Scenario

[Tim Gratz]

Pat wrote:

Tim, your scenario is fairly solid. I do think if you read a little more on Trafficante you'll see that the man would never take orders from Castro; it's possible he told Castro of his plans, however, and expected favors in return. I also believe that the cover-up by LBJ was not just a coincidence.

Pat, you may very well be correct about this. I also know that after the assassination either Trafficante or Marcello was heard to remark, to the effect, now Hoffa owes us big time.

I also think your post is correct that the mafia was a powerful organization which was able to succcessfully hide from public view much of its criminal enterprise as well as the public corruption on which it thrived.

I believe it fair to say that the scenario I suggested is similar to one subscribed to by James Richards, except he believes the CIA (Morales I believe) brought Rosselli into the plot, whereas I believe that IF renegade CIA agents were involved, they were probably recruited by Rosselli and that the plot was conceived by the Mafia.

I still believe Castro was involved but my scenario "works" with or without Cuban involvement.

This scenario is very similar to the one set forth by historian Michael Kurtz. He suggests the involvement of Castro, Trafficante, Rosselli and Harvey rather than Morales. If CIA agents were involved I suspect Rosselli recruited them (probably over drinks) and I suspect he did so not because the plot really needed their expertise but to ensure a cover-up.

And Pat I am sure you know this but for everyone else's benefit, Johnny Rosselli had a very good friend in a lobbyist and power-broker named Fred Black. Black happened to be LBJ's neighbor. This is covered in Larry's book. So good neighbor Black could have been used to convey a "message" to LBJ, either before or after the assassination.

Edited June 25, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[Al Carrier]

Tim,

I find the mafia and anti-Castro militant theories inconceivable because I was once on the inside of such things. When it is time to play hardball, the government does not go with a second string that are radical and/or in it for their own reasons. They utilize persons they have trained and can control. They carefully select these individuals at the outset of their careers and nurture them until they services are required. They may go their entire career without being utilized and often when they are, they cease to exist shortly after, unless they have taken out insurance by means of holding onto documentation and hiding it away in order to keep their existance. Shooting is only a part in such an operation. Ability to infiltrate, eliminate and extricate themselves from the show is a specialty. All the while they are writing their own ending without realizing it.

And Pat,

Rosselli was nothing more than a pimp to the mafia and the government. Col. Rosselli as he has been referred to through the Cuban Ops is as laughable as the Cuban Ops was in itself. The mafia was as strong as certain factions of the government allowed it to be for their own gain. Narcotics trafficing and money laundering was done through the boogey man mafia families in order to assist in paying for covert operations and laying blame in later on the same to take the heat off the true operatives.

There are many individuals out there that I would not want coming after me. The mafia hit men would be my least worries.

If you think I am blowing smoke here, then there isn't a whole lot I can say to change your mind on this forum. You might want to get in touch with Tosh Plumlee in regards to the true boogey men that I am referring to.

Al

[Tim Gratz]

Al wrote:

I find the mafia and anti-Castro militant theories inconceivable because I was once on the inside of such things. When it is time to play hardball, the government does not go with a second string that are radical and/or in it for their own reasons. They utilize persons they have trained and can control.

Al, does this not pre-suppose a "government" hit?

Of course my scenario assumes the genus of the plot was either the Mafia or renegade CIA agents, not some invisible government.

So if you are arguing that IF some invisible government force orchestrated the assassination it would not employ the people in my scenario, you are PERHAPS right. Certainly it is probable a "government" plot would not employ Ruby (as you suggest). Therefore, Ruby's involvement tends to disprove your theory, does it not?

There is, I respectfully submit, no evidence to support your premise who initiated the plot. I think the scenario I outlined above effectively reconciles the available evidence re who participated in the plot.

And by the way, if I had the mafia after me, I'd worry about it! Gee, one only has to look at the number of mafioso who met violent deaths to know that prudence would suggest increasing one's life insurance if the mafia is after you!

Edited June 25, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[Al Carrier]

Al wrote:

I find the mafia and anti-Castro militant theories inconceivable because I was once on the inside of such things. When it is time to play hardball, the government does not go with a second string that are radical and/or in it for their own reasons. They utilize persons they have trained and can control.

Al, does this not pre-suppose a "government" hit?

Of course my scenario assumes the genus of the plot was either the Mafia or renegade CIA agents, not some invisible government.

So if you are arguing that IF some invisible government force orchestrated the assassination it would not employ the people in my scenario, you are PERHAPS right.  Certainly it is probable a "government" plot would not employ Ruby (as you suggest).  Therefore, Ruby's involvement tends to disprove your theory, does it not? 

There is, I respectfully submit, no evidence to support your premise who initiated the plot.  I think the scenario I outlined above effectively reconciles the available evidence re who participated in the plot.

And by the way, if I had the mafia after me, I'd worry about it!  Gee, one only has to look at the number of mafioso who met violent deaths to know that prudence would suggest increasing one's life insurance if the mafia is after you!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tim,

First of all, the term "renegade CIA Agents" is rediculous. It is a term that has been used in this investigation for the past forty years to get the monkey off the back of the government. "shadow or invisible government" is also a term that should be utilized in fictional books and not for investigative purposes. Compartmentalization is the key to truely well planned covert operations and this compartmentalization is used an excuse to eliminate blame for whatever is proven to be true.

