Jump to content
The Education Forum

Fake Assassination Attempt


Tim Gratz
 Share

Recommended Posts

Tim Carroll and I disagree on many things but we also agree on many things.

One thing on which we do agree is that many of the events surrounding the assassination would be explained by the scenario of a fake assassination attempt to be blamed on Castro (which attempt may have even been known to JFK).

I taking another look at the issue of possible security stripping in Dallas, I came across this statement in the testimony of George Micheal Evica to the AARB (and I would also note that the testimony comes from the mcAdams web-site):

Since no later than '75, researchers have collected comments circulating not just among researchers but in the U.S. intelligence community on a possible Dealey Plaza assassination scenario; that is, a covert test of the President's security, including a simulated attack to be attributed to pro-Castro agents or sympathizers, that test justifying an actual security stripping as part of the simulation. With the President made vulnerable, the assassination plot succeeds.

Evica's mention that this "speculation" started in 1975 is interesting. I recently reread a vintage 1975 article on the assassination that appeared in that most mainstream media outlet, "The Tattler". The thrust of the article was that Loran Hall was a conspirator. But buried in the article was speculation that there had been a fake assassination attempt planned for Dallas.

I thought it would be worthwhile to start a thread to discuss the possibility of a fake asassination attempt. I would invite Tim Carroll's comments, specifically asking him to repost here his information about what one ofd H. L. Hunt's former security agents wrote about this.

As I recall there was also an interersting article about a fake aassassination scenario that involved the actor Audie Murphy (not as a conspirator but as someone who had heard about the theory). I would invite anyone who has ready access to this article to repost it here.

In closing (for now) I would comment that this scenario fits in nicely with the premise of "Ultimate Sacrifice". A failed aassassination attempt blamed on Castro could have been used to justify the coup against Castro. And if "Ultimate sacrifice" is correct that the Mafia had infiltrated the AMWORLD plot, how easy it would have been to "hijack" the fake plot and make it real.

I doubt if there is currently any way to make this sceanrio any more than "speculation" but perhaps we can at least try to find out when and where the reports and rumors of a fake assassination originated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 46
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Tim Carroll and I disagree on many things but we also agree on many things. One thing on which we do agree is that many of the events surrounding the assassination would be explained by the scenario of a fake assassination attempt to be blamed on Castro (which attempt may have even been known to JFK).... I recently reread a vintage 1975 article on the assassination that appeared in that most mainstream media outlet, "The Tattler". The thrust of the article was that Loran Hall was a conspirator. But buried in the article was speculation that there had been a fake assassination attempt planned for Dallas.... In closing (for now) I would comment that this scenario fits in nicely with the premise of "Ultimate Sacrifice". A failed aassassination attempt blamed on Castro could have been used to justify the coup against Castro. And if "Ultimate sacrifice" is correct that the Mafia had infiltrated the AMWORLD plot, how easy it would have been to "hijack" the fake plot and make it real.

Ultimate Sacrifice does indeed include references to a fake attempt planned for Dallas. On page 738, the book notes, "Bobby's suspicion could have been triggered by the way in which JFK was killed, by the link of Oswald (or Oswald's alias) to the crime, by some activity related to C-Day being staged in Dallas, or by all of those things." The H.L. Hunt memos provide material corroboration that there was foreknowledge among the wrong crowd of such an administration operation:

...North Texas State University, which oddly enough was also where the universities "Young Peoples Republican Club" had planned to join alongside Edwin Walker in a protest during President Kennedy's (now infamous) motorcade. The protest was called off after the Dallas Police learned of said plan, ostensibly Walker departed on Nov. 21, and neither he nor his 'group' as the Warren Commission referred to it materialized.
I believe there was a concerted effort reaching the highest levels of Dallas powerbrokering to keep the right-wing quiet that day. This connects to the information that had been received by H. L. Hunt and presumably others that an administration "incident" was planned for Dallas that could be blamed on the right-wing:

"The Hunts learned that President Kennedy's visit to Dallas might be greeted with violence nearly three weeks before the President crossed the state line. The warning came from the family's master intelligence man, Hunt Oil security chief Paul Rothermel. In a November 4, 1963, interoffice memo headlined 'POLITICS,' Rothermel informed his boss that there had been 'unconfirmed reports of possible violence during the parade' scheduled to take place when Kennedy arrived in town on November 22. Although Rothermel did not directly identify his sources, it was clear from his memo that he was sharing information the FBI and the Dallas Police Department were getting from informants placed in General Edwin Walker's right-wing political action groups in Dallas and on the campus of North Texas State University in Denton.

