Jump to content

Lamar Waldron: Ultimate Sacrifice


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 58
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The main sticking point involved United Nations inspections of Cuba. Documents have just been released that show that JFK's pledge not to invade Cuba was linked to UN inspections.

Because Castro had refused the inspection of Cuba specified in the October exchange of letters, Kennedy withheld a formal pledge not to invade Cuba. At his November 20, 1962 press conference. Kennedy said: "For our part, if all offensive weapons are removed from Cuba and kept out of the hemisphere in the future, under adequate verification and safeguards, and if Cuba is not used for the export of aggressive Communist purposes, there will be peace in the Caribbean."

Kennedy instructed John J. McCloy, who was negotiating the formal agreement with the Soviets without knowledge of the secret deal to dismantle the Jupiter missiles, that since the Cubans had refused U.N. verification, this was "the most we can do." No agreement was ever formalized and Kennedy allowed his November 20 statement to stand as his final public word on the settlement. Ted Sorensen later recalled, Kennedy "would have preferred a cleaner solution, but the way this worked out was really all right. We were able to continue our overflights, and Khrushchev got no no-invasion pledge."

In 1970, when Castro was again worrying about an invasion, this time from President Nixon, the Soviets used the construction of a submarine base at Cienfuegos Bay to compel the Americans to finally ratify the no-invasion pledge. Kissinger did so, asserting that the submarine base was prohibited by the 1962 understanding, which he privately described to the president as "never formally buttoned down."

I am very impressed by Ultimate Sacrifice, and unlike with Professor Mellen's book, can see that there is a wealth of new information contained therein. The main exception I take to the book thus far is that it misleadingly packages many of its revelations as new. As can be seen by John's statement above about the no-invasion pledge, even very old information is represented as new.

This is especially the case with regard to the plans for an invasion in late 1963. What has long been termed Second Naval Guerrilla is repackaged here and represented as new, with the authors even giving it a new name of their own: "C-Day." It is far from new information that Desmond FitzGerald said, just four months after the assassination: "If Jack Kennedy had lived, I can assure you we would have gotten rid of Castro by last Christmas."

Bill Turner and Warren Hinckle reported a quarter century ago that Manuel Artime's "MRR was receiving $250,000 a month" to set up the Second Naval Guerrilla operation in Nicaragua and Costa Rica. When Nicaragua's General Luis Somoza viewed the exiles' fleet at Monkey Point in 1963, he announced that "in November strong blows will begin against Cuban Prime Minister Fidel Castro by groups we are training."

Ultimate Sacrifice unhesitatingly asserts that the Kennedys were not aware of the Cubela plans. The authors do a good job of characterizing the Kennedys' thinking about their planning as "the US aiding 'Cubans helping other Cubans,' not as an assassination plan." One might wonder what effect the Vietnam coup just three weeks before Dallas would have had on the Kennedys' thinking in this regard. We know that years later, E. Howard Hunt worked in Nixon's White House fabricating a cable to implicate President Kennedy in Diem's assassination. In the case of C-Day we have it presented that the Kennedys initiated a coup on Vietnam on November 1 and had one planned for Cuba on December 1. But at least the authors are not asserting that they had two assassinations planned in the span of one month.

I do appreciate the point that there was an operation apart from Dallas that was piggybacked by the assassination conspirators. I have long maintained the same and have posted the memo to H.L. Hunt demonstrating that the administration's operation had been compromised. The hijacked operation framework helps explain both Oswald's and Bobby Kennedy's behaviors.

T.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is a review of the book from the "St. Petersburg Times":

TAMPA - Amid the grief and speculation that followed the assassination

of John F. Kennedy on Nov. 22, 1963, a story emerged of an aborted plot

to kill the president four days earlier as he rode through the streets

of Tampa.

Now, a new book about the assassination attempts to detail the Tampa

plot, joining the litany of literature about that fall day in Dallas.

In 900 pages, Ultimate Sacrifice, released Friday, offers a new twist

on an old conspiracy theory, with Tampa figuring prominently.

At its core is the notion that the killing was an organized crime hit

instigated, in part, by a local Tampa mobster, the late Santo

Trafficante Jr.

Authors Lamar Waldron and Thom Hartmann argue that a trifecta of Mafia

dons - Trafficante in Tampa, Carlos Marcello in New Orleans and Johnny

Roselli in Chicago - was responsible for killing Kennedy to halt Robert

Kennedy, then attorney general, from further Mafia prosecutions. The

theory isn't new.