To believe a group of Sicilian thugs or agitated refugees were utilized in this is challenged by simply showing that this operation did not end in a goat screw attempt. It succeeded and has been hidden for the past forty-two years with only speculation flying in all directions. Some of the speculation has some merit and is realistic, while most is in left field and should be made into a James Bond fiction.

Your proof is making connections to events that are as far a stretch as it comes to what we see in this assassination. For those viewing this thread, keep in mind that Kennedy's protectors were aware of the two planned hits earlier in the month of November '63 and still were powerless to prevent the event from taking place in DP. They were able to quickly override the facts and cover it up. If this was the mafia or anti-Castro Cubans or combination of both, would we not hesitate to at least eliminate the players and planners? If it was Castro's Cuba, would it not be nothing more than a uninhabital stretch of land in the Carribean?

Sorry Tim, but I was doctrinated into the real world through fear and forced performance at the age of 18. I have since spent 22 years in law enforcement and see the world in a very clear and frightening light.

Al

[Tim Gratz]

Al, so Ruby was not involved in the plot?

[Shanet Clark]

Al wrote:

I find the mafia and anti-Castro militant theories inconceivable because I was once on the inside of such things. When it is time to play hardball, the government does not go with a second string that are radical and/or in it for their own reasons. They utilize persons they have trained and can control.

Al, does this not pre-suppose a "government" hit?

Of course my scenario assumes the genus of the plot was either the Mafia or renegade CIA agents, not some invisible government.

So if you are arguing that IF some invisible government force orchestrated the assassination it would not employ the people in my scenario, you are PERHAPS right.  Certainly it is probable a "government" plot would not employ Ruby (as you suggest).  Therefore, Ruby's involvement tends to disprove your theory, does it not? 

There is, I respectfully submit, no evidence to support your premise who initiated the plot.  I think the scenario I outlined above effectively reconciles the available evidence re who participated in the plot.

And by the way, if I had the mafia after me, I'd worry about it!  Gee, one only has to look at the number of mafioso who met violent deaths to know that prudence would suggest increasing one's life insurance if the mafia is after you!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tim,

First of all, the term "renegade CIA Agents" is rediculous. It is a term that has been used in this investigation for the past forty years to get the monkey off the back of the government. "shadow or invisible government" is also a term that should be utilized in fictional books and not for investigative purposes. Compartmentalization is the key to truely well planned covert operations and this compartmentalization is used an excuse to eliminate blame for whatever is proven to be true.

To believe a group of Sicilian thugs or agitated refugees were utilized in this is challenged by simply showing that this operation did not end in a goat screw attempt. It succeeded and has been hidden for the past forty-two years with only speculation flying in all directions. Some of the speculation has some merit and is realistic, while most is in left field and should be made into a James Bond fiction.

Your proof is making connections to events that are as far a stretch as it comes to what we see in this assassination. For those viewing this thread, keep in mind that Kennedy's protectors were aware of the two planned hits earlier in the month of November '63 and still were powerless to prevent the event from taking place in DP. They were able to quickly override the facts and cover it up. If this was the mafia or anti-Castro Cubans or combination of both, would we not hesitate to at least eliminate the players and planners? If it was Castro's Cuba, would it not be nothing more than a uninhabital stretch of land in the Carribean?

Sorry Tim, but I was doctrinated into the real world through fear and forced performance at the age of 18. I have since spent 22 years in law enforcement and see the world in a very clear and frightening light.

Al

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Great point, Al.

Some are still actively denying the role of these fascists,

even here on the FORUM.

[Al Carrier]

Al, so Ruby was not involved in the plot?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tim,

Let me answer your question with a question. Would you utilize the likes of Jack Ruby for such a plot?

Isn't it more likely the persons in place to cover up whatever was to go down utilized him to silence the patsy due to his connections with the DPD and his access to the building? A promise to get him out from under the IRS leans would go along way to keep his silence, especially since he really wouldn't have had to know anything, other than to silence the patsy.

Al

[Tim Gratz]

Al, my point was that if you contend the military or whoever you believe orchestated the assassination would not use mafioso as shooters why would they use a minor mobster like Ruby for the cover-up? Certainly if the plotters were military there wer other mways they had to "silence the patsy".

[Al Carrier]

Al, my point was that if you contend the military or whoever you believe orchestated the assassination would not use mafioso as shooters why would they use a minor mobster like Ruby for the cover-up?  Certainly if the plotters were military there wer other mways they had to "silence the patsy".

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Tim,

If you would read my previous posts here and and on Lancer, you would see clearly that I do not believe that those who set up the assassination of JFK were part of the cover-up afterwords. The plotters had one goal in mind while those who were in place after the November 1 and 18 plots were on the ready to if not stop the asssassination, were there to cover-up their dificiency in stopping it and to hide who was behind it. An intelligence breakdown allowed the plotters to succeed, but the investigators were quick to hide the fact that JFK was killed by elements of his own government.

Al