Posting Copies Declassified CIA Documents

[Robert Howard]

These are reproductions of the "Family Jewels Documents" that according to the CIA are related to the CIA. I did not have the capability to scan the documents so instead of copies of the originals these documents are re-written versions of the originals, I extensively checked them against the originals, and they are completely accurate. Note: The CIA is still in the redaction business. Robert Howard

[Robert Howard]

These are reproductions of the "Family Jewels Documents" that according to the CIA are related to the CIA. I did not have the capability to scan the documents so instead of copies of the originals these documents are re-written versions of the originals, I extensively checked them against the originals, and they are completely accurate. Note: The CIA is still in the redaction business. Robert Howard

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Sorry the above should read "that according to the CIA are related to the JFK Assassination." Apologies

[Pat Speer]

Thanks, Robert. These are great. It's interesting to see how much is still redacted in the Elder document, even after the Church Committee. I'm wondering if this is because the redacted items were not interpreted to have any possible connection to the assassination, and were therefore excluded from the JFK records act. After all, if I'm not mistaken, the HSCA records released by the ARRB redact all detailed references to the MLK investigation. If that isn't the case, of course, then one can only conclude there's a whole lot of secrets the taxpayers are unworthy of knowing. At least in the eyes of Big Brother.

[Robert Howard]

Thanks, Robert.  These are great.  It's interesting to see how much is still redacted in the Elder document, even after the Church Committee.  I'm wondering if this is because the redacted items were not interpreted to have any possible connection to the assassination, and were therefore excluded from the JFK records act.  After all, if I'm not mistaken, the HSCA records released by the ARRB redact all detailed references to the MLK investigation.  If that isn't the case, of course, then one can only conclude there's a whole lot of secrets the taxpayers are unworthy of knowing.  At least in the eyes of Big Brother.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thank's Pat. There were three elements to these documents that were illuminating for me. The First is how there was a direct link between Roselli and the CIA with regard to the Castrol assassination plots, I didn't know how much of that was speculative and how much was proven until I saw these documents. I wish that it wasn't so problematic in discovering how much validity there is to the speculation that the JFK assassination was "utilizing the parties that were supposed to kill Castro to kill Kennedy. I personally do not believe that Castro OR Cuban intelligence was responsible for the assassination, because if they were I believe the US would have invaded Cuba, which is what so many wanted to do in the first place, both in and out of the government. Second, it appears that Sidney Gottleib and the CIA were all over the Patrice Lumumba assassination even if they didn't actually do it. Seeing Gottlieb and Lumumba mentioned by the CIA on one of their own documents was very enlightening. Third and I think potentially the most significant is the memo from Elder to DCI William Colby regarding Lucien Conein and the "large amount of money" he was given from the CIA as he was going to the Joint General Staff meeting on November 1, 1963. I know that there is a photograph of an individual in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963 who some researchers/people think is Conein, I haven't passed judgement, but most accounts of the Diem Coup have Conein practically side by side with the conspirators getting ready to off the Diem brothers, and that he was practically giving a play by play of this to his superiors. It is hard for me to think that he flew back to the US went to Dallas and was in on the Kennedy assassination, it is much easier to think the funds Elder mentioned were possibly to finance the S. Vietnamese General's coup. Also the portion where Elder is discussing a CIA proposal by Angleton and Helms to increase intelligence gathering at the Soviet Embassy "in this country" that the CIA was planning to "redacted" in an aim towards both "greatly increased intelligence collection" and "greatly increased CIA representation in the Moscow Embassy" as part of a program of "selected exposure of KGB activities and counteractions against the Soviet intel service." This left me wondering if "this country" might be Mexico and the items mentioned might be references to the mysterious figure allegedly known as "Saul" who was photographed outside both the Soviet and Cuban Embassy there. The reason I thought about that was Elder's reference to the quote "A third which assumes a new significance today." Isn't it a nearly unanimous belief among researchers that the key to understanding the assassination depends on Oswald's Mexico City trip? Not to mention that Angleton went to snatch Win Scott's memoirs.

[Tim Gratz]

Great stuff here, Robert! Great work indeed!

Re whether Castro (or his surrogate) "did it", I think that if he did it was with the cooperation of Trafficante and that not even every team involved would have known that Castro was a sponsor. I do not want to hijack this thread but my belief that Cuba was involved is based on: (1) Castro's clear motive ("self defense"); (2) Castro's Sept 7th threat which was made the same day Cubela reapproached the CIA; (3) Cubela's apparent association with Cubela; (4) the possible presence of DGI agents in Dealey Plaza; (4) the rumored association between Trafficante and Castro; and (5) the opinions of Angleton (since I think he was right about many things, another minority opinion).