Yet this book also alleges that the government was forced to cover up

Mafia involvement in the assassination to protect a top secret plan to

stage a coup in Cuba called C-Day. Mob associates had infiltrated the

secret project, according to the authors' interviews with Harry

Williams, a Cuban exile who said he organized C-Day for Robert Kennedy.

The book's central premise is that federal investigators couldn't

implicate the Mafia dons in the assassination without casting light on

the planned coup and threatening national security.

More interesting for local readers, the book also claims that

Trafficante was behind an attempt to kill Kennedy during his visit to

Tampa on Nov. 18, 1963.

Trafficante allegedly called off the attack after an informant alerted

law enforcement a few days before the visit, according to the book.

"Of course, Trafficante would have also known that there was still one

more chance to kill JFK, in Marcello's territory of Dallas," according

to Ultimate Sacrifice.

Plans for the would-be Tampa assassination resembled the Dallas

assassination, according to the book. The Tampa gunman would have fired

from a window of the Floridan Hotel, then the tallest building in the

city. (In Dallas, Lee Harvey Oswald was accused of shooting from a

window on the sixth floor of a book depository.)

Kennedy and his entourage of limousines and squad cars wound their way

along 20 miles of Tampa streets that day.

Thousands of spectators flanked the route.

The motorcade was expected to slow for a left turn at the Floridan

Hotel. (In Dallas, Kennedy was shot while the motorcade slowed to make

a left turn.)

The book even names a patsy, a Cuban named Gilberto Policarpo Lopez who

was allegedly poised to take the fall in Tampa, unbeknownst to him,

according to the authors' interviews with Lopez's wife.

Waldron said he based his reporting of the Tampa plot on interviews

with former Tampa police Chief J.P. Mullins, a confidential law

enforcement source and a Chicago Secret Service agent, Abraham Bolden.

Mullins has since died.

Waldron also combed records at the Miami Police Department, the agency

that got the tip about the assassination plan.

"It's groundbreaking because it reveals the Tampa attempt for the first

time in any book, and it tells the complete story of the Tampa

attempt," said Waldron, who researched the book for 17 years with the

help of Hartmann.

Ultimate Sacrifice is Waldron's first book, although he has written

extensively about the Kennedy assassination and Robert Kennedy over the

past decade.

The Tampa assassination threat was reported in a story in the Tampa

Tribune that ran Nov. 23, the day after Kennedy was shot in Dallas. But

details were vague, and there was no follow-up.

An entire 300 pages of Ultimate Sacrifice is dedicated to explaining

what could have motivated Trafficante and the other Mafia bosses to

kill the president, as well as their efforts to get involved in Robert

Kennedy's alleged scheme to overthrow Fidel Castro. Trafficante's

interest in getting rid of President Kennedy and invading Cuba was tied

to getting back casinos he had lost in Havana when Castro took over and

his role in the narcotics trade, according to the book. The authors

pulled much of their Trafficante information from unclassified

documents, other books and Williams.

A Tampa native, Trafficante was reputed to be a top mob boss, taking

over in Tampa from his father in 1954. His name was mentioned in

connection with at least four mob hits, he was linked to gambling and

drugs, and he faced bribery, racketeering and tax evasion charges over

the years. But Trafficante never spent a night in a U.S. jail.

He kept modest homes in Tampa and North Miami Beach, and died in 1987

in a Houston hospital where he had gone for heart surgery.

In 1989, his former attorney, Tampa lawyer Frank Ragano, published a

book in which he said Trafficante had confessed to him in 1987 that he

had had something to do with the Kennedy assassination. Ragano repeated

the claim during sworn testimony he gave to the Assassination Records

Review Board in 1997. He has since died. Local Trafficante experts said

they were skeptical of this latest book reporting Trafficante's

involvement in the assassination, having never seen evidence supporting

such a theory.

"In all the research I've done on the matter, I've never heard of such

things," said Florida Department of Law Enforcement special agent Ken

Sanz, who is working as a consultant for a book in progress on

Trafficante. "Never. And quite frankly, it's fresh on my brain."

