verified dated set of photographs of the entire datebook, there is no protection against tampering or additions, future "sensational discoveries" emerging from the remaining unpublished portions. Alternatively, if any of the unpublished pages did happen to have authentic writing of Jean-Pierre Lafitte, that could be checked against the handwriting of the sensational JFK assassination-related entries on the pages for which photographs have been published.

Fact #5: there are also many specific claims as to facts published in the Albarelli books which are difficult or impossible to verify, independently of the datebook. For example, I see in A Secret Order (2013) claims that Lafitte murdered Frank Olsen (p. 107); was tasked by Gottlieb to use botulism-toothpaste to kill Patrice Lumumba in the Congo (p. 149); in 1961 was traveling to Europe, the Middle East, and Africa doing assassinations for the CIA (p. 322); was QJ/WIN (p. 438); was very close to mobster John Roselli (p. 438) ... Are any of these claims true? None can be verified by anyone here, so far as I can tell. You cannot find any of these things verified on the Mary Ferrell Foundation site's documents, or anywhere else online to my knowledge. One might reasonably suspect these claims are all fabrications out of whole cloth (not saying Albarelli himself did the fabricating). (At A Terrible Mistake, 801, I see Albarelli credits "several retired CIA and FBI officials who asked to be unnamed" for some of his information on Jean-Pierre Lafitte.)    

~ ~ ~

p.s. on page 576 of Coup in Dallas, the Nov 20 entry is transcribed as "Lanny-Filiol ... call Storey ... DeM ... Frank B...."

However the photograph of the Nov 20, 1963 entry has only the first three of those four names. The fourth, "Frank B", is non-existent in the photograph, and instead (where "Frank B" would be) there is something different: "Rifle into building..."

Is that a typo, or is that a relic of an earlier composition draft by the author(s), prior to the writing of that entry in the datebook, inadvertantly surviving into the published book? 

Let's see if I have this straight, Greg:

 

 

Fact #1: Nobody alleged Skorzeny carried out the JFK assassination in a direct way before Ralph Ganis". {{Bold reflects an edit of an original "was connected to the JFK assassination before Ralph Ganis". A 1984 article by Mae Brussell argued for a possible worldwide post-ww2 Nazi connection to the JFK assassination in which activities of international post-ww2 Nazis are described including Skorzeny.}} 

 

Have you read Oglesby's "The Secret Treaty of Fort Hunt"?  

Fact #2: there is no evidence Skorzeny and Lafitte knew, met, or had anything to do with each other outside of the Lafitte datebook itself (and a decades-later reported and wholly unverified claim that Ilse Lafitte claimed to remember knowing Skorzeny, reportedly told by her in the same sentences as equally unverified claims in which she claimed to relate multiple social meetings with Lee and Marina Oswald, Thomas Eli Davis, and French assassin Souetre). 

(LS Who is Ilse Lafitte?)

LS Conversely, you have no evidence to discredit Rene's assertion that both she and Pierre knew Otto Skorzeny and Ilse Skorzeny; the family also asserted that Lafitte served briefly in the Charlemagne Battalion made up of French collaborators as the war came to a close. Rene also advised that Leon Degrelle wanted to pitch in on the expense of the assassination of John Kennedy because he despised him so much. She also said, "oil smoothes the way for sudden and sometimes deadly change."

Fact #3: In Ganis's book on Skorzeny, The Skorzeny Papers (2018), there is not a single mention of Lafitte. In my paperback edition of Ganis, 2020, the name of Lafitte does not even appear in the index. Also, in Albarelli's two earlier books, A Terrible Mistake (2009) and A Secret Order (2013), I notice Skorzeny is not in either of the indexes of those books.

 

LS and from that, you deduce what?   

Fact #4: This sequence (I found exact dates hard to nail down, due to lack of a published timeline, but this is ca. 2010's). Lafitte dies; followed by Albarelli meeting Ganis; followed by Ganis telling Albarelli about Skorzeny; followed by Albarelli not telling Ganis immediately but later telling Ganis he (Albarelli) had previously seen Skorzeny's name in the Lafitte datebook just before meeting Ganis; followed by publication of the Lafitte datebook (Coup in Dallas, 2021) with multiple entries in the Lafitte datebook referring to Skorzeny.

LS I recommend you interview those who have direct knowledge of trajectory of the Ganis/Albarelli collaboration, including me. Otherwise, suffice to say your rendering of the timline and the circumstances is — as kindly as I can put it — factually incorrect.

Prima facie the Skorzeny references in the Lafitte 1963 datebook appear to date the writing of those Skorzeny references in that datebook to the time Albarelli met Ganis, ca. half a century later than 1963.

LS What are you talking about?

Prima facie, it appears Lafitte is not the author of the multiple Skorzeny written references in Lafitte's datebook, since the allusions to Skorzeny appear to postdate Lafitte's death.

LS Based on what evidence do you assert, "it appears Lafitte is not the author"? 

Provisional conclusion: at least some of the writing in the Lafitte 1963 datebook was written later than Lafitte. 