Respectfully, I think it is clear both the FBI and CIA were instructed not to investigate possible foreign involvement. That was indeed LBJ's rationale to Earl Warrren to justify the cover-up. The people who wanted to investigate foreign involvement were put down.

Of course, if an adequate contemporaneous investigation had been done it is at least possible that foreign involvement could have been proven or disproven.

As I said on another thread, I now suspect (and all it is is a hunch) that Marcello's associate Halfen advised LBJ of the planned assassination the evening of November 21st and ordered him to orchestrate the cover-up. But again, if there was foreign involvement, I doubt Trafficante even shared that with his "associates" Rosselli and Marcello.

I think the "war scenario" was given to LBJ but I also think he readily accepted it because he certainly did not want to be in office when the events might lead inexorably (by his analysis) to a cataclysmic nuclear exchange.

That was my response to the point you raised but I want to reiterate my thanks for your hard work. I look forward to reviewing the documents.

[Pat Speer]

Robert, I thought the same thing about the Elder reference to Conein. A transfer of money on the same day as a coup? Sounds like a payoff to me...

Another interesting bit is on the 8 page Rosselli document. It says that Maheu talked to O'Connell on November 17 and told them that Rosselli was gonna talk if they didn't prevent his deportation. It says the CIA told Maheu on the 18th that they weren't gonna intervene and that he respoonded by saying he wasn't concerned about any negative publicity that would result. What's intriguing to me about this is that Maheu leaves this out of his book. He makes it sound like he had nothing to do with Rosselli's blackmailing the CIA, when in fact he was the delivery boy for the threat. This makes me wonder if he wasn't a party to the threat. After all, Rosselli could have used Harvey to get the CIA a message, or Edward Morgan, as Morgan was Rosselli's attorney as well as Maheu's. But no, it's Maheu, who supposedly had washed his hands of Rosselli a few years before, after Rosselli asked him to arrange for Howard Hughes to pay his legal fees, claiming "you guys owe me." Hmmm. Why would Rosselli think Hughes owed him anything?

Also intriguing is the timing of this incident. On November 18 1970, Maheu tells the CIA he is unconcerned with the negative publicity he is bound to receive from being a cut-out for political assassinations. He says nothing of the damage this could do to his employer Howard Hughes, for whom he is the public face. And then less than a week later Hughes, who hasn't left his room for four years, sneaks out of his own hotel and flies to the Bahamas, firing Maheu in the process. When finally asked about this by the press, Hughes says that Maheu was a crook who'd robbed him blind, and implies Maheu's loyalty was with the mobsters, and not with Hughes. I take from this that Hughes was told of Maheu's meeting with the CIA, possibly even by Nixon himself, who'd planted General Cushman in the CIA to keep tabs on what was going on. Nixon may have warned Hughes that Maheu was in the middle of this mess, and that to protect himself from being subpoenaed he should immediately leave the country. This isn't as far-fetched as one might think. Maheu admits he told Hughes of the Castro plots; if Hughes had stayed in the U.S. he almost certainly would have been called before the Church Committee.

This raises the possibility in my mind that Hughes left the country not only because he dreaded the possible publicity, but because he knew something he wasn't supposed to know about and didn't want to talk about. I know it's as out there as Tim with his Castro theory, but I'm constantly dancing with the possibilty that Hughes had something to do with the assassination. The timing of Maheu's talks with the CIA added fuel to this fire.

[Tim Gratz]

I hate to sound repetitious, but another great post, Pat.

I suggest Hughes may very well have known something about the assassination making it important for him to get out of the country but it does not necessarily mean he was involved or even had preknowledge of it.

But, if you are right that Hughes knew something about the assassination, that might also explain a Watergate burglary connection? (O'Brien's former association with Hughes.)

"The Aviator" stopped too soon!

I have been having trouble pulling up the documents! Has anyone else?

Edited August 17, 2005 by Tim Gratz

[Robert Howard]

I hate to sound repetitious, but another great post, Pat.

I suggest Hughes may very well have known something about the assassination making it important for him to get out of the country but it does not necessarily mean he was involved or even had preknowledge of it.

