Graybeard Outdoors banner

1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,461 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
We passed the 45th anniversary of the JFK assassination just a few days ago. I was a lad of 8 when it happened. All I can remember is getting out of school early that day, and the next door neighbor lady yelling at a bunch of us kids for playing football in the front yard and making to much noise, and she had a hard time listening to the TV.
Not being a real big aficionado of conspiracy theories, I always had an interest in this event. What little bit of time I've had to do some research on this, knowing that Joe Kennedy wasn't much better than Al Capone, I always figured that this was payback from something he did in the '20's or '30's.
But a few years ago, I picked up a book on the dollar table at a store, titled, Mortal Error. In the book, the author,(Bonar Menninger) and the real investigator, Howard Donahue, claim that JFK's killing was more of an accident than anything else.
Donahue was more of a ballistics expert than anything else. And after years of research, he came to the conclusion that the head shot on Kennedy came from a Secret Service agent in the car behind the limo. It was documented that an M-16 in locked and loaded condition was in the car. And the agent had picked it up and was looking over his shoulder from where he had heard the shots, and he accidentally discharged the weapon. As there where people in the crown that had said they smelled gunpowder, which would have been impossible from Oswald's gun. He also said that the shot that hit JFK in the neck probably would have killed him anyway, but that the head shot most likely came from the car behind the Presidential limo. Anyway, it makes for a good read! gypsyman
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,772 Posts
Yeah,,,I was 12 at the time. I've always thought that if anybody was going to pull off a 88 yard shot or two that they would pick a weapon just a little more accurate than a Carcano by just spending a couple hundred dollars of the time. I had a Carcano at the time and if you had one you would know what I mean, just a poor choice for the task at hand and I think ex-marine Oswald would have known this, and they said he used mil-surplus ammo too. Multiple shooters?,,,maybe. I've heard about the secret service shooting, except it wasn't accidental by some accounts. One would have to look at some of JFK's policies that were quickly reversed after his death.

..TM7
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
1,795 Posts
It was the driver... pull the old news footage that shows the driver and you will see him turn around point a handgun and you can see the muzzle flash and then JFK go backwards.... Why do you think the first lady was trying to climb on the trunk....


Matt
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
720 Posts
I'm kinda reluctant to stick my nose in conspiracy thoughts, everyone has their own, and boy oh boy do they believe strongly in it!! For the life of me, I have not seen anything EVER that points to anything other then Oswald acting alone. For definitive reads, check out " Case Closed" by Postom (SP?), "A Simple Act of Murder" by Mark Furmam, or the Vince Bugliosi (SP?) book. Recent computer re-enactment, ballistic tests, and so all point to the same conclusion. Oswald was a mental case, who had very little money, and bought what he could afford. He practiced, both live-fire and dry-fire. The shots were simple, from a rest, with an adequate rifle. He was using Winchester ammo made with the right bullet diameter ( slightly oversize compared to other 6.5's). He was a former Marine, sight-alignment/trigger squeeze. The bullets did as they were designed to, penetrate.
Most people have a hard time dealing with the fact that the most important person on earth (POTUS) was killed by a nut-job who had the means, opportunity, method, and skill required.
IMO, the JFK Conspiracy folks are up there with the 911 Truethers, UFO abductee's, and others.
But..like I said, lots of folks have their own opinion, and the debate will never end.
Mark
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,772 Posts
Did not know about the Winchester ammo, but I seem to remember Fed officers holding up the rifle and a stripper of Italian ammo in pictures of the time. Here's an alternative viewpoint and some reason to question a few things. Also was my understanding that Oswald could not drive a vehicle, and was seen by Book Depository employees 90 seconds after the shooting in the cafeteria sipping a coke and wondering what happened. Here's some info...TM7
.
Death In Dallas
Morgan Reynolds — November 22, 2005
It is of paramount importance to “show the world that America is not a banana republic, where a government can be changed by conspiracy.”