Waldron and publisher Carroll & Graf of Avalon stand by the reporting

in the book, citing thousands of pages of documents, many of which were

recently declassified. "It was critical to our credibility that we had

to prove C-Day and provide context for how the mob did it," said

Charlie Winton of Avalon. The book went on sale at bookstores

nationwide on Nov. 18, the anniversary of the planned Tampa

assassination attempt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the text of the HSCA on Gilberto Policarpo Lopez:

e) Gilberto Policarpo Lopez allegation

More troubling to the committee was another specific allegation discussed by the Senate committee. It concerned a Cuban-American named Gilberto Policarpo Lopez.(119) According to the account, Lopez obtained a tourist card in Tampa, Fla., on November 20, 1963, entered Mexico at Nuevo Laredo on November 23, and flew from Mexico City to Havana on November 27. (12O) Further, Lopez was alleged to have attended a meeting of the Tampa chapter of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee on November 17, 1963, and at a December meeting of the chapter, Lopez was reported to be in Cuba. (12l)

The committee first examined the CIA files on Policarpo Lopez.(122) They reflect that in early December 1963, CIA headquarters received a classified message stating that a source had requested "urgent traces on U.S. citizen Gilberto P. Lopez." (123) According to the source, Lopez had arrived in Mexico on November 23 enroute to Havana and had disappeared with no record of his trip to Havana. The message added that Lopez had obtained tourist card No. 24553 in Tampa on November 20, that he had left Mexico for Havana November 27 on Cubana Airlines, and that his U.S. passport number was 310162.(124)

In another classified message of the same date, it was reported that the FBI had been advised that Lopez entered Mexico on November 27 at Nuevo Laredo. (125)

Two days later these details were added: Lopez had crossed the border at Laredo, Tex., on November 23; registered at the Roosevelt Hotel in Mexico City on November 25; and departed Mexico on November 27 on a Cubana flight for Havana. (126) Another dispatch noted that Lopez was the only passenger on Cubans flight 465 on November 27 to Havana. (127) It said he used a U.S. passport and Cuban courtesy visa. It noted, too: "Source states the timing and circumstances surrounding subject's travel through Mexico and departure for Havana are suspicious." It was this dispatch that alerted headquarters to the source's "urgent" request for all available data on Lopez. (128)

The same day as the dispatch, headquarters sent a cable identifying the Cuban-American as Gilberto Policarpo Lopez, born January 26, 1940. It added that Lopez was not identical with a Gilberto Lopez who had been active in pro-Castro groups in Los Angeles. (129)

Headquarters was also told that there existed a "good" photograph of Lopez, showing him wearing dark .glasses. A copy of the photograph with "27 November 1963" stamped on the back was found in his CIA file by committee investigators in 1978. (130)

In March 1964, CIA headquarters received a classified message: a source had reported in late February that an American citizen named

Page 119

Gilberto Lopes 11 had been involved in the Kennedy assassination; that Lopes had entered Mexico on foot from Laredo, Tex., on November 13 carrying U.S. passport 319962, which had been issued July 13, 1960; that he had been issued Mexican travel form B24553 in Nuevo Laredo; that Lopes had proceeded by bus to Mexico City "where he entered the Cuban Embassy"; and that he left the Cuban Embassy on November 27 and was the only passenger on flight 465 for Cuba. (132)

The following day, a classified message was sent to headquarters stating that the information "jibes fully with that provided station by [source] in early December 1963." (133)

A file had been opened on Lopez at headquarters on December 16, 1963. (134) It contained a "Review of [material omitted] file on U.S. Citizen" by an operations officer of the responsible component of the agency. In the review, the file was classified as a "counterintelligence case, (that is, involving a foreign intelligence or security service)." The date of entry of that category in the agency's records is indicated as January 22, 1975. (135)

The committee also reviewed an FBI investigation of Gilberto Policarpo Lopez in Key West, Fla., contained in a report dated August 1964.(136)

In an interview, Lopez' cousin, Guillermo Serpa Rodriguez, had said that Lopez had come to the United States soon after Castro came to power, stayed about a year and returned to Cuba because he was homesick. He returned to the United States in 1960 or 1961 fearing he would be drafted into the Cuban militia. (137)

The FBI also interviewed an American woman Lopez had married in Key West. She listed companies where he had been employed, including a construction firm in Tampa. She also said he began suffering from epileptic attacks, was confined for a time at Jackson Memorial Hospital in Miami in early 1963, and was treated by doctors in Coral Gables and Key West. She said she believed the epilepsy was brought on by concern for his family in Cuba. (138)

