Jump to content

3 Times


Recommended Posts

When looking at the various CT’s which are dealing with LHO and his past concerning that

he was prepared as the patsy based on all the circumstances, Russia, Fairp-Play activities and

possible connections to different agencies etc. it gives the impression of a long in advanced

planned assassination. If you consider the Harvey and Lee theory, it even boosts up the preparation time to a dimension that IMO is somehow doubtful.

When we take JFK last months or only his last weeks it looks to me as if there was almost a competition to kill him. Within a month there were three different attempts to kill JFK.

1)Abraham Bolden did report of a planned attempt on the 2nd of November in Chicago.

Thomas Arthur Vallee, a former marine who took this day off and travelled to Chicago with a M-1 and 3000 bullets, is being arrested but released the same day. The information was taken serious and JFK cancelled his trip to Chicago. Later Bolden, who wondered why his information was excluded from the WC, was arrested and had to spend a couple of years in prison, thanks to Lee Rankin.

2)On the morning of Nov. 9, 1963 a FBI informant, William August Somersett reports about his taped conversation with Joseph Adam Milteer, who told him about the plan to kill JFK in Miami at the 18th of November. According to the House Committee transcript, Milteer told Somersett that the killing of Kennedy "was in the working," that the president could be killed "from an office building with a high-powered rifle," that the rifle could be "disassembled" to get it into the building, and that "they will pick up somebody within hours afterward, if anything like that would happen just to throw the public off."

Again it was taken seriously and security actions were taken to put the risk to a minimum.

3)Finally we end up in Dallas Nov. 22.where President Kennedy gets killed.

As far as I know, neither information about the Milteer remarks apparently were passed on to Secret Service officials responsible for the Dallas trip nor the Chicago plans.

If we believe that the first two attempts, based on the available information we have, happened and can be considered as “real attempts” then we could ask the following questions:

a)Do we have to consider, that there were three different groups who had the same goal and one unfortunately was successful?

b)Or were these three groups controlled all by the same evil force?

c) If there were three diffrent groups, do we have three diffrent motives?

If there was a connection between these three attempts, why are there practically no links? Were those connections not worth further investigations, after/because LHO was arrested and killed?

What about these groups and people like Milteer who threatened the President? They were still around, could even travel to Dallas, did their dangerousness vanished after Kennedy’s death?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When looking at the various CT’s which are dealing with LHO and his past concerning that

he was prepared as the patsy based on all the circumstances, Russia, Fairp-Play activities and

possible connections to different agencies etc. it gives the impression of a long in advanced

planned assassination. If you consider the Harvey and Lee theory, it even boosts up the preparation time to a dimension that IMO is somehow doubtful.

When we take JFK last months or only his last weeks it looks to me as if there was almost a competition to kill him. Within a month there were three different attempts to kill JFK.

1)Abraham Bolden did report of a planned attempt on the 2nd of November in Chicago.

Thomas Arthur Vallee, a former marine who took this day off and travelled to Chicago with a M-1 and 3000 bullets, is being arrested but released the same day. The information was taken serious and JFK cancelled his trip to Chicago. Later Bolden, who wondered why his information was excluded from the WC, was arrested and had to spend a couple of years in prison, thanks to Lee Rankin.

2)On the morning of Nov. 9, 1963 a FBI informant, William August Somersett reports about his taped conversation with Joseph Adam Milteer, who told him about the plan to kill JFK in Miami at the 18th of November. According to the House Committee transcript, Milteer told Somersett that the killing of Kennedy "was in the working," that the president could be killed "from an office building with a high-powered rifle," that the rifle could be "disassembled" to get it into the building, and that "they will pick up somebody within hours afterward, if anything like that would happen just to throw the public off." 

Again it was taken seriously and security actions were taken to put the risk to a minimum.

3)Finally we end up in Dallas Nov. 22.where President Kennedy gets killed.

As far as I know, neither information about the Milteer remarks apparently were passed on to Secret Service officials responsible for the Dallas trip nor the Chicago plans.

If we believe that the first two attempts, based on the available information we have, happened and can be considered as “real attempts” then we could ask the following questions:

a)Do we have to consider, that there were three different groups who had the same goal and one unfortunately was successful?

b)Or were these three groups controlled all by the same evil force?

c) If there were three diffrent groups, do we have three diffrent motives?

