USAF COL. Prouty, Operation BLOODSTONE, SS-Obersturmbannführer Skorzeny, & the murder of President Kennedy...

[Ron Bulman]

10 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

  Also, can someone explain how Skorzeny was involved in the CIA/Anti-Castro Cuban op (delineated by Larry Hancock, et.al.)  to assassinate JFK?

He wasn't.  IF he was involved in the JFKA it was through Dulles, Angleton and Harvey in particular.  He, COS Berlin in the early 1950's, put in charge of ZRifle, his notes about foreign assassins, which the Cuban refugees were not at that point as part of Operation 40.  From WWII they all dealt with both east and west Germans, The Black Prince, Rat lines, Paperclip and more. 

Is what some have mentioned before, a piggybacked operation, in a different context, plausible?  Cubans roused up about assassinating JFK, a few used for various purposes (keeping Oswald busy?), maybe a shooter from the swamp group?  Ultimately used as scape goats.  IDK. Nothing sticks to the wall?  Preposterous, I guess.

[Calvin Ye]

16 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

He wasn't.  IF he was involved in the JFKA it was through Dulles, Angleton and Harvey in particular.  He, COS Berlin in the early 1950's, put in charge of ZRifle, his notes about foreign assassins, which the Cuban refugees were not at that point as part of Operation 40.  From WWII they all dealt with both east and west Germans, The Black Prince, Rat lines, Paperclip and more. 

Is what some have mentioned before, a piggybacked operation, in a different context, plausible?  Cubans roused up about assassinating JFK, a few used for various purposes (keeping Oswald busy?), maybe a shooter from the swamp group?  Ultimately used as scape goats.  IDK. Nothing sticks to the wall?  Preposterous, I guess.

Both the Nazis  and CIA were involved in drugs

[Calvin Ye]

Both the Nazis  and CIA were involved in drugs. There is also the Operation Valkyrie

[David Josephs]

11 hours ago, W. Niederhut said:

David,

    Can you and Paul Brancato name any other JFK administration Deep State insiders, besides Col. L. Fletcher Prouty, who ever stepped forward to debunk the WCR narrative about JFK's assassination?

    Also, can someone explain how Skorzeny was involved in the CIA/Anti-Castro Cuban op (delineated by Larry Hancock, et.al.)  to assassinate JFK?

    This is now the third time I have asked that question on this disorganized thread.

WN... is it normal to ask questions 3 or 4 times and then ignore any discussion of the responses both @Robert Montenegro and I provided?

Furthermore, the whole point of this thread in to set aside the CIA/Anti-Castro narrative as yet another layer of fluff keeping us from the rotten core as I've outlined numerous times on this forum over the years.  The CIA - as I see it - was created to add layers of protection and a public face to the evils of the US instead of the true culprits, the Military Industrial (Congressional) Complex.

As we've also discussed on these pages - how many ONI, MID or I&NS docs have we been allowed to see compared to the mountains of CIA double-speak?  What little we do know is that Admiral Rufus Taylor (Dir of Naval Intelligence 11/22/63) oversaw the Naval Intel investigation and had interest and awareness of Oswald at least a year prior to 11/22.

I also asked you to list a few who meet your DEEP STATE JFK ADMIN INSIDERS' qualifications... as there were many deep state insiders who wrote about the folly that was the WCR... but JFK Admin?

btw - As a top PROUTY cheerleader you do understand he was not "in" the JFK administration... he was and had always been a military man answering to military superiors.  And once again, the point of the thread is to bring some light to what the support apparatus within the Military for CIA (and other acronyms) Black Ops was doing and FOR WHOM.  Is that something PROUTY would have a unique perspective on?

You don't suppose they sent him halfway round the world for his protection...  

Finally, @James DiEugenio Even if the two men were providing pure disinformation - how does their discussion about JG potentially going after a nazzzi affect his investigation as "disinformation"?  Wouldn't mention of that increase efforts to shut him down - if any of those accusations had any validity at all... and if not valid, as I ask above - what is the damage?