—Member John J. McCloy, at the first meeting of LBJ-appointed Warren Commission
Last November marked the 42d anniversary of the assassination of John F. Kennedy and virtually everyone in America past the 50-year-old mark remembers where he or she was that day. People were stunned. Former Canadian diplomat and assassination researcher Peter Dale Scott wrote, “[A]s a foreigner who lived through it, I could not but observe the depth and centrality of everyone’s response to the assassination of the President.” The assassination still resonates today.
The Warren Commission printed 10 million words in 26 volumes, with yawning gaps between its report and the available testimony and evidence, and there have been thousands of books written on JFK, so things are complicated but, as usual, not that complicated.
To solve a crime, detectives look at cui bono, and more specifically motive, means and opportunity. In his short time in office JFK managed to provoke a swamp full of vicious and powerful enemies. Here are the Big Eight:
MOTIVE
• Vice President Lyndon Baines Johnson, whose ambition, pride and ruthlessness were unexcelled, was going to be dumped from the ticket after three years of inside ridicule at the hands of the Kennedy crowd, and further the Billy Sol Estes and Bobby Baker scandals were about to end his powerful political career.
• The CIA hated JFK for his coitus interruptus of its (and Dick Nixon’s) all-out Bay of Pigs scheme, his crack down on assassination attempts against Castro, his hands-off-Cuba pact with the Soviets after the missile crisis and his threat to scatter the criminal CIA into a thousand pieces. JFK fired Director of Central Intelligence Allen W. Dulles [future Warren Commission member!] and cronies after the Bay of Pigs, and Dulles is suspect #1 for top supervisor of the JFK ambush. A Fort Worth Press front page photo a few days before the assassination showed Allen Dulles at the LBJ Ranch.
• J. Edgar Hoover and his FBI hated everything about the Kennedys, including their boss, RFK, attorney general of the United States, and Hoover knew that JFK planned to “retire” him after reelection in 1964.
• Texas independent oilmen like H.L. Hunt and Clint Murchison hated JFK for many reasons, especially his promise to eliminate the 27.5% oil depletion allowance, which would have raised their taxes by hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
• The Pentagon and the military industrial complex were agitated because JFK had already signed a National Security memorandum to begin a phased withdrawal of American military “advisers” from Vietnam, had rejected the Joint Chiefs proposal to stage a false-flag terrorist Operation Northwoods to provide a pretext to invade Cuba, and more generally, JFK’s drive for peace and perceived “softness” on communism.
• Wall Street and investment banking powers were threatened by JFK’s intention to terminate the Federal Reserve under his silly theory (!) that a privately-owned central bank served the interests of Wall Street and bankers, not those of America, and it had no right to issue currency under the Constitution. JFK further alienated the business community with his confrontation over price increases by big steel.
• Organized crime, which had worked with the CIA since it began as the OSS in World War II, wanted its lucrative casinos back in Havana, plus its drug-and-gun-running and money laundering profits from Cuba. The mob helped get Kennedy elected and showered him with molls to bed, and for their troubles Bobby cracked down on them. Resentment can be traced back to Joe Senior, who made his fortune running booze during Prohibition, generating plenty of underworld enemies.
• The Israeli government’s determination to go nuclear was fiercely opposed by JFK on the grounds that it would destabilize the middle east and ignite an arms race. Ben Gurion and successors believed that JFK’s resolve threatened Israel’s very existence. Prior to launching its 1981 attack on Iraq’s Osirak nuclear facility, the Israeli commander told his pilots with unusual emotion, “The alternative is our destruction.” After JFK’s demise, LBJ generously supported the Israeli war machine.
• Miscellaneous outsider groups like ********, Russians and Cubans, both pro- and anti-Castro, do not make my Big Eight, even though individual Cubans were involved.
Clint Murchison threw a party at his Dallas residence the night before the assassination and his guest list included H.L. Hunt, Richard Nixon, Texas Senator John Tower, John McCloy [‘head of the establishment’ and future Warren Commission member], J. Edgar Hoover, and Lyndon Johnson (pp. 109-10). They went into a private meeting and Lyin’ Lyndon came out and told Madeleine Brown, one of his mistresses, “Those damned Kennedys will not be poking fun at me after today.”