If there was a connection between these three attempts, why are there practically no links? Were those connections not worth further investigations, after/because LHO was arrested and killed?

What about these groups and people like Milteer who threatened the President? They were still around, could even travel to Dallas, did their dangerousness vanished after Kennedy’s death?

Perhaps an added dimension can be : Why Dealey Plaza?

As I see it, from studying reports of the limo stopping, Kennedy getting out to shake hands, and separation from security, and in looking at other photos : there might have been better, more certain, places to kill the President.

Dealey Plaza was a very special place in the history of Texas, as is vividly described in 'Dealey Plaza, the Heart of Texas' web site. Not only is it the historic centre of Dallas but integral in the development of Texas. It housed at one point all the essential buildings of early commerce, plus is the site of the home of the founder and of the first official building, the Post Office.

The symbolism of Dealey Plaza as the place where 'the message' was sent from is arguably a significant factor in identifying the perpetrators.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The symbolism of Dealey Plaza as the place where 'the message' was sent from is arguably a significant factor in identifying the perpetrators.

Hi John,

it is interesting, because someone else mentioned that particular symbolism on a earlier subject. Hope you correct me if I'm wrong but did this symbolism, as you understand it today, have the same importance before the assassination or did it rather develop afterwards?

Is it really possible, that the place of the assassination played a role concerning its history to the plotters?

Maybe because I'm an European I don't get that point right.

George

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a European by birth, aussie by choice.

Gorge, Perhaps Tom or someone with a feel for the place at that time could comment on this?

From my reading though, it could rank with the burning of the Reichstadt? Or if that's too extreme perhaps if the French president was assassinated under the 'arc de Triumph' (sp)? The web site I mention goes into the history of Dealey Plaza, and concludes something like 'if Dallas could be considered the heart of Texas, then Dealey Plaza is the Heart of Dallas'. As you say, it would take a local to appreciate the significance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stephen Turner

a)Do we have to consider, that there were three different groups who had the same goal and one unfortunately was successful?

b)Or were these three groups controlled all by the same evil force?

c) If there were three diffrent groups, do we have three diffrent motives?

George, briefly.

a) No,all part of the same plan.

:blink: Absolutely.

c) No, JFK was becoming a major problem to powerful vested interest groups and so had to go. and the manor of his departure needed to be graphic in the extreme

Link to comment
Share on other sites

c) No, JFK was becoming a major problem to powerful vested interest groups and so had to go. and the manor of his departure needed to be graphic in the extreme

Stephen

which one of the powerful vested interest group would you favour? Of course, if you go down to the bottom they are finally all mingled-up with eachother and it is hard to tell who is who.

George

ps. stil got this myth problem Dealey Plaza..... :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Stephen Turner
c) No, JFK was becoming a major problem to powerful vested interest groups and so had to go. and the manor of his departure needed to be graphic in the extreme

Stephen

which one of the powerful vested interest group would you favour? Of course, if you go down to the bottom they are finally all mingled-up with eachother and it is hard to tell who is who.

George

ps. stil got this myth problem Dealey Plaza..... :blink:

Simply put, the rich and powerful, those that walk between the raindrops,on who's empire the sun truly never sets. Imagine what it takes to order the assassination of a President, and KNOW 1 it will happen, and 2, you will get away with it, then you understand what we are dealing with... Steve.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm puzzled by the Chicago plot. It looks like Vallee was going to be the patsy (if he was going to be one of the real shooters, we can forget about the conspirators going after the best shots available), but Vallee had no pro-Castro legend. If the assassination was to be blamed on Castro (as I believe it was), and the same people were behind the November plots, how were they going to blame Vallee on Castro?

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps an added dimension can be : Why Dealey Plaza?

As I see it, from studying reports of the limo stopping, Kennedy getting out to shake hands, and separation from security, and in looking at  other photos : there might have been better, more certain, places to kill the President.

Dealey Plaza was a very special place in the history of Texas, as is vividly described in 'Dealey Plaza, the Heart of Texas' web site. Not only is it the historic centre of Dallas but integral in the development of Texas. It housed at one point all the essential buildings of early commerce, plus is the site of the home of the founder and of the first official building, the Post Office.

The symbolism of Dealey Plaza as the place where 'the message' was sent from is arguably a significant factor in identifying the perpetrators.