This is Bringuier talking to the FBI about a call from DePino...   what does disinformation in this instance accomplish?

Do you believe GAUDET when he says Oswald knew Bannister because he saw them talking together?
Don't you think that CONTEXT is important in evaluating whether a CIA document/asset is truthful or not..as well as see the value of including something like this in the tapestry of ones analysis?

You kinda need to explain to us why you feel a CIA report quoting a FBI report about DiPino bringing up an ex-nazzzi which Garrison may be looking into as part of his JFK investigation is so toxic  ...

DePino trying to l i e to Bringuier?  Yet lo and behold, Rocca knows who he might be talking about..THERE's your bs Jim... Rocca's "one thin possibility" as if he was not aware of what was going.

What say you my friend?  And I am asking sincerely, I am only now getting to know this information and was surprised by your comment.  By your definition, every Crypt that's been deciphered is a lie as they are described in CIA documents... 

Harvey's handwritten ZR/RIFLE plans...  not reliable or indicative of CIA activity since it was authored by a CIA "asset"?  C'mon man.

 

 

 

 

[Robert Montenegro]

4 hours ago, David Josephs said:

WN... is it normal to ask questions 3 or 4 times and then ignore any discussion of the responses both @Robert Montenegro and I provided?

Furthermore, the whole point of this thread in to set aside the CIA/Anti-Castro narrative as yet another layer of fluff keeping us from the rotten core as I've outlined numerous times on this forum over the years.  The CIA - as I see it - was created to add layers of protection and a public face to the evils of the US instead of the true culprits, the Military Industrial (Congressional) Complex.

As we've also discussed on these pages - how many ONI, MID or I&NS docs have we been allowed to see compared to the mountains of CIA double-speak?  What little we do know is that Admiral Rufus Taylor (Dir of Naval Intelligence 11/22/63) oversaw the Naval Intel investigation and had interest and awareness of Oswald at least a year prior to 11/22.

I also asked you to list a few who meet your DEEP STATE JFK ADMIN INSIDERS' qualifications... as there were many deep state insiders who wrote about the folly that was the WCR... but JFK Admin?

btw - As a top PROUTY cheerleader you do understand he was not "in" the JFK administration... he was and had always been a military man answering to military superiors.  And once again, the point of the thread is to bring some light to what the support apparatus within the Military for CIA (and other acronyms) Black Ops was doing and FOR WHOM.  Is that something PROUTY would have a unique perspective on?

You don't suppose they sent him halfway round the world for his protection...  

Finally, @James DiEugenio Even if the two men were providing pure disinformation - how does their discussion about JG potentially going after a nazzzi affect his investigation as "disinformation"?  Wouldn't mention of that increase efforts to shut him down - if any of those accusations had any validity at all... and if not valid, as I ask above - what is the damage?

This is Bringuier talking to the FBI about a call from DePino...   what does disinformation in this instance accomplish?

Do you believe GAUDET when he says Oswald knew Bannister because he saw them talking together?
Don't you think that CONTEXT is important in evaluating whether a CIA document/asset is truthful or not..as well as see the value of including something like this in the tapestry of ones analysis?

You kinda need to explain to us why you feel a CIA report quoting a FBI report about DiPino bringing up an ex-nazzzi which Garrison may be looking into as part of his JFK investigation is so toxic  ...

DePino trying to l i e to Bringuier?  Yet lo and behold, Rocca knows who he might be talking about..THERE's your bs Jim... Rocca's "one thin possibility" as if he was not aware of what was going.

What say you my friend?  And I am asking sincerely, I am only now getting to know this information and was surprised by your comment.  By your definition, every Crypt that's been deciphered is a lie as they are described in CIA documents... 

Harvey's handwritten ZR/RIFLE plans...  not reliable or indicative of CIA activity since it was authored by a CIA "asset"?  C'mon man.

 

 

 

 

 

Precisely. 