In contrast to this intense cauldron of hatred toward the charismatic Irish Catholic, all the establishment offers us about Oswald’s motive is the loose suggestion that he was a publicity-seeking, lone nut. Like most propaganda about what happened to JFK, little evidence supports the official theory. For example, upon arrest Oswald protested, “Now everybody will know who I am!” This comports with the compelling evidence that Oswald was a CIA and FBI asset.
OPPORTUNITY
• Key to opportunity in this case, as Air Force pilot Fletcher Prouty said, is who had “the power to call off or reduce the usual security precautions that are always in effect whenever a president travels?” Only powerful insiders, not outsiders, have this power.
• The Secret Service violated rule after rule of presidential protection, including an blatantly slow 110 degree left-hand turn from Houston onto to Elm Street, no motorcycle escorts alongside the presidential limo (instructed to stay behind the rear wheels), no shield of Secret Service agents on limo running boards, people in the streets and in open upper-story windows, the presidential limo braking during the shooting and even coming to a complete halt as shooters finished their work, secret service agents reacting slowly during and after the shooting, and so on. It was a set up, beyond reasonable doubt.
• One particularly telling fact is that the press photographers’ flat bed truck which usually traveled in front of the presidential limo was cancelled in favor of a station wagon far back in the motorcade, thwarting a major media photo and film record of the assassination.
Fall guy Oswald was in the Texas School Book Depository at the time of the assassination, so he superficially had opportunity. The trouble is that within ninety seconds of the shooting TSBD superintendent Roy Truly and Dallas policeman Marrion Baker found Oswald standing in the lunch room on the second floor calmly drinking a coke, despite (allegedly) committing the “crime of the century.” He did not have enough time to fire on the president, run to the opposite corner of the sixth floor where the weapon was discovered, hide it, race down four flights of stairs without being seen (the elevators were locked in the wrong position for descent), get a coke and show no sign of exertion or emotion. Other TSBD employees concurred that they heard no footsteps and did not see Oswald racing down the stairs for his encounter with Truly and Baker.
MEANS
• The assassination required money, expert planning, coordination and skilled shooters to insure success.
• Accused clandestine services like the CIA, Mossad, and the French SDECE had money and plenty of experience in assassination. Likewise the FBI and military. The mob had it too, although the military-style triangulation that killed JFK was not their style, favoring instead up-close-and-personal techniques like garroting and 38 caliber slugs. LBJ and Texas independent oilmen were quite familiar with employing professional killers. The list of possible and self-confessed killers is long (E. Howard Hunt, Frank Sturgis, Charles Harrelson, Bernard Barker, Mac Wallace, etc.) yet the key is that the professional killers depended on powerful insiders, especially in terms of supplying compensation, a patsy and the cover up that continues four decades later.
Oswald, by contrast, had military experience but was a poor marksman by all accounts. No expert marksman has ever been able to reproduce the Warren Commission script on the first attempt that the lone assassin fired three deadly shots within six seconds from behind a moving limo with a bolt-action Mannlicher-Carcano rifle. The absurdities of the Warren theory are countless, but one is that a real lone gunman on the 6th floor of the TSBD would have shot the president as his limo approached the TSBD on Houston Street rather than waiting until it turned onto Elm Street and went away from the sniper. A leafy tree obstructed half the good shots along Elm Street. Further, the rifle in the fabricated backyard photos used by the Warren Commission to link Oswald to the Mannlicher-Carcano rifle found in the TSBD is not the same weapon! And Oswald’s assassination? The conspirators could not allow Oswald to stand trial since he could easily prove his innocence and implicate insiders as well. Oswald eluded his own scheduled murder on the streets of Dallas following the assassination, so mob figure Jack Ruby was given an order he could not refuse.
COVER UP
The final area proving that JFK’s death was an inside job is the systematic destruction of evidence, fabricated evidence, omissions in gathering evidence and dead witnesses and potential squealers. The medical data—body, autopsy, and X-rays—were criminally tampered with and forged in the case of X-rays, primarily to hide the evidence of the frontal shots and the huge hole shot out the back of the president’s head with the attendant brain loss. He was shot in the head at least twice. The limousine was immediately sent to Michigan for a makeover, covering up the multiple shots and especially to replace the windshield with its bullet hole from the front, likely a fatal headshot. Eyewitnesses were intimidated and their testimony distorted and inverted beyond recognition. The federal government stonewalled New Orleans prosecutor Jim Garrison, governors refused to extradite witnesses and dozens of witnesses and insiders were murdered. Garrison’s chief suspect, David Ferrie, was found dead less than a week after the newspapers broke the story of Garrison’s investigation.