Hi, John, George, and Stephen

The historical significance of Dealey Plaza might have importance to the assassins but I should think that overriding this would be that logistical advantages would be paramount for the success of the operation. Thus, on the practical level, Dealey Plaza, as an intersection of various streets, offers numerous escape routes. Thus it might be more advantageous than attempting the assassination at the airport, say, where the assassin(s) escape route(s) would be more limited. Also as we have been discussing, Dealey Plaza would seem to offer a number of places to place a sniper that other areas might not. That is, you could hit the motorcade from front, rear, and both sides. As per our conversation, it's possible that at least two and perhaps three or four or more sniper's positions were used to engage Kennedy in an effective crossfire.

Best regards

Chris George

Edited by Christopher T. George
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps an added dimension can be : Why Dealey Plaza?

As I see it, from studying reports of the limo stopping, Kennedy getting out to shake hands, and separation from security, and in looking at  other photos : there might have been better, more certain, places to kill the President.

Dealey Plaza was a very special place in the history of Texas, as is vividly described in 'Dealey Plaza, the Heart of Texas' web site. Not only is it the historic centre of Dallas but integral in the development of Texas. It housed at one point all the essential buildings of early commerce, plus is the site of the home of the founder and of the first official building, the Post Office.

The symbolism of Dealey Plaza as the place where 'the message' was sent from is arguably a significant factor in identifying the perpetrators.

Hi, John, George, and Stephen

The historical significance of Dealey Plaza might have importance to the assassins but I should think that overriding this would be that logistical advantages would be paramount for the success of the operation. Thus, on the practical level, Dealey Plaza, as an intersection of various streets, offers numerous escape routes. Thus it might be more advantageous than attempting the assassination at the airport, say, where the assassin(s) escape route(s) would be more limited. Also as we have been discussing, Dealey Plaza would seem to offer a number of places to place a sniper that other areas might not. That is, you could hit the motorcade from front, rear, and both sides. As per our conversation, it's possible that at least two and perhaps three or four or more sniper's positions were used to engage Kennedy in an effective crossfire.

Best regards

Chris George

If recalled, LHO was offered a job as a "baggage handler" at the airport, however, the TSDB position had been achieved at that time.

The baggage handler was offered through the Texas Unemployment Agency.

Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

George

If you want to take "a long in advanced planned assassination" and Oswald the "patsy" to the extreme one could begin with his letter to the Socialist Party in 1957. Since the likes of Angleton, Helms and Dulles were reading mail sent to "communist" organizations in New York, is it possible that Oswald began his life as a "patsy" at that time?

Fast forward to 1963 and we find that information about Oswald was being forwarded to the office of Richard Helms in the months leading up to the assassiantion. The question for me is, did the monitoring of Oswald only begin after he returned from the Soviet Union or did it begin in 1957 with the the above mentioned "mail operation?"

Then the "patsy" statement itself. It seems Oswald was aware of the fact that he was a "patsy" when he made the statement, "They're taking me in because of the fact that I lived in the Soviet Union. I'm only a patsy." Most critics wish to use only the last four words of this statement while Oswald in fact used the sentence about Russia to preface his "patsy" statement. If true, according to Oswald, his life as a "patsy" began in 1959, before Kennedy was elected, making the case for a "patsy" much more complicated than a simple "set-up" on November 22.

How would he know he was the "patsy" unless he in fact had reason to believe he was? This leads us to speculate that Oswald was or had been in fact used by some group/organization/agency in the past. One does not have to look to deeply to realize that his trip to Russia, his activities while a Marine radar operator, his ease of movement/entry into the Soviet Union, etc., etc. mark Oswald as more that just an average "Joe Lunchbox." But if he was this type of "patsy" would it also provide a plausible motive for a potential assassin?

An assassination attempt on the life of Edwin Walker seven months before the assassination of JFK must come into play as well when we speak of Oswald the "patsy." Was this part of the attempt to set Oswald up as a "patsy?" But then why would a future Warren Commissioner, John J. McCloy, write a letter to Edwin Walker (distancing himself from Walker) five months before the assination of JFK and two months after the attempt on the life of Walker? Was this an attempt to protect a man (McCloy) who would be called upon to cover up the real story of the assassination, or to set McCloy up as well? This seems very strange to me, but I believe more than just a coincidence. Would McCloy have reason to fear being associated with Walker after an attempt had been made on Walker's life? Why?