[Paul Brancato]

Thank you David Josephs. 
there are two threads in which some of the same info is being discussed. I’m going to rewrite what I posted for Jim D on that other thread here.

Jim - Robert isn’t using Dipino and Bringuier as sources. He is using Raymond Rocca, who was the task force commander for the ‘Garrison Group’. Someone in that group, working for Rocca, sends him the info identifying the unnamed Nazi in Mexico City. It wasn’t either Dipino or Bringuier - they just said he was a Nazi working in Mexico City. This looks a lot different to me than how you are describing it. Why would Dipino bring this to Rocca’s attention? I would guess it’s because they are worried about its implications, and trying to help Rocca, not smear Garrison.
David - It looks like you and i are on the same page. 
Jim D - I’ve reposted this here. I cannot understand why you want to dismiss it, and denigrate Robert, which you have done a few times now. If you disagree with the general thesis that Robert seems to be developing, it would serve all of us well if you would argue your case by sharing your own conclusions about possible Nazi involvement. I’ll repeat what I said in an earlier post - collaboration is called for, not competition. Reading between the lines I gather that you, probably more familiar with Garrison’s files than anyone else, have not found anything Garrison himself or his staff wrote that indicates he was pursuing a Nazi in MC, or any other Nazis. If that’s the case, I’ll ask you how many of Garrisons files were destroyed before researchers got ahold of them? Btw if I’m not mistaken Pierre Lafitte was one of the men who destroyed Garrison files. 
 

Edited July 19, 2023 by Paul Brancato

[Benjamin Cole]

5 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Thank you David Josephs. 

The Dictator-Puppet-in-Chief, through his illegal but indisputable snuff job on the JFK Records Act, is helping to cover up a Nazified-CIA JFKA? Really? Why? 

[Paul Brancato]

12 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

The Dictator-Puppet-in-Chief, through his illegal but indisputable snuff job on the JFK Records Act, is helping to cover up a Nazified-CIA JFKA? Really? Why? 

Ben - if you are referring to Biden, let’s add Trump to that moniker. 

[Tom Gram]

8 hours ago, David Josephs said:

WN... is it normal to ask questions 3 or 4 times and then ignore any discussion of the responses both @Robert Montenegro and I provided?

Furthermore, the whole point of this thread in to set aside the CIA/Anti-Castro narrative as yet another layer of fluff keeping us from the rotten core as I've outlined numerous times on this forum over the years.  The CIA - as I see it - was created to add layers of protection and a public face to the evils of the US instead of the true culprits, the Military Industrial (Congressional) Complex.

As we've also discussed on these pages - how many ONI, MID or I&NS docs have we been allowed to see compared to the mountains of CIA double-speak?  What little we do know is that Admiral Rufus Taylor (Dir of Naval Intelligence 11/22/63) oversaw the Naval Intel investigation and had interest and awareness of Oswald at least a year prior to 11/22.

I also asked you to list a few who meet your DEEP STATE JFK ADMIN INSIDERS' qualifications... as there were many deep state insiders who wrote about the folly that was the WCR... but JFK Admin?

btw - As a top PROUTY cheerleader you do understand he was not "in" the JFK administration... he was and had always been a military man answering to military superiors.  And once again, the point of the thread is to bring some light to what the support apparatus within the Military for CIA (and other acronyms) Black Ops was doing and FOR WHOM.  Is that something PROUTY would have a unique perspective on?

You don't suppose they sent him halfway round the world for his protection...  

Finally, @James DiEugenio Even if the two men were providing pure disinformation - how does their discussion about JG potentially going after a nazzzi affect his investigation as "disinformation"?  Wouldn't mention of that increase efforts to shut him down - if any of those accusations had any validity at all... and if not valid, as I ask above - what is the damage?

This is Bringuier talking to the FBI about a call from DePino...   what does disinformation in this instance accomplish?

Do you believe GAUDET when he says Oswald knew Bannister because he saw them talking together?
Don't you think that CONTEXT is important in evaluating whether a CIA document/asset is truthful or not..as well as see the value of including something like this in the tapestry of ones analysis?