'The North Texas informant is reporting information that would indicate that that group may be planning an incident,' Rothermel wrote. 'There is another report from a left-wing group that an incident will occur with the knowledge of the President whereby the left-wingers will start the incident in hopes of dragging in any of the right side groups or individuals nearby and then withdrawing. The talk is that the incident involving Adlai Stevenson made the present administration hopeful in that if they could get the same thing to happen to Kennedy it could reassure his election....' As Rothermel pointed out in his memo to Hunt, 'If an incident were to occur, the true story of who perpetrated it would never come out.' Rothermel, however, had a solution to suggest. 'I have thought about the problem,' he wrote, 'and I am wondering if a few letters to the editor might not be a good way of pre-exposing this if, in fact, there is a planned incident.'"

Hunt did write an editorial, not to expose the administration's scheme, but rather to discourage any right-wing demonstrations that could be exploited. We don't know what Dallas oilmen like H. L. Hunt, Clint Murchison and Sid Richardson really did about their inside information. There can be little doubt, however, that their information was based on quality intelligence. An example would be the assertions in the new book, Ultimate Sacrifice, about a planned invasion of Cuba. On pages 237-238:

"In a provocative memo dated February 6, 1964, Rothermel informed Hunt that 'Lyndon B. Johnson is mortally afraid of being assassinated and does not trust the Secret Service to protect him. He has ordered the F.B.I. to be present everywhere he goes with no less than two men and more when there is any possibility that he will be exposed. Johnson has confidentially placed a direct telephone line from his office to J. Edgar Hoover's desk.'

Four days after the report on LBJ, Rothermel brought his boss some even more stunning news. 'There is information that the CIA and the State Department are currently planning a second invasion of Cuba,' Rothermel wrote. 'A very reliable source reports that the Manuel Ray group, which is extremely left-wing, has been in touch with the CIA and has agreed to a second invasion. The right-wing Cubans are being pressured to join the invasion. The second invasion is being closely scrutinized by John Martino, leader of the right-wing groups, for fear it will be a second Bay of Pigs fiasco.'"

Harry Hurt III, Texas Rich, (New York: W. W. Norton & Co., 1981), pp. 223-224.

Ultimate Sacrifice notes on page 390 that the framework for fake operations contemplated to pretextualize an invasion of Cuba predated Operation Northwoods, going back to the pre-Bay of Pigs Eisenhower administration planning. There is a reference to "a joint effort with Naval Intelligence. It involved staging a fake attack on the U.S. Navy base at Guantanamo, Cuba, using U.S.-supported exiles pretending to be Fidel's troops." Later, with regard to Ultimate Sacrifice's C-Day planning, Cyrus Vance asserted that "the U.S. does not contemplate ... a premeditated full-scale invasion of Cuba ... except in the case of Soviet intervention or the reintroduction of offensive weapons." In this concern about the Soviet presence in Cuba, Oswald's background can be seen to be potentially useful in his planned role as patsy for Castro's assassination, preceding a coup. However, Vance denied that any "contrivance or a provocation which could be used as a pretext for" an invasion continued to be a consideration [p.94].

T.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With a known assassinaton attempt in Chicago, followed by a known assassination attempt in Tampa, why would they need to fake one in Dallas?

I would welcome an explanation from anyone asserting the authenticity of the supposed Chicago and Tampa plots and JFK's awareness of them, of how likely it would have been that JFK would have Jackie beside him in Dallas just four days after Tampa. The idea that JFK was aware of a pending fake attempt not only explains many things about Dallas, it especially explains Tampa and the manner in which the president stood in his limo through the motorcade, ostensibly aware of a plot against him that day.

T.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not believe that security stripping (the SS removing motorcycles that the DPD planned to have beside the limo) would be part of a fake attempt. On the contrary, all normal security procedures would be in place for a fake attempt. Security would be unusually lax only in a real attempt, otherwise it wouldn't serve any purpose.

As for the "supposed" plots in Chicago and Tampa, I believe they are documented in Ultimate Sacrifice, the same book that is being quoted here as a reliable source.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for the "supposed" plots in Chicago and Tampa, I believe they are documented in Ultimate Sacrifice, the same book that is being quoted here as a reliable source.