In the "patsy" scenerio the most difficult area for me to accept is the part played by the attempt on the life of Edwin Walker. It seems that it only complicates the LN theory when you look at it in depth, which most researchers refuse to do.

Walker does a telephone interview with a German magizine (which calls him at exactly 7:00 AM) from a hotel room in Shreveport, LA. (Walker lives in Dallas) This same magazine reports that Oswald is the man who shot at Walker seven months before the assassination in their next issue, the Wednesday following the assassiantion of JFK (before the FBI is onto this lead). By the time Walker is questioned by the FBI he denies providing this information to the Germans and Oswald (if he would have talked about Walker) is long sense dead.

The Warren Commission neglected to go into Walker's military backround with the statement, "I don't think we have to indicate a great deal of your background for the record, since I think we all know who you are..." Was there a reason for this omission?

Walker was traveling in Europe at the same time Oswald goes from London to Helsinki. The Warren Commission can not identify the flight Oswald traveled on although passenger lists were available at the time. Why? If Walker was on one of those planes the "patsy" statement becomes even more important. But once again this is long before Kennedy is even elected.

Walker commanded elite forces during WWII and trained Korean War era Rangers that produced a multitude of future CIA, etc. type personel. His career in intelligence seems clear when examined closely.

Walker had a close relationship with Maxwell Taylor that began in 1927. Taylor's rise to the position of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is only achieved after he retires as Chief of Staff of the Army and writes "The Uncertain Trumpet," a book critical of the Eisenhower administration, and Kennedy is elected President. Without Kennedy's election Taylor the General, "just fades away."

Did the shoot down of Francis Gary Powers on May 1, 1960 which led to the failure of the Paris Peace Summit scheduled for May 15th help JFK get elected? Did Oswald play a roll in the U-2 incident that he would later regret (see his speech at Spring Hill College)?

Did Maxwell Taylor call upon his trusted friend, Edwin Walker, to "help" Oswald into Russia?

Why wasn't Hosty's November 4th note (containing the information about where Oswald was working) given a CE number? Is it a coincidence that the route past where Oswald was working was decided in Washington about a week after the Hosty note was sent to the State Dept. and the FBI? Is it a coincidence that previous Hosty notes were forwarded to the office of Richared Helms? Should we believe that the November 4th note was not forwarded to the office of Richard Helms?

Did Maxwell Taylor have imput into the route selection for the Dallas trip through General Chester Clifton, Jr, the military aide to Kennedy apointed by Taylor (Clifton was also in the motorcade on Nov. 22)?

As Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is it possible that Taylor would have access to information about a potential "patsy" named Lee Harvey Oswald if in fact Oswald had been used (in some way) by US intelligence? Is it two far fetched to believe that Taylor would be aware of the fact that Walker (Taylor's former student and go to man in Korea, Taiwan and Littlerock) had been shot at in April of 1963? And that Oswald was (unknown to Walker) in Dallas at the time?

Was Oswald set up? Starting when?

Jim Root

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest John Gillespie

Jim wrote:

"Fast forward to 1963 and we find that information about Oswald was being forwarded to the office of Richard Helms in the months leading up to the assassiantion. The question for me is, did the monitoring of Oswald only begin after he returned from the Soviet Union or did it begin in 1957 with the the above mentioned "mail operation?""

Jim,

Dick Russell in "The Man Who Knew Too Much" asserts that Oswald was being monitored - indeed, handled - during his time in Atsugi. I know this, that an Intelligence Summary Report was written by an Intelligence Coordinator (a MIlitary Intelligence admin support position for those having received an eight week course at the US Military Intelligence School at, that time, Ft. Holabird, MD) in SEPTEMBER 1962 at a M.I. Battalion HQ in an Asian country other than Japan! During his briefing, the Coordinator was told that "The White House has an interest in this." This was never elaborated upon by the Officer doing the briefing and, of course, the Coordinator didn't ask. But, the sheep dipping appears already to have been in progress.

P.S. This was before my time.

I enjoy your postings,

Regards, JAG

Edited by John Gillespie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems Oswald was aware of the fact that he was a "patsy" when he made the statement, "They're taking me in because of the fact that I lived in the Soviet Union. I'm only a patsy." Most critics wish to use only the last four words of this statement while Oswald in fact used the sentence about Russia to preface his "patsy" statement.  If true, according to Oswald, his life as a "patsy" began in 1959, before Kennedy was elected, making the case for a "patsy" much more complicated than a simple "set-up" on November 22.