Lopez' wife said she received a letter from him in about November 1963, saying he had returned to Cuba once more. She said she had been surprised, although he had mentioned returning, to Cuba before he left for Tampa in November 1963. In a later letter, Lopez told his wife he had received financial assistance for his trip to Cuba from an organization in Tampa. His wife explained that he would not have been able to pay for the trip without help. She said, however, he had not had earlier contacts with Cuban refugee organizations. (139)

11The committee noted the discrepancies in this message, as follows: the spelling of Lopes, for Lopez; the November 13 date and passport number 319962, issued July 13, 1960; and Lopez entering Mexico on foot. In its 1977 Task Force Report, the CIA cited the several "inaccuracies," as they had been repeated in the report of the Senate Select Committee, as reason to refute the report itself. The TFR pointed out that Lopez' name had been misspelled "Lopes," that it had Lopez entering Mexico on foot, when the CIA had information that he had traveled by automobile; that it listed incorrect digits for Lopez' passport number; that it stated that Lopez' Mexican tourist visa had been issued in Nuevo Laredo, not Tampa; and it reported that he had stayed at the Cuban Embassy. Based on these inaccuracies, the TFR concluded, "the source was patently and extensively misinformed." The TFR therefore discounted the March cable that held that the information "jibed" with what the CIA's source had earlier reported. (131)

The discrepancies pointed out in the TFR were apparently intended to explain why the CIA had not taken more aggressive investigative steps to determine whether there had been a connection between Lopez and the assassination.

Page 120

Rodriguez said Lopez left Key West in late 1963 for Tampa with the hope of being able to return to Cuba, explaining he was afraid he would be drafted into the U.S. military. Rodriguez said Lopez had not been involved in pro-Castro activity in Key West, but that he was definitely pro-Castro, and he had once gotten into a fistfight over his Castro sympathies. (140)

The FBI had previously documented that Lopez had actually been in contact with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee and had attended a meeting in Tampa on November 20, 1963. In a March 1964 report, it recounted that at a November 17 meeting of the Tampa FPCC, Lopez had said he had not been granted permission to return to Cuba but that he was awaiting a phone call about his return to his homeland.

In that March report, a Tampa FPCC member was quoted as saying she called a friend in Cuba on December 8, 1963, and was told that Lopez had arrived safely. She also said that the Tampa chapter of the FPCC had given Lopez about $190 for the trip to Cuba and that he had gone to Cuba by way of Mexico because he did not have a passport. (141)

The March 1964 FBI report stated that Lopez did have a U.S. passport-- it had been issued in January 1960 and was numbered 310162. His Mexican tourist card was numbered M8-24553 and was issued November 20, 1963 in Tampa. The report also confirmed that Lopez entered Mexico via Laredo, Tex., by automobile on November 23, and he departed for Havana on November 27, the only passenger on a Cubana flight. He was carrying a Cuban courtesy visa.(142)

Lopez' FBI file contained a memorandum from the Tampa office. Dated October 26, 1964, it read:

It is felt that information developed regarding the subject is not sufficient to merit consideration for the Security Index. (143)

The only information transmitted by the FBI to the Warren Commission, the committee determined, concerned a passport check on Lopez. Information sent to the Commission by the FBI on the Tampa chapter of the FPCC did not contain information on Lopez' activities. The CIA apparently did not provide any information to the Warren Commission on Lopez. (144) The committee concurred with the Senate Select Committee that this omission was egregious, since sources had reported within a few days of the assassination that the circumstances surrounding Lopez' travel to Cuba seemed "suspicious." Moreover, in March 1964, when the Warren Commission's investigation was in its most active stage, there were reports circulating that Lopez had been involved in the assassination.

In its 1977 Task Force Report, the CIA responded to the charges of the Senate committee. It claimed that the agency had carried its investigation of Lopez as far as it could, having questioned a Cuban defector about him. (145) The committee found that the absence of access to additional sources of information was not an adequate explanation for the agency's failure to consider more seriously the suspicions of its sources or to report what information it did have to the Warren Commission. Attempts in the Task Force Report to denigrate the information that was provided on Lopez were not an adequate substitute for enabling the Warren Commission itself to pursue the leads more aggressively.

Page 121

From the information gathered by the FBI, there appeared to be plausible reasons both for Lopez' desire to return to Cuba and for his solicitation of financial aid from the Tampa FPCC chapter. Lopez' contacts in Florida appeared to have been innocent and not connected with the assassination, and while there was a suggestion in the Senate committee's report that Lee Harvey Oswald also was in contact with the Tampa FPCC chapter, the committee could find no evidence of it. Nor could the committee find any evidence that Oswald was in contact with Lopez.