Ultimate Sacrifice is a treasure trove of information, but that is entirely and obviously separate from its interpretations and conclusions. There is nothing in that book that precludes the possibility that Chicago and Tampa were part of fake attempt plotting, as opposed to an operation actually intended to kill the president. Nevertheless, the premise that JFK stood in the limo as a profile in courage during the Tampa motorcade, believing that a legitimate attempt would be made, begs the issue of the improbability that he would have allowed Jackie to ride with him only four days later in Dallas.

T.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, wouldn't it look kind of peculiar to the people of Dallas if Jackie rode with someone else, say LBJ, or in her own limo?

As most interested people know very well, before the Texas trip Jackie had not campaigned with JFK since the 1960 primaries. Her participation in the Texas trip was unusual for her. If Ron's silly posting on this thread is an attempt to subject it to ridicule, he could come right out and state his opinion and leave it at that, without resorting to such juvenile distraction.

T.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim Carroll and I disagree on many things but we also agree on many things.

One thing on which we do agree is that many of the events surrounding the assassination would be explained by the scenario of a fake assassination attempt to be blamed on Castro (which attempt may have even been known to JFK).

Interesting that you veer between believing that Castro was responsible for the assassination and a scenario under which Castro was made to appear responsible for same. Yet at no time do you seem to entertain the notion that the real assassination was planned and executed by those who planned to have Castro look like the culprit, which is what all the evidence seems to suggest. Quite a massive blind spot there, dear boy.

I taking another look at the issue of possible security stripping in Dallas, I came across this statement in the testimony of George Micheal Evica to the AARB (and I would also note that the testimony comes from the mcAdams web-site):

Since no later than '75, researchers have collected comments circulating not just among researchers but in the U.S. intelligence community on a possible Dealey Plaza assassination scenario; that is, a covert test of the President's security, including a simulated attack to be attributed to pro-Castro agents or sympathizers, that test justifying an actual security stripping as part of the simulation. With the President made vulnerable, the assassination plot succeeds.

Evica's mention that this "speculation" started in 1975 is interesting. I recently reread a vintage 1975 article on the assassination that appeared in that most mainstream media outlet, "The Tattler". The thrust of the article was that Loran Hall was a conspirator. But buried in the article was speculation that there had been a fake assassination attempt planned for Dallas.

Read Evica's statement again, Tim. Evica doesn't say this speculation began in '75, but that it was topical by "no later" than '75. The Newcomb & Adams manuscript of '74 [years in the making] contained that suggestion, as did other prior works. Re-read Meagher's "Accessories After The Fact" and you'll note the contention that even Oswald's purportedly ordering his weapons might have been part and parcel of a government sting operation, which is also along the same lines: to wit, set up a situation that the authorities were supposed to detect [but wouldn't/didn't] in order to introduce improved legislation to preclude same from happening in a real situation.

I thought it would be worthwhile to start a thread to discuss the possibility of a fake asassination attempt. I would invite Tim Carroll's comments, specifically asking him to repost here his information about what one ofd H. L. Hunt's former security agents wrote about this.

You may also wish to consider the possible ramifications of a few other details.

First, there is the fact that Robert Kennedy introduced legislation in February of '63 that would remove the responsibility for Presidential security from the SS and place it directly into the President's hands [it was defeated, ironically enough, early in '64, the very point in time that LBJ no longer trusted the SS to protect him.]

Second, you may wish to consider how SS protection protocols were compromised just prior to the assassination, when CIA played a role in same during the late '63 Florida jaunt. What could dilute such protective protocols more thoroughly than sharing that type of information with an organization that maintained its own staff of freelance assassins? While you're navel-gazing and blue-skying any number of speculations, perhaps either of these two thoughts might take up a few nano-seconds of your time?

As I recall there was also an interersting article about a fake aassassination scenario that involved the actor Audie Murphy (not as a conspirator but as someone who had heard about the theory). I would invite anyone who has ready access to this article to repost it here.

In closing (for now) I would comment that this scenario fits in nicely with the premise of "Ultimate Sacrifice". A failed aassassination attempt blamed on Castro could have been used to justify the coup against Castro. And if "Ultimate sacrifice" is correct that the Mafia had infiltrated the AMWORLD plot, how easy it would have been to "hijack" the fake plot and make it real.

Oh, puh-leeze. Have you any evidence that the conspiracy that succeeded wasn't "real" from start to finish? Or are we off on yet another of your pointless fishing expeditions, designed to waste time and energy on the useless, while ignoring the potentially fruitful?