But, if you are right that Hughes knew something about the assassination, that might also explain a Watergate burglary connection? (O'Brien's former association with Hughes.)

"The Aviator" stopped too soon!

<span style='color:green'>I have been having trouble pulling up the documents! Has anyone else?</span>

I never quite figured out how something like this could recieve such little scrutiny on the vaunted JFK Debate section of the Education Forum. I guess Pat and Tim were the only ones who thought it was interesting?

[James Richards]

Robert,

I can't get that original attachment you posted to download. Is there anything specific I should be doing?

James

[Robert Howard]

Robert,

I can't get that original attachment you posted to download. Is there anything specific I should be doing?

James

If you have right clicked and saved target/link and nothing happened, I do not know what to tell you. I tried it moments ago, and it still works. The only thing I can think of is if you're computer has no available memory, [the document is 17 pages] that might account for it, but I seriously doubt that is the case. Also a word of explanation about these papers, I acquired them under FOIA about a week or less before I posted this thread on the Forum. The original CIA Family Jewels were some 854 pages, if I recall correctly, BUT there supposedly were only 17 pages which related to the JFK Assassination, if you believe that you have more faith in our government's ability for candor than I ever will. Also, my perception is that "plausible deniability" may have given some leeway within the Agency to work around some unpleasant revelations to be given the then, DCIA......but that is just my opinion.

I was pretty excited when I first read them, but after I studied them, it became very difficult to take the assertion that "this is all we have" was written or stated with a straight face......

[James Richards]

Thanks, Robert. I did successfully get the material to download.

It seems when it comes to computer matters my incompetence knows no bounds.

James

[John Dolva]

Robert,

I can't get that original attachment you posted to download. Is there anything specific I should be doing?

James

If you have right clicked and saved target/link and nothing happened, I do not know what to tell you. I tried it moments ago, and it still works. The only thing I can think of is if you're computer has no available memory, [the document is 17 pages] that might account for it, but I seriously doubt that is the case. Also a word of explanation about these papers, I acquired them under FOIA about a week or less before I posted this thread on the Forum. The original CIA Family Jewels were some 854 pages, if I recall correctly, BUT there supposedly were only 17 pages which related to the JFK Assassination, if you believe that you have more faith in our government's ability for candor than I ever will. Also, my perception is that "plausible deniability" may have given some leeway within the Agency to work around some unpleasant revelations to be given the then, DCIA......but that is just my opinion.

I was pretty excited when I first read them, but after I studied them, it became very difficult to take the assertion that "this is all we have" was written or stated with a straight face......

Right click save open works fine.

(Otherwise, settings in browser options may need enabling to view from one clicks.)

___________________

EDIT::

"The official seal used by the Post Office Department from 1837 to 1970 pictured, as directed by Postmaster General Amos Kendall, "a post horse in speed, with mail bags and rider, encircled by the words 'Post Office Department, United States of America."' It is believed this seal was inspired by Benjamin Franklin. (first PMG)

On August 12, 1970, the day President Nixon signed into law the Postal Reorganization Act converting the Post Office Department into an independent establishment of the executive branch, the Postal Service announced adoption of a new seal. It featured a bald eagle poised for flight on a white field, above red and blue bars framing the words "U.S. Mail" and surrounded by a square border with the words "United States Postal Service" on three sides and nine five-pointed stars at the base."

1639- Richard Fairbanks' tavern in Boston named repository for overseas mail

1775- Benjamin Franklin, first Postmaster General under Continental Congress

1789- Samuel Osgood, first Postmaster General under Constitution

1823- Navigable waters designated post roads by Congress

1825- Dead letter office

1829- Postmaster General joins Cabinet

1830- Office of Instructions and Mail Depredations established, later Office of the Chief Postal Inspector

1838- Railroads designated post routes by Congress (around this time about 17 PI Agents in service)

....

(Civil war- Union and Confederate separate PO Departments)

1864- Railroad post offices (eg Terminal Annexe)

....

(mid 1962 PMG J.E.Day retires over civil rights issue.)

(1969 Harry D. Holmes retires)

1970- Postal Reorganization Act (what becomes of the USPO documents?)

1971- United States Postal Service began operation; Postmaster General no longer in Cabinet

_________________

may 1973 doc

in part: TSD Support to Other Agencies

"Technical Services Division's charter (CSI 1-8) requires that it provide technical assistance to both CLACIA operations and other activities as May be directed by Deputy Director for Operations.