Jim,

I have a different take on Oswald's "patsy" statement than you do. Yes, he had to know he was a patsy at that time, but he also must have had hope that he would not be completely abandoned, that somehow his co-conspirators or some benefactor would help him out of this predicament. (Hence his attempted call from jail to the mysterious John Hurt, possibly the Hurt you've been researching.)

I think he was just blowing smoke with his patsy statement. The "they" whom he was accusing of setting him up was the DPD, not his handlers. He was simply saying the DPD was on the spot and needed a patsy in a hurry, so they arrested him because they knew he had lived in Russia.

Oswald was not going to accuse his handlers of setting him up or of anything else at that point because they were the only people who could help him, as slim as that chance might be.

Ron

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest John Gillespie

Jim,

I have a different take on Oswald's "patsy" statement than you do. Yes, he had to know he was a patsy at that time, but he also must have had hope that he would not be completely abandoned, that somehow his co-conspirators or some benefactor would help him out of this predicament. (Hence his attempted call from jail to the mysterious John Hurt, possibly the Hurt you've been researching.)

I think he was just blowing smoke with his patsy statement. The "they" whom he was accusing of setting him up was the DPD, not his handlers. He was simply saying the DPD was on the spot and needed a patsy in a hurry, so they arrested him because they knew he had lived in Russia.

Oswald was not going to accuse his handlers of setting him up or of anything else at that point because they were the only people who could help him, as slim as that chance might be.

Ron

Ron,

I tend to believe that theory because of the flip manner in which Oswald said it, though he certainly was being hurried along. I think it was his way of simply announcing his innocence based on his conclusion that the DPD really had nothing that would stand up.

As for John Hurt, the apparent intended recipient of "The Raleigh Call," there are a number of good links, among them:

http://indyweek.com/durham/2003-11-19/porch.html

and

http://www.groverproctor.us/jfk/jfk-affidavit.html

I CAN attest that so many of LHO's actions immediately following the assassination, i.e., taking the cab past his residence and walking back, ducking into the theater and this purported telephone call attempt are all Intelligence Agent 101 training. I want to add that he remains as one of the truly greatest Agents of all and, as Garrison said, one of the great patriots.

Regards Ron,

JAG

Edited by John Gillespie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

George

If you want to take "a long in advanced planned assassination" and Oswald the "patsy" to the extreme one could begin with his letter to the Socialist Party in 1957.  Since the likes of Angleton, Helms and Dulles were reading mail sent to "communist" organizations in New York, is it possible that Oswald began his life as a "patsy" at that time?

Fast forward to 1963 and we find that information about Oswald was being forwarded to the office of Richard Helms in the months leading up to the assassiantion.  The question for me is, did the monitoring of Oswald only begin after he returned from the Soviet Union or did it begin in 1957 with the the above mentioned "mail operation?"

Then the "patsy" statement itself.  It seems Oswald was aware of the fact that he was a "patsy" when he made the statement, "They're taking me in because of the fact that I lived in the Soviet Union. I'm only a patsy." Most critics wish to use only the last four words of this statement while Oswald in fact used the sentence about Russia to preface his "patsy" statement.  If true, according to Oswald, his life as a "patsy" began in 1959, before Kennedy was elected, making the case for a "patsy" much more complicated than a simple "set-up" on November 22.

How would he know he was the "patsy" unless he in fact had reason to believe he was?  This leads us to speculate that Oswald was or had been in fact used by some group/organization/agency in the past.  One does not have to look to deeply to realize that his trip to Russia, his activities while a Marine radar operator, his ease of movement/entry  into the Soviet Union, etc., etc. mark Oswald as more that just an average "Joe Lunchbox."  But if he was this type of "patsy" would it also provide a plausible motive for a potential assassin?

An assassination attempt on the life of Edwin Walker seven months before the assassination of JFK must come into play as well when we speak of Oswald the "patsy."  Was this part of the attempt to set Oswald up as a "patsy?"  But then why would a future Warren Commissioner, John J. McCloy, write a letter to Edwin Walker (distancing himself from Walker) five months before the assination of JFK and two months after the attempt on the life of Walker?  Was this an attempt to protect a man (McCloy) who would be called upon to cover up the real story of the assassination, or to set McCloy up as well?  This seems very strange to me, but I believe more than just a coincidence.  Would McCloy have reason to fear being associated with Walker after an attempt had been made on Walker's life?  Why?