Lopez' association with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, however, coupled with the facts that the dates of his travel to Mexico via Texas coincide with the assassination, plus the reports in Mexico that Lopez' activities were "suspicious," all amount to a troublesome circumstance that the committee was unable to resolve with confidence.

Top of Page

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, I guess my question would be why the authors believe Policarpo Lopez was a patsy and what they think of his trip to texas later in the week. as the HSCA report indicates, he obtained a fourteen day visa to enter Mexico on Wednesday, November 20th. My question is since he traveled from Tampa to Dallas is it possible (even probable) he was a conspirator rather than a patsy?

Obviously we are intrigued by the Policarpo Lopez story in part because of his Key West connections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here is the summary of the HSCA on why Cuba was not involved in the assassination:

While the committee did not take Castro's denials at face value, it found persuasive reasons to conclude that the Cuban Government was not involved in the Kennedy assassination. First, by 1963 there were prospects for repairing the hostility that had marked relations between the two countries since Castro had come to power. Second, the risk of retaliation that Cuba would have incurred by conspiring in the assassination of an American President must have canceled out other considerations that might have argued for that act. President Castro's description of the idea as "insane" is appropriate. And there was no evidence indicating an insane or grossly reckless lack of judgment on the part of the Cuban Government. Third, the CIA had both the motive to develop evidence of Cuban involvement and access to at least substantial, if incomplete, information bearing on relevant aspects of it, had such involvement existed. Its absence, therefore, must be weighed in the balance. Finally, the Cuban Government's cooperation with this committee in the investigation must be a factor in any judgment. In conclusion, the committee found, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the Cuban Government was not involved in the assassination of President Kennedy.

Query whether the first two reasons withstand the new evidence re the planned coup/invasion as set forth in "The Ultimate Sacrifice"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(1) In your book you state:

“This “palace coup” would be led by one of Castro’s inner circle, himself a well-known revolutionary hero. This man, the coup leader, would cause Castro’s death, but without taking the credit or blame for doing so. The coup leader would be part of the new Provisional Government in Cuba, along with a select group of Cuban exiles - approved by the Kennedys - who ranged from conservative to progressive. The identity of the coup leader is known to the authors, and has been confirmed by Kennedy associates and declassified documents. However, US national security laws may prevent the direct disclosure of past US intelligence assets even long after their deaths, so we will not directly name the coup leader in this book. Since we have no desire to violate national security laws or endanger US intelligence assets, we will only disclose official information that has been declassified or is available in the historical record.”

It is clear that if the coup was to succeed the leader from within the government would have been able to get the immediate respect of the Cuban people. That they was someone who was clearly identified with the original revolution that had deposed Fulgencio Batista. Although you do not name him, I suspect that the person concerned was Che Guevara. He is of course someone who would have had a chance of being accepted by the Cuban people after the removal of Castro. However, I find it difficult to believe that Guevara would have found it possible to work with people like Enrique Ruiz-Williams, Manuel Artime, Manolo Ray, Eloy Menoya and Tony Varona in any new government. Nor do I see how people like Artime and Varona would have worked with Guevara. If I had been them, I would have thought it was just a matter of time before Guevara took over complete control of the government. Even if it is not Guevara you are talking about, any other figure in the Castro government, would have faced the same problems about working with people, who by 1963, were seen as counter-revolutionaries.

(2) Several people whose judgement I respect have argued privately to me that you have made a mistake in your identification of what you call the “C-Day Plan”. That you are tangling up AMLASH, AMTRUNK and Artime’s Second Naval Guerrilla operation. Or that C-Day was a mutation of the Cubela operation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John, it would also seem to me an appropriate question why the Kennedys apparently thought they could pull off this coup without retaliation from the Soviet Union.

It is clear there was no love lost between Khruschev and Fidel after the Cuban missile crisis when Fidel thought Khruschev had sold him out.

Query whether the Kennedys had made an agreement with Khruschev to replace Castro with someobe more acceptable to both?