You kinda need to explain to us why you feel a CIA report quoting a FBI report about DiPino bringing up an ex-nazzzi which Garrison may be looking into as part of his JFK investigation is so toxic  ...

DePino trying to l i e to Bringuier?  Yet lo and behold, Rocca knows who he might be talking about..THERE's your bs Jim... Rocca's "one thin possibility" as if he was not aware of what was going.

What say you my friend?  And I am asking sincerely, I am only now getting to know this information and was surprised by your comment.  By your definition, every Crypt that's been deciphered is a lie as they are described in CIA documents... 

Harvey's handwritten ZR/RIFLE plans...  not reliable or indicative of CIA activity since it was authored by a CIA "asset"?  C'mon man.

 

 

 

 

I don’t know much about DePino, but I agree with Jim that Bringuier is the most unreliable source imaginable. Bringuier is a bigger person of interest in the JFKA, at least regarding Oswald’s activities in New Orleans, than all of these random Nazis combined. 

That said, if Garrison was actually investigating a specific Nazi linked to the CIA in Mexico City, there should be evidence of that in his files. I do not recall seeing anything like that, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t there. Those pushing this Nazi’s-did-it theory should attempt to trace the source of DePino’s alleged tip, and if it actually checks out, look through Garrison’s files for any evidence he had that directed his investigation towards this one specific Nazi in Mexico City. However, if the lead starts and ends with this CIA memo I think it’s safe to say that it’s likely a bunch of BS. 

[David Josephs]

45 minutes ago, Tom Gram said:

I don’t know much about DePino, but I agree with Jim that Bringuier is the most unreliable source imaginable. Bringuier is a bigger person of interest in the JFKA, at least regarding Oswald’s activities in New Orleans, than all of these random Nazis combined. 

That said, if Garrison was actually investigating a specific Nazi linked to the CIA in Mexico City, there should be evidence of that in his files. I do not recall seeing anything like that, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t there. Those pushing this Nazi’s-did-it theory should attempt to trace the source of DePino’s alleged tip, and if it actually checks out, look through Garrison’s files for any evidence he had that directed his investigation towards this one specific Nazi in Mexico City. However, if the lead starts and ends with this CIA memo I think it’s safe to say that it’s likely a bunch of BS. 

The memo is from Rocca up the chain.  Thanks again to Bill Simpich who provides the needed background...  
The redacted info from the FBI report this CIA report is referencing:  A. Edward Horsey, a public accountant in Kalamazoo, Michigan, tips the FBI that he been working with a group of people to study the Kennedy slaying. They concluded a man named Al Groat was on the grassy knoll firing a gun.    http://historiadiscordia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/19670718-fbi_memo-a_edward_horsey.jpg 

So much for paragraph 1.   https://www.maryferrell.org/php/cryptdb.php?id=LISIREN-3  There are enough links and backstories to keep you busy for quite a while... but not the point

The rest describes what Bringuier told the FBI as found in an FBI report which Rocca must have seen or was briefed upon as he shares details of the FBI report.  If Bringuier is lying, he is lying about what DePino said to him which he tells to the FBI - ok, CIA lying to the FBI is expected - yet Rocca runs with the ball, forwards the info on and even offers a name which we are now learning appears to have direct implications within the assassination...

ROCCA offers the name to the person he is writing the memo to...  C/WH/1...  as this is not my area I am not sure who that was in 1967...  but are you of the mind that Rocca lies directly to his superiors in this case just to create a false record about a tiny little event while dropping a bombshell name - by mistake?

For the sake of discussion then... this BS disinformation which Bringuier feeds the FBI - what is the purpose of this Rocca memo to C/WH/1 and adding the name MAX HOHENLOHE ??