In the "patsy" scenerio the most difficult area for me to accept is the part played by the attempt on the life of Edwin Walker.  It seems that it only complicates the LN theory when you look at it in depth, which most researchers refuse to do.

Walker does a telephone interview with a German magizine (which calls him at exactly 7:00 AM) from a hotel room in Shreveport, LA. (Walker lives in Dallas)  This same magazine reports that Oswald is the man who shot at Walker seven months before the assassination in their next issue, the Wednesday following the assassiantion of JFK (before the FBI is onto this lead).  By the time Walker is questioned by the FBI he denies providing this information to the Germans and Oswald (if he would have talked about Walker) is long sense dead.

The Warren Commission neglected to go into Walker's military backround with the statement,  "I don't think we have to indicate a great deal of your background for the record, since I think we all know who you are..."  Was there a reason for this omission?

Walker was traveling in Europe at the same time Oswald goes from London to Helsinki.  The Warren Commission can not identify the flight Oswald traveled on although passenger lists were available at the time.  Why?  If Walker was on one of those planes the "patsy" statement becomes even more important. But once again this is long before Kennedy is even elected.

Walker commanded elite forces during WWII and trained Korean War era Rangers that produced a multitude of future CIA, etc. type personel.  His career in intelligence seems clear when examined closely.

Walker had a close relationship with Maxwell Taylor that began in 1927.  Taylor's rise to the position of Chairman of the Joint Chiefs is only achieved after he retires as Chief of Staff of the Army and writes "The Uncertain Trumpet," a book critical of the Eisenhower administration, and Kennedy is elected President.  Without Kennedy's election Taylor the General, "just fades away."

Did the shoot down of Francis Gary Powers on May 1, 1960 which led to the failure of the Paris Peace Summit scheduled for May 15th help JFK get elected?  Did Oswald play a roll in the U-2 incident that he would later regret (see his speech at Spring Hill College)?

Did Maxwell Taylor call upon his trusted friend, Edwin Walker, to "help" Oswald into Russia?

Why wasn't Hosty's November 4th note (containing the information about where Oswald was working) given a CE number?  Is it a coincidence that the route past where Oswald was working was decided in Washington about a week after the Hosty note was sent to the State Dept. and the FBI?  Is it a coincidence that previous Hosty notes were forwarded to the office of Richared Helms?  Should we believe that the November 4th note was not forwarded to the office of Richard Helms?

Did Maxwell Taylor have imput into the route selection for the Dallas trip through General Chester Clifton, Jr, the military aide to Kennedy apointed by Taylor (Clifton was also in the motorcade on Nov. 22)?

As Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, is it possible that Taylor would have access to information about a potential "patsy" named Lee Harvey Oswald if in fact Oswald had been used (in some way) by US intelligence?  Is it two far fetched to believe that Taylor would be aware of the fact that Walker (Taylor's former student and go to man in Korea, Taiwan and Littlerock) had been shot at in April of 1963?  And that Oswald was (unknown to Walker) in Dallas at the time?

Was Oswald set up?  Starting when?

Jim Root

Jim, a couple of other factors to consider perhaps, though I haven't reasoned through how they fit in, are :

the Mail Opening operations had been going on since at least late '52. There are reports of it going on in San Francisco and New Orleans as well. As it was a highly secret and illegal operation, it probably went on in many places, Dallas for example (Harry D Holmes, FBI informant, Postal Insepctor, Dallas Post Ofiice Dealey Plaza.) . Databases were built as well from just adresses and names on enevelopes where the recipient was mailed a form to fill out asking if they would accept mail from such and such a place.

Helms was intimately involved and no doubt was kept informed. JE Day, the Postmaster General appointed by Kennedy who later in July 63 resigned 'over differences' with Kennedy, stated under oath that Roosevelt, Dulles and Helms came to him three weeks after starting work as Postmaster General to brief him in this, in Helms words , 'very secret' operation. Helms provided a statement that contradicted Days assertion that he didn't 'want to know' and in fact was thoroughly briefed.The postal Inspection Service was under him and the postal inspectors under the head of the Postal Inspection Service. Three steps away from Helms was Holmes. Holmes - FBI > etc. Holmes -> Day, Helms, Dulles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...