Over the years the chief non-CIA recipients of this support have been the Department of Defense, the Federal, Bureau of Investigation, Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, Immigration. and Naturalization Service, Department of State. United States Postal Service, Secret Service, Agency for International Development, and the White House."

"Over the years the chief non-CIA recipients...United States Postal Service." - It's as if the USPO never existed? speculation: perhaps a document written in 1973 would be expected to acknowledge the USPO as being an 'over the years' recipient?

IOW this documents is carelessly written, indicating perhaps: 'for public consumption'? recent, and careless?

Edited June 23, 2007 by John Dolva

[Shanet Clark]

Its a MS Word document, I could access it.

First person primary archival documents

from Osborn, CIA director of Security CIA-OS.

"The right hand don't know what the left hand is doing"

as Sam Giancana used to say...........

[Miles Scull]

I never quite figured out how something like this could receive such little scrutiny on the vaunted JFK Debate section of the Education Forum. I guess Pat and Tim were the only ones who thought it was interesting?

Thx for posting this, Robert.

I believe the "Family Jewels" will be up on the CIA website. http://www.dominicantoday.com/app/article.aspx?id=24411

[Robert Howard]

I never quite figured out how something like this could receive such little scrutiny on the vaunted JFK Debate section of the Education Forum. I guess Pat and Tim were the only ones who thought it was interesting?

Thx for posting this, Robert.

I believe the "Family Jewels" will be up on the CIA website. http://www.dominicantoday.com/app/article.aspx?id=24411

Thank You Miles and all those who found the thread interesting.

There is a group of American's who are the very soul and fiber of America, who for 43 years have persevered amidst the power structure of America's political, intelligence, and media apparatus, who felt that the truth was nowhere in sight regarding the generally accepted view of events regarding the death of President Kennedy and from that moment on, dedicated themselves to discovering the truth, regarding the true circumstances of Pres. Kennedy's death, often at great cost to themselves, their reputations and their well being; in the 1960's and 1970's some of them paid for their desire to know the truth with their lives.

It is an outrage, but not surprising that Jacqueline Hess and the HSCA played the spin game of relegating their deaths to some sort of illusion that was fostered by conspiracy theorists.

In fact, the HSCA's ultimate treatment of the subject consisted mainly of demonstrating that the "100,000 trillion to one" figure cited by a London Newspaper had in effect been an acknowledged mathematical mistake. I would not be the first to acknowledge that the figure cited of 167, or whatever the exact number was, obviously was a leap into the void. But, it is also an incontrovertible fact that there were over 10 individuals whose deaths took place under circumstances that gives credence to the fact that their deaths were, in fact related to either their fore-knowledge of 11/22/63 or what they had discovered in the time after the assassination concerning conspiratorial aspects of same.

To have owns own death, be relegated to a part of some mythos as described by Hess and the HSCA is the ultimate slap in the face to the families of individuals such as Dorothy Kilgallen, Hank Killam, Mary Meyer, Albert Bogard, Jimmy Levens, John Roselli, John Crawford, Lou Staples as well as those who actually lost their lives.

I believe that the ultimate historical account regarding the final resolution into the circumstances regarding the death of the Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr serve as a template, if you will, to how the final resolution of the death of John F. Kennedy will take place, because to acknowledge it publicly would be an admittance, that our vaunted media has perpetuated a sack of lies for 43 years and called it the "truth." It would also display that the American people's also vaunted "right to know" can, when confronted with issues concerning national security, take a rather low priority on the list of what comes first.

I suspect that many of the re-formed Conspiracy Theorist's have a built-in psychological mechanism to rationalize to themselves, why they jumped ship, if you will. Obviously, some or, many of them may posses altruistic motivations for doing so, but there are some, who, no doubt look at the JFK Assassination as a cash-cow, and realized that books that promote the old "Oswald did it" routine are still a marketable commodity, as long as the fact that no-one can put him in that window, with a straight face, isn't dwelt on.

Other's may think "with the current threats to America today from without" revealing the truth is dangerous, to which I would reply, well they should have thought of that before they killed him. The truth always wins.

In the 1960's it was Lawrence Schiller and Priscilla McMillan slamming the conspiracy theories, in the third Millenium it is the likes of Bugliosi, Posner and Fuhrman, if youre dwelling on what they say and you are interested in resolving the last remaining questions regarding the death of Pres. Kennedy you are doing exactly, what they hoped for.

Edited June 23, 2007 by Robert Howard