I doubt if there is currently any way to make this sceanrio any more than "speculation" but perhaps we can at least try to find out when and where the reports and rumors of a fake assassination originated.

Mere "speculation" [bereft of any evidence] hasn't precluded you from reaching untenable conclusions in the past.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim Carroll and I disagree on many things but we also agree on many things.

One thing on which we do agree is that many of the events surrounding the assassination would be explained by the scenario of a fake assassination attempt to be blamed on Castro (which attempt may have even been known to JFK).

Interesting that you veer between believing that Castro was responsible for the assassination and a scenario under which Castro was made to appear responsible for same. Yet at no time do you seem to entertain the notion that the real assassination was planned and executed by those who planned to have Castro look like the culprit, which is what all the evidence seems to suggest. Quite a massive blind spot there, dear boy.

I taking another look at the issue of possible security stripping in Dallas, I came across this statement in the testimony of George Micheal Evica to the AARB (and I would also note that the testimony comes from the mcAdams web-site):

Since no later than '75, researchers have collected comments circulating not just among researchers but in the U.S. intelligence community on a possible Dealey Plaza assassination scenario; that is, a covert test of the President's security, including a simulated attack to be attributed to pro-Castro agents or sympathizers, that test justifying an actual security stripping as part of the simulation. With the President made vulnerable, the assassination plot succeeds.

Evica's mention that this "speculation" started in 1975 is interesting. I recently reread a vintage 1975 article on the assassination that appeared in that most mainstream media outlet, "The Tattler". The thrust of the article was that Loran Hall was a conspirator. But buried in the article was speculation that there had been a fake assassination attempt planned for Dallas.

Read Evica's statement again, Tim. Evica doesn't say this speculation began in '75, but that it was topical by "no later" than '75. The Newcomb & Adams manuscript of '74 [years in the making] contained that suggestion, as did other prior works. Re-read Meagher's "Accessories After The Fact" and you'll note the contention that even Oswald's purportedly ordering his weapons might have been part and parcel of a government sting operation, which is also along the same lines: to wit, set up a situation that the authorities were supposed to detect [but wouldn't/didn't] in order to introduce improved legislation to preclude same from happening in a real situation.

I thought it would be worthwhile to start a thread to discuss the possibility of a fake asassination attempt. I would invite Tim Carroll's comments, specifically asking him to repost here his information about what one ofd H. L. Hunt's former security agents wrote about this.

You may also wish to consider the possible ramifications of a few other details.

First, there is the fact that Robert Kennedy introduced legislation in February of '63 that would remove the responsibility for Presidential security from the SS and place it directly into the President's hands [it was defeated, ironically enough, early in '64, the very point in time that LBJ no longer trusted the SS to protect him.]

Second, you may wish to consider how SS protection protocols were compromised just prior to the assassination, when CIA played a role in same during the late '63 Florida jaunt. What could dilute such protective protocols more thoroughly than sharing that type of information with an organization that maintained its own staff of freelance assassins? While you're navel-gazing and blue-skying any number of speculations, perhaps either of these two thoughts might take up a few nano-seconds of your time?

As I recall there was also an interersting article about a fake aassassination scenario that involved the actor Audie Murphy (not as a conspirator but as someone who had heard about the theory). I would invite anyone who has ready access to this article to repost it here.

In closing (for now) I would comment that this scenario fits in nicely with the premise of "Ultimate Sacrifice". A failed aassassination attempt blamed on Castro could have been used to justify the coup against Castro. And if "Ultimate sacrifice" is correct that the Mafia had infiltrated the AMWORLD plot, how easy it would have been to "hijack" the fake plot and make it real.

Oh, puh-leeze. Have you any evidence that the conspiracy that succeeded wasn't "real" from start to finish? Or are we off on yet another of your pointless fishing expeditions, designed to waste time and energy on the useless, while ignoring the potentially fruitful?

I doubt if there is currently any way to make this sceanrio any more than "speculation" but perhaps we can at least try to find out when and where the reports and rumors of a fake assassination originated.

Mere "speculation" [bereft of any evidence] hasn't precluded you from reaching untenable conclusions in the past.

If anyone takes Gerry Hemmings at his word, He says he was involved in protecting the president at the Tampa attempt.

Terry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone takes Gerry Hemmings at his word, He says he was involved in protecting the president at the Tampa attempt.