CONCLUSION
It is not difficult to disprove the lame lone assassin theory in favor of multiple gunmen. Try this out: Oswald could not drive a car, yet he pulled off the crime of the century without help. Then supposedly a second lone nut with no known connections to organized crime according to the Warren Commission, a complete lie, but plenty of cop connections, whacked Oswald in the cops’ stronghold because he said he wanted to prove Jews were not weak, and later that he was worried about Jackie’s health. Who makes this stuff up? We are supposed to believe that these are real motives for murdering a president and his accused assassin?
Shortly after the assassination, national polls showed that 52% doubted Oswald did it alone and this skepticism reached 90% in intervening years. The evidence is overwhelming that multiple gunmen did JFK in at the behest of powerful interests.
Why care today? Surely most of the perpetrators are dead. Yet that rogue network inside and outside the national government remains. It was never rooted out. It would sound familiar to a Roman citizen who experienced the transformation of the Roman Republic into despotic empire and then eventual dissolution to barbarism. Rome shriveled from the first city to attain perhaps 1 million people to a local trading center of about 5,000-10,000.
The network concealed in deep politics has grown more audacious since the Kennedy triumph, with individual assassination still popular (e.g., Senator Paul Wellstone) but escalating to mass murders like the Oklahoma City bombing and the World Trade Center. Do we need CNN to televise the federal government slaughtering Americans in a Tianneman-square-style massacre, more open and visible than the FBI’s massacre of women and children at Waco, before people understand the constitutional crisis? I fail to see how America’s current head-in-the-sand approach can succeed.
Copyright Morgan Reynolds 2006+ unless otherwise specified. Distribution of and linking to the articles on this website is strongly encouraged, as long as the content is not manipulated or distorted in anyway.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
720 Posts
Actually, Oswald did drive, and I believe he owned a car. He drove out to where he took the pot-shot at the retired military officer ( General?) who was head off local John Birch group. Immediately after the shooting, when numerous witnesses said they saw the shooter in the TSBD, police went in, Oswald was the only person unaccounted for. As police began the search of the building, they encountered Oswald leaving, An employee told police he ( Oswald) worked there, and they let him go. He left via bus, then when on foot was contacted by Officer Tibbets, since Oswald matched the description of the shooter given by eyewitnesses. Oswald shot and killed Tibbets in view of numerous witnesses, fled to movie , snuck in, and the rest is well know.
An interesting point, oftentalked about by conspiracy buffs, is the bullets recovered from Officer Tibbets body had no ( or very little) rifling marks, so they claim it was an "assassins special": actually is was a milsurp S&W originally chambered for .38 S&W ( NOT special ). This has a larger bore then "special". To make the revolver more attractive to buyers, the importer cut the chambers longer to take the .38 SPECIAL round, but the bullets for the special, being .357, were way undersize in both the chambers, and the bore, hence little or no rifling marks. Typical of Oswald, it was all he could afford, but it worked.
Read the books I mentioned, keep an open mind, and report back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
61 Posts
Just gotta throw in a couple of items that support TM7's post. 1. I recently retired from Ford Motor Company after 39 years, I worked in the Rouge Complex in Dearborn, MI. I have spoken with men who claimed to have helped replace the windshield of the presidential limousine after Dallas, they were sworn to silence on threat of prosecution by the FBI. 2. Recently (within the last 5 years, I think) the FBI has officially admitted to altering the Zapruder film to erroneously show that the shots came from the rear, when they in fact did come from the front of the car. BTW the admitted reason that Jacqueline jumped out of the car onto the trunk was to retrieve Kennedy's brain and put it back into his head so he could be revived (she thought).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
I have also never thought that we were given the truth about JFK.