The suggestion of Guevera is interesting indeed. Although Cubela must also be considered. As I am sure you know Cubela was the leader of a rival anti-Batista group. If I recall right, the date that his group and the July 26th movement agreed to consolidate or cooperate was--ready for this?--Nov 22nd (of 1957 or 1958?) Clearly a coincidence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim, Lamar covers that point in extensive detail in the book so I gather you haven't read it yet?

Start with the fact that Lopez was in the US and had been trying for over a year to get into

Cuba to visit his ailing mother - and shows absolutely no signes of having any training or

experience in covert operations much less as an actual shooter or participant. Go on with

his having made him so visible by his efforts to get to Cuba that there document references suggesting

he may even have been a recruitment target for US intel. Then go to the fact that virtually

all the reports on him are second or third hand...but starting with reports from Morales

AMOT's. Add in the fact that although he was reported in Chicago, Tampa and Dallas but that

there were no actual sightings in any of the cities about all you are left with is that he a) got

the paperwork he needed to transit to Cuba after a year or more of trying and B) did go

to Cuba as soon as he received it.

I think that I suggested ages ago that if you want to use him as a possible Castro agent you need

to get the actual documents and evaluate them yourself....as Lamar has done to reach his

conclusions.

Perhaps the most interesting thing is that Morales and company would have been in an ideal

position to know about Lopez and generate the reports that would make him look suspicious.

......that's a very abbrieviated synopsis of Lamar's coverage...although as I read it he is

more inclined to see Lopez as being set up by Trafficante. Personally that's one of the

areas where I think forcing everything to a Mafia theme makes less sense than a conspiracy

involving Roselli and Morales as principals. Call that you will...maybe "MAFCIA"...grin.

-- Larry

John, I guess my question would be why the authors believe Policarpo Lopez was a patsy and what they think of his trip to texas later in the week. as the HSCA report indicates, he obtained a fourteen day visa to enter Mexico on Wednesday, November 20th. My question is since he traveled from Tampa to Dallas is it possible (even probable) he was a conspirator rather than a patsy?

Obviously we are intrigued by the Policarpo Lopez story in part because of his Key West connections.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim Gratz: This thread is for questions.
John, it would also seem to me an appropriate question why the Kennedys apparently thought they could pull off this coup without retaliation from the Soviet Union.

1. I also wonder about the authors' views on the question of Soviet retaliation, at least in Berlin. The Kennedys had been bending over backward to avoid exposure of the Secret Deal to dismantle the NATO Jupiter Missiles. Ultimate Sacrifice makes it clear that the coup had to appear indigenous, request from Provisional Govt., etc. etc. But those considerations are not fundamentally different than what was in place at the Bay of Pigs.

2. As much as the book depicted the December 1st launch date as virtually carved in stone, it does also note that Harry Williams began to notice a "lull" in the Kennedys' enthusiasm, and that they were beginning to drag their feet. What would the more belligerent anti-Castro elements think of the Kennedys reneging?

T.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim Gratz

Here is a review of the book from the "St. Petersburg Times":

The book even names a patsy, a Cuban named Gilberto Policarpo Lopez who

was allegedly poised to take the fall in Tampa, unbeknownst to him,

according to the authors' interviews with Lopez's wife.

Waldron said he based his reporting of the Tampa plot on interviews

with former Tampa police Chief J.P. Mullins, a confidential law

enforcement source and a Chicago Secret Service agent, Abraham Bolden.

Mullins has since died.

Abraham Bolden seems to be a very well informed person concerning efforts and attempts to kill JFK.

He also 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.

So I'd like to ask Lamar Waldron:

Q: Did A. Bolden ever reveal to the authors why he had previous knowledge of these two diffrent attempts

and why his warnings were taken seriously but were later excluded from the WC?

George

Edited by George Bollschweiler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In response to Larry's Post #11, I am anxiously waiting a copy of "Ultimate Sacrifice" to read it cover-to-cover.

Regarding Policarpo Lopez, however, he certainly appeared to be in Texas on the day of the assassination and his flight back to Cuba from Mexico City seemed suspicious. (See Peter Whitney's article re his flight from Mexico City to Havana.)

I assume you agree that Trafficante was probably involved in the assassination.

We have Policarpo Lopez moving from Key West to Tampa (Trafficante's home town) about the same time frame that the assassination plans started. That in itself is a bit curious.

Two days after the assassination attempt in Tampa was aborted by the planners, Policarpo Lopez gets his paper to enter Mexico.

Let us just take a small "leap of logic" here and assume he was in Dallas on November 22nd.