Edited July 19, 2023 by David Josephs

[Paul Brancato]

20 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

The memo is from Rocca up the chain.  Thanks again to Bill Simpich who provides the needed background...  
The redacted info from the FBI report this CIA report is referencing:  A. Edward Horsey, a public accountant in Kalamazoo, Michigan, tips the FBI that he been working with a group of people to study the Kennedy slaying. They concluded a man named Al Groat was on the grassy knoll firing a gun.    http://historiadiscordia.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/19670718-fbi_memo-a_edward_horsey.jpg 

So much for paragraph 1.   https://www.maryferrell.org/php/cryptdb.php?id=LISIREN-3  There are enough links and backstories to keep you busy for quite a while... but not the point

The rest describes what Bringuier told the FBI as found in an FBI report which Rocca must have seen or was briefed upon as he shares details of the FBI report.  If Bringuier is lying, he is lying about what DePino said to him which he tells to the FBI - ok, CIA lying to the FBI is expected - yet Rocca runs with the ball, forwards the info on and even offers a name which we are now learning appears to have direct implications within the assassination...

ROCCA offers the name to the person he is writing the memo to...  C/WH/1...  as this is not my area I am not sure who that was in 1967...  but are you of the mind that Rocca lies directly to his superiors in this case just to create a false record about a tiny little event while dropping a bombshell name - by mistake?

For the sake of discussion then... this BS disinformation which Bringuier feeds the FBI - what is the purpose of this Rocca memo to C/WH/1 and adding the name MAX HOHENLOHE ??

That is the question. 
tom - did you see my note about Garrison files being destroyed? Let’s wait and see if Jim D has anything to add on that, and on any references he may have seen in the Garrison files that survived. Again, wasn’t Pierre Lafitte involved in that destruction of Garrison files? 

[W. Niederhut]

10 hours ago, David Josephs said:

WN... is it normal to ask questions 3 or 4 times and then ignore any discussion of the responses both @Robert Montenegro and I provided?

Furthermore, the whole point of this thread in to set aside the CIA/Anti-Castro narrative as yet another layer of fluff keeping us from the rotten core as I've outlined numerous times on this forum over the years.  The CIA - as I see it - was created to add layers of protection and a public face to the evils of the US instead of the true culprits, the Military Industrial (Congressional) Complex.

As we've also discussed on these pages - how many ONI, MID or I&NS docs have we been allowed to see compared to the mountains of CIA double-speak?  What little we do know is that Admiral Rufus Taylor (Dir of Naval Intelligence 11/22/63) oversaw the Naval Intel investigation and had interest and awareness of Oswald at least a year prior to 11/22.

I also asked you to list a few who meet your DEEP STATE JFK ADMIN INSIDERS' qualifications... as there were many deep state insiders who wrote about the folly that was the WCR... but JFK Admin?

btw - As a top PROUTY cheerleader you do understand he was not "in" the JFK administration... he was and had always been a military man answering to military superiors.  And once again, the point of the thread is to bring some light to what the support apparatus within the Military for CIA (and other acronyms) Black Ops was doing and FOR WHOM.  Is that something PROUTY would have a unique perspective on?

You don't suppose they sent him halfway round the world for his protection...  

 

 

 

David,

     I appreciate your efforts (and Montenegro's) to give us a fuller picture of U.S. military/intelligence ops in the 50s and 60s, but you're being somewhat disingenuous here about my questions.

     My question about Prouty was posted for you and Paul Brancato to illustrate the fact that Prouty was, in fact, a very rare example of a JFK administration era "Deep State" insider who had the courage and the integrity to step up and try to debunk the WCR narrative (through his contacts with Jim Garrison and Oliver Stone and his book on JFK, the CIA, and Vietnam.)  He stuck his neck out, and has been smeared by CIA propagandists for the past 30 years as a result.

     If he had been involved with, or knowledgeable about, the JFK assassins, why would he have exposed problems with the WCR narrative-- rather than letting sleeping dogs lie?  Do you understand my point?

     So, let's give Prouty credit for trying to tell the public the truth about Allen Dulles, Lansdale, and the CIA.