I like to keep things simple & I think he was killed because he opposed the Viet Nam war. If we look at it after the assassination its not hard to see what happened & where the MONEY went!

It is very similar to what is going on now, in any war a lot of people die & a lot of people make a lot of
MONEY!.......Simple!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
61 Posts
I am not implying that there are no other motives, indeed there were probably many, but is it really hard to see that LBJ could not have gotten into the white house any other way, something that he wanted passionately? Add that he hated the Kennedy's? And that he had also been implicated in the convenient murders of several political rivals (for lesser offices) in his rise to power? He had the motive, opportunity, and the means. He may or may not have been allied with Howard Hunt, or other wealthy and powerful (and anti-Kennedy) Texans.

Furthermore, I don't think that it is unconnected that Joe Kennedy, JFK's father, was well known as being a Nazi sympathizer in WWII, who has been described as being a spy for Germany while he was the Ambassador to Great Britain during the same war. Back in the early 60's, they were still familiar with the truth about the PT109 incident (a hint: JFK was no hero). Nor had they forgotten how Joe Kennedy bought JFK's way into politics to begin with (he had to, because of the infamy of the PT109 incident).

So, to sum up, maybe a hyper-patriot of Texan extraction got rid of the son of a traitor, who had been court marshaled for dereliction of duty, and who subsequently bought his way into a House seat, forever causing politics to be a race based solely on money and advertising?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,772 Posts
Gaeton Fonzi, member of the Church committee, responds to Vince Bugilosi's 1600 page book supporting the Warren Commission, actually a re-write of the Warren report, and with the Arlen Specter role.....fyi...TM7
.
Reply From a Conspiracy Believer
by Gaeton Fonzi
Vincent Bugliosi must be exhausted. He not only churned out more than 1600 pages of tautologically strained contentions to support his book’s pretentious title, Reclaiming History, he must be weary from wrestling with the multitude of distortions and twisted conclusions he was forced to make to support his primary assertion.

His primary assertion? Swallow that mouthful of Dr. Pepper before you read this: “...it has been established beyond all doubt that Oswald killed Kennedy.”

Fearful of endowing his abhorrent duplicity with any hint of legitimacy, I hesitate to take the time and effort to respond to all the ungrounded contentions he makes about my role as a federal investigator in the case and about certain areas of evidence with which I was involved. There are, however, two very significant segments of the investigation that Bugliosi, with clever distortion and selected omission of facts, defiles truth and history. And having cited as a source my own book, The Last Investigation, he had to be well aware of its documented adherence to the historical facts. (Former U.S. Senator Richard Schweiker graciously provided a jacket blurb citing the book for exactly that : “A rarity among Kennedy assassination books, [it] does not indulge in sensational or bizarre conspiracy theories.”)

One key contention that Bugliosi repeatedly makes is that my approach to the investigation was biased because, before I was hired by the HSCA, I “had long been a conspiracy theorist.” Bugliosi uses the term “conspiracy theorist” with the same poisonous implication that Joe McCarthy used when he stigmatized anyone who defied him as a “Communist sympathizer.” In my case, Bugliosi was forced to characterize my viewpoint as anything but objective in order to distort the validity of certain evidence I had discovered – evidence that knocked **** out of his and the Warren Commission’s crucial single bullet theory and the branding of Oswald as the lone assassin.

Bugliosi is wrong. I was never a “conspiracy theorist.” I went from an agnostic to a conspiracy believer. Like millions of Americans and almost all journalists whose Fourth Estate responsibility mandates that they maintain a critical oversight of our Government, I didn’t question the Warren Report when it was published. Didn’t even read it. Its assertions and conclusions came to me from the daily press and the national news networks. And the most respected and nationally influential newspapers – including The New York Times – editorially praised the Report and instantly endorsed its conclusions. This despite the fact that the 26-volumes of evidence which the Commission claimed backed its critical conclusions weren’t available to the press until more than two months after the release of the Report.

I was then writing feature articles for Philadelphia Magazine. By the time the Warren Report was published, a Philadelphian named Arlen Specter who had worked