I believe Gerry Hemming said he was involved in security at the Miami airport.

T.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone takes Gerry Hemmings at his word, He says he was involved in protecting the president at the Tampa attempt.

I believe Gerry Hemming said he was involved in security at the Miami airport.

T.C.

Tim, that is correct. He also mentioned that no one was armed in this endeavour. Do you put any stock in what Mr. Hemmings has to say

Thanks,

Terry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If anyone takes Gerry Hemmings at his word, He says he was involved in protecting the president at the Tampa attempt.
I believe Gerry Hemming said he was involved in security at the Miami airport.

Tim, that is correct. He also mentioned that no one was armed in this endeavour. Do you put any stock in what Mr. Hemmings has to say

I am interested in Mr. Hemming's information. He is clearly knowledgeable about the region of history that the JFK assassination involves. I am convinced, however, that he has disseminated false information at times, and that makes for difficulty discerning between wheat and chaff.

Regarding Hemming's Miami Airport assertions, I find them interesting because that event ties to the topic of this thread. If a fake attempt was in the works, the Miami-Dallas axis of Cubans, CIA and Mafia is widely considered key to understanding the underworld plotting against Castro, which might well have been turned around against Kennedy.

The particular issue of Hemming's group being suspicious about a possible set-up, to the point of deliberately attending the event without weapons, supports the concept that a false sponsor of a faked attempt was a cause for concern among some of the inhabitants of the anti-Castro underworld at that time - possibly for good reason.

T.C.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert Charles-Dunne wrote:

Interesting that you veer between believing that Castro was responsible for the assassination and a scenario under which Castro was made to appear responsible for same. Yet at no time do you seem to entertain the notion that the real assassination was planned and executed by those who planned to have Castro look like the culprit, which is what all the evidence seems to suggest.

I am not "veering" between scenarios. I raised the issue of a fake assassination attempt as a possible scenario because I believe, like Tim C does, that it explains a lot of things. (See Tim's excellent post above.)

IF there indeed had been a fake assassination attempt that was hijacked, that neither inculpates or exculpates Castro (or pro-Castro Cubans), or anyone else for that matter. If Castro's intelligence service was aware that Oswald was an asset of US intelligence (if indeed he was) it could have hijacked the plot, particularly if it had evidence that Oswald was a US asset. By the same token, a fake assassination attempt could have been hijacked by anyone who had acquired knowledge of the plan (rogue CIA agents; the Mafia; Malcom Wallace (and others?) on behalf of LBJ). Anyone who knew of a fake assassination plot that was to be used to frame Castro could certainly count on a government cover-up to prevent knowledge of that plot. Its exposure would have been at least as explosive as the Operations Northwoods documents.

Robert Charles-Dunne wrote:

Second, you may wish to consider how SS protection protocols were compromised just prior to the assassination, when CIA played a role in same during the late '63 Florida jaunt. What could dilute such protective protocols more thoroughly than sharing that type of information with an organization that maintained its own staff of freelance assassins? While you're navel-gazing and blue-skying any number of speculations, perhaps either of these two thoughts might take up a few nano-seconds of your time?

First comment: Robert's writing is usually lucid but that first sentence in the above paragraph is as bad as any in Mellen's book: "the CIA played a role in same"? To what does "same" refer? I assume to "SS protection protocols". I am not aware of any written "SS protection protocols" but would certainly be interested in seeing if any exist. I would also be interested in Robert's documentation that the CIA "played a role" in the development of any such protocols.

It is pure fantasy on Robert's part to assert that there was any compromise in security protocols "just prior to the assassination". Proof of that is the photo of the JFK motorcade in Key West, less than a month after the resolution of the CMC. The photo shows: 1) JFK in open Lincoln convertible; 2) no motorcycles on either side; and 3) no SS agents on the back of the car. This despite the fact that Key West was home to a large number of Cuban exiles, many enraged that JFK had not used the CMC to get rid of Castro. It only takes a few nano-seconds to examine that photo and realize that the security in Key West in November of 1962 was no different than the security in Dallas. It is certainly time to put the "security stripping" issue to bed. (I know it is hard on Robert to see the "security stripping" theory demolished, since it is about the only proposition that supports his scenario of the assassination, but the Kennedy visit to Key West is proof beyond any doubt that the security in Dallas was not unique. (Gee, maybe there was photo alteration!)

Edited by Tim Gratz
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...