     Allen Dulles's favorite black ops/psy ops man, Ed Lansdale, was in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63.  He was positively ID's by Prouty and Krulak, then Krulak got cold feet and wanted nothing to do with publicly outing Lansdale in Dealey Plaza.  Prouty was more courageous.

     I appreciate your attempt to answer my question, (unlike Paul, who ignored it) but you came up with no one of any real significance in the JFK era Deep State who was similarly courageous.

      As for your request for a list of JFK Deep State "insiders," doesn't it makes more sense to simply identify those JFK era government employees who stepped up to debunk the WCR narrative?!

      Where are they?

      Your list is thin gruel, indeed-- illustrating Gerry Patrick Hemming's claim that Prouty was the only Deep State insider who ever spilled the beans about the CIA, JFK, and Vietnam.

       You can call that "cheerleading" if you choose.  I call it "history."

Edited July 19, 2023 by W. Niederhut

[David Josephs]

15 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

David,

     I appreciate your efforts (and Montenegro's) to give us a fuller picture of U.S. military/intelligence ops in the 50s and 60s, but you're being somewhat disingenuous here about my questions.

     My question about Prouty was posted for you and Paul Brancato to illustrate the fact that Prouty was, in fact, a very rare example of a JFK administration era "Deep State" insider who had the courage and the integrity to step up and try to debunk the WCR narrative (through his contacts with Jim Garrison and Oliver Stone and his book on JFK, the CIA, and Vietnam.)  He stuck his neck out, and has been smeared by CIA propagandists for the past 30 years as a result.

     If he had been involved with, or knowledgeable about, the JFK assassins, why would he have exposed problems with the WCR narrative-- rather than letting sleeping dogs lie?  Do you understand my point?

     So, let's give Prouty credit for trying to tell the public the truth about Allen Dulles, Lansdale, and the CIA.

     Allen Dulles's favorite black ops/psy ops man, Ed Lansdale, was in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/63.  He was positively ID's by Prouty and Krulak, then Krulak got cold feet and wanted nothing to do with publicly outing Lansdale in Dealey Plaza.  Prouty was more courageous.

     I appreciate your attempt to answer my question, (unlike Paul, who ignored it) but you came up with no one of any real significance in the JFK era Deep State who was similarly courageous.

      As for your request for a list of JFK Deep State "insiders," doesn't it makes more sense to simply identify those JFK era government employees who stepped up to debunk the WCR narrative?!

      Where are they?

      Your list is thin gruel, indeed-- illustrating Gerry Patrick Hemming's claim that Prouty was the only Deep State insider who ever spilled the beans about the CIA, JFK, and Vietnam.

       You can call that "cheerleading" if you choose.  I call it "history."

Again... PROUTY was not a JFK admin insider...  why can't you acknowledge same?  And like @Robert Montenegro I am not tearing him down, he has indeed exposed information that helps cleanse his conscience while adding debunking material to the already huge mountain of such against the WCR.

As to your inability to offer JFK Admin Deep Insiders names AT ALL, let alone if they debunked the WCR or not, is a nice side-step.  I assume you are aware of the book and articles that have been written over the years attacking the WCR and showing it for what it really was...

Would Daniel Elsberg count even though his revelations are only at the fringe of the Ass'n?
If you can't even name a dozen or so of these "insiders" what's the point of my taking time to dig them up for you... 

What you seem to be trying to prove is that PROUTY was the only one... even though he was not one of the "insiders" based on the modifiers you added.

You can dig into who and why the WCRT was debunked on your own... there is probably 10 years of reading on this site alone showing every aspect of the WCR & HSCA reports as the junk they were... Even Blakey admits it.

How about SPRAGUE?  Too late to be a JFK deep state insider?

KRULAK had cold feet?   makes one wonder.. PROUTY was in bed with these men for decades and is one of the only vocal detractors...  Feeding and/or exposing info that supports the myriad of onion layer cover stories and keeping people focused "over there" while the real crimes were perpetrated "over here" is not something in the best interest of the 2 entities he served?  C'mon man.