How many other people can you identify who were both in Tampa and in Dallas? And left the country the day after the assassination?

If I was an investigating detective, I would want to interview anyone who was in Tampa on november 18th and then in Dallas on November 22nd--particularly a Cuban (whether pro or anti Castro).

Another way to address the question would be: how many other Cubans who were in Tampa the day an assassination attempt was to take place moved to Cuba shortly after the assassination?

The HSCA found Policarpo Lopez's travels around the time of the assassination "troublesome" and that was (per "The Ultimate Sacrifice") without any knowledge by the HSCA of the aborted assassination attempt in Dallas.

Perhaps I am a bit more suspicious than you but I would be troubled by any person, regardless of his background, who left the country--for Cuba--within a day of the assassination and was in Tampa when JFK visited there and was probably in Dallas the day of the assassination.

He just happened to get his travel papers two days before the assassination after trying to get them for a year? A rather unusual happenstance, I would think.

Moreover, I find it most suspicious that anyone would leave Key West for Tampa!

I mean there would seem to be a clear inference or possibility at least that Policarpo Lopez was going to be used in the assassination in Tampa but when that attempt was aborted Trafficante sent him to Dallas.

Edited by Tim Gratz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim, let me try this again. Gilberto Lopez was supposed to look suspicious, he was supposed

to point toward Castro. He may well have been intended to be a diversion by any security

personnel looking for Cuban agents doing surveillance or preparing for an attack on JFK.

To get beyond that, I'd love to see you do some real research on him. Do a monograph

giving us his family background, his education and training, the history and sequence of

his moves. What his wife said about him; what he said about going to visit his mother

in Cuba. His efforts to obtain an entry visa; how long that took and when he actually got it.

You would find all that in Ultimage Sacrifice plus the documents it cites.

Also consider his possible value to US intelligence because of his brother...and factor in

the intel memos on him that Lamar cites.

Then chart out the informant reports and investigations....who said he was where, who

said he was suspicious for what reason. And show us who those informants

connect to....Trafficante perhaps?.....Morales perhaps?......CIA domestic ops?

Then perhaps we can really discuss who if anyone was pulling his strings. And judge

if first paragraph is correct. Or if you still consider him a viable Castro agent and

possible assassination participant (and in what role...certainly as a courier he would

have been about as covert as Oswald).....so far the record shows that FPCC members

were being used by US intel not Cuban (reference AM/SANTA joint FBI-CIA project).

-- by the way, Happy Holidays.

In response to Larry's Post #11, I am anxiously waiting a copy of "Ultimate Sacrifice" to read it cover-to-cover.

Regarding Policarpo Lopez, however, he certainly appeared to be in Texas on the day of the assassination and his flight back to Cuba from Mexico City seemed suspicious. (See Peter Whitney's article re his flight from Mexico City to Havana.)

I assume you agree that Trafficante was probably involved in the assassination.

We have Policarpo Lopez moving from Key West to Tampa (Trafficante's home town) about the same time frame that the assassination plans started. That in itself is a bit curious.

Two days after the assassination attempt in Tampa was aborted by the planners, Policarpo Lopez gets his paper to enter Mexico.

Let us just take a small "leap of logic" here and assume he was in Dallas on November 22nd.

How many other people can you identify who were both in Tampa and in Dallas? And left the country the day after the assassination?

If I was an investigating detective, I would want to interview anyone who was in Tampa on november 18th and then in Dallas on November 22nd--particularly a Cuban (whether pro or anti Castro).

Another way to address the question would be: how many other Cubans who were in Tampa the day an assassination attempt was to take place moved to Cuba shortly after the assassination?

The HSCA found Policarpo Lopez's travels around the time of the assassination "troublesome" and that was (per "The Ultimate Sacrifice") without any knowledge by the HSCA of the aborted assassination attempt in Dallas.

Perhaps I am a bit more suspicious than you but I would be troubled by any person, regardless of his background, who left the country--for Cuba--within a day of the assassination and was in Tampa when JFK visited there and was probably in Dallas the day of the assassination.

He just happened to get his travel papers two days before the assassination after trying to get them for a year? A rather unusual happenstance, I would think.

Moreover, I find it most suspicious that anyone would leave Key West for Tampa!

I mean there would seem to be a clear inference or possibility at least that Policarpo Lopez was going to be used in the assassination in Tampa but when that attempt was aborted Trafficante sent him to Dallas.

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...