 

LS I'll skip over  portions of your  "provisional conclusion".  For the most part, it is purely subjective.

Suggested means of testing or falsification of provisional conclusion: analysis of handwriting; analysis of ink; recheck known public domain information (e.g. Mary Ferrell Foundation site) for any known references or discussions to Skorzeny as suspected involved in the JFK assassination prior to Ganis.

LS Have you crossed paths with Valery Aginsky and/or Oliver Thorne.

Suggested method in the absence of a credible, objective vetting/analysis of the datebook's writing for authenticity: distinguish and segregate what is known of the various characters independently of the datebook, from what is derivative from the datebook. Avoid mixing and conflating those two categories unless and until authenticity of the datebook is checked on the basis of physical examination by reputable questioned-document examiners.  

LS Have you crossed paths with Valery Aginsky and/or Oliver Thorne.

Prima facie there are credible grounds to suspect this may be a forged document, 

LS What are your credible grounds  to suspect this may be a forged document? 

although there appears to be no knowledge or information concerning the identity of the forger, who was witting and who unwitting to the forgery, if that was the case. 

Those who believe the datebook entries dated 1963 are authentically from pre-Nov 22, 1963 may wish to make inquiry whether the entire datebook has been photographed, in a verified dateable record, since only some of the pages of the datebook are reported published in Coup in Dallas, and no authentication has been done. Unless there is a verified dated set of photographs of the entire datebook, there is no protection against tampering or additions, future "sensational discoveries" emerging from the remaining unpublished portions. Alternatively, if any of the unpublished pages did happen to have authentic writing of Jean-Pierre Lafitte, that could be checked against the handwriting of the sensational JFK assassination-related entries on the pages for which photographs have been published.

 

LS Once again, have the courtesy to  review the limited analysis presented by respected Kennedy assassination investigative journalist Dick Russell of the datebook entries in the Front Matter of Coup in Dallas; or, please see the excerpts from Dick's analysis I've provided on this and other EF threads.

Fact #5: there are also many specific claims as to facts published in the Albarelli books which are difficult or impossible to verify, independently of the datebook. For example, I see in A Secret Order (2013) claims that Lafitte murdered Frank Olsen (p. 107); was tasked by Gottlieb to use botulism-toothpaste to kill Patrice Lumumba in the Congo (p. 149); in 1961 was traveling to Europe, the Middle East, and Africa doing assassinations for the CIA (p. 322); was QJ/WIN (p. 438); was very close to mobster John Roselli (p. 438) ... Are any of these claims true? None can be verified by anyone here, so far as I can tell. You cannot find any of these things verified on the Mary Ferrell Foundation site's documents, or anywhere else online to my knowledge. One might reasonably suspect these claims are all fabrications out of whole cloth (not saying Albarelli himself did the fabricating). (At A Terrible Mistake, 801, I see Albarelli credits "several retired CIA and FBI officials who asked to be unnamed" for some of his information on Jean-Pierre Lafitte.)    

LS Your lack of professionalism knows no bounds.  Hank is not here to defend his work. I recall that when I challenged your assessment of Coup in Dallas which — for those who don't recall — was based solely on the coauthor's statement on provenance and authenticity instead of Hank's own introduction which lays out in detail how he stumbled on to the Lafitte material, how he took possession etc., you didn't stoop to this level. In fact, you actually expressed admiration for Hank's previous work. Here, perhaps as a last resort, you have slammed his overall investigative professionalism and his career, for what? to discredit the datebook and Coup in Dallas. Why? Desperate moves by desperate men is my guess.

Edited July 29, 2023 by Leslie Sharp

[Leslie Sharp]

@Greg Doudna @Benjamin Cole @David Josephs @Andrej Stancak @Paul Brancato @Ron Bulman

Greg, what electronic version of the datebook entries that appear in the first edition, Coup in Dallas, are you working with to advance your analysis?

[Benjamin Cole]

3 hours ago, Leslie Sharp said:

Again, I said public domain, not a government venue per se.

Let's see if America permits Trump to seize our executive branch first.

"Again, I said public domain, not a government venue per se.

Let's see if America permits Trump to seize our executive branch first."--LS

Seriously? 

This is becoming farce. 

[Leslie Sharp]

1 minute ago, Benjamin Cole said:

"Again, I said public domain, not a government venue per se.

Let's see if America permits Trump to seize our executive branch first."--LS

Seriously? 

This is becoming farce. 

How very original:  Circus. Farce.

We would never relinquish this material to NARA with Trump or his MAGA predecessors in office.  Simple.

[Benjamin Cole]

1 minute ago, Leslie Sharp said:

How very original:  Circus. Farce.

We would never relinquish this material to NARA with Trump or his MAGA predecessors in office.  Simple.

Please explain. 

 

[Leslie Sharp]

21 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Please explain. 

 

Do you have a copy of Coup in Dallas?

[Benjamin Cole]

1 minute ago, Leslie Sharp said:

Do you have a copy of Coup in Dallas?

No. I live offshore. You can send me a PDF.