And I bet you still think the Zapruder film is THE definitive record and timing of the assassination.  I've got this bridge I can sell you too... 

Finally - what makes you think ANYONE meeting your description would throw themselves and their benefactors under the bus by overtly exposing the reality of the assassination?

Have you even bothered to read thru the ARRB ...  Dr. HUMES (insider?) is finally nailed down and debunks his own WCR testimony about the start of the autopsy and the arrival of JFK... while an empty hearse sat at the front of Bethesda...  Many others describe the in-process autopsy as the empty casket pulls up to the front of the hospital.

SIbert and O'Neill finally came clean telling us THEY brought in casket at 7:17 after Humes lets us know he had been with JFK's body since 6:30.

How much debunking do you want W?  You want McNamara and Bundy to come out and say yes, we did it because the cabal forced us to change NSAM 263, keep the wars going and remove the dreadful PEACE POTUS from office?

What are you trying to do here W?  Show your work

[Robert Montenegro]

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

Again... PROUTY was not a JFK admin insider...  why can't you acknowledge same?  And like @Robert Montenegro I am not tearing him down, he has indeed exposed information that helps cleanse his conscience while adding debunking material to the already huge mountain of such against the WCR.

What you seem to be trying to prove is that PROUTY was the only one... even though he was not one of the "insiders" based on the modifiers you added.

Finally - what makes you think ANYONE meeting your description would throw themselves and their benefactors under the bus by overtly exposing the reality of the assassination?

 

Precisely, I'm am not tearing down COL. Prouty, I am only questioning whether or not he was involved in a limited hangout, nothing more. 

Plus, in all the research I've done on COL. Prouty, he never actually committed to paper anything to the effect of "...these people, *insert target specific names,* are the ones who murdered President Kennedy..." & "...this is how they did it *insert specific scenario*..."

COL. Prouty only ever spoke in the vaguest of terms like "... the Joint Chiefs of Staff was disaffected by Kennedy..." or "...the intelligence community was providing bureaucratic resistance..." or "...the Malthusian mind set of policy makers under Eisenhower..."

And COL. Prouty uses "...they..." and "...we..." a lot, without ever getting specific about anything.

It's like The Rolling Stones lyric in the song "Sympathy for the Devil."

"...I shouted out 'who killed the Kennedys?!' When after all, it was you and me..." 

Uhm, sorry Mick Jagger, no cigar, I wasn't up on the damn knoll, and neither were you, you sexy gyrating pixie of a man.

So, that's where my questioning of COL. Prouty's statements about COL. Prouty's intimate affirmations concerning, hands down, one of the most secret covert projects of the Cold War—Operation BLOODSTONE—where he sure is unrepentant and enthusiastic in his tone, while getting into graphic detail about the usage and re-arming of tens of thousand of functionaries of the Holocaust after WWII... 

Edited July 19, 2023 by Robert Montenegro

[David Josephs]

10 minutes ago, Robert Montenegro said:

It's like The Rolling Stones lyric in the song "Sympathy for the Devil."

"...I shouted out 'who killed the Kennedys?!' When after all, it was you and me..." 

Uhm, sorry Mick Jagger, no cigar, I wasn't up on the damn knoll, and neither were you, you sexy gyrating pixie of a man.

I'm hoping your use of metaphor and subsequent comment is part of that obtuse sarcasm I speak of in my other reply to you on the Day After thread.

"it was you and me" 

Behind The Meaning

In this track, Jagger introduces a socialite version of the devil, who claims the responsibility for a number of historical tragedies including the Hundred Years War, the Russian Revolution, World War II, and the Assassination of JFK.

The satan-centric lyrics got the band accused of devil worship—as did many rock bands in the ’60s and ’70s. Despite the lyrics, Jagger has claimed the song is more about the darker nature of man than celebrating the devil.

https://americansongwriter.com/behind-the-meaning-rolling-stones-sympathy-for-the-devil/#:~:text=Despite the lyrics%2C Jagger has,is quite an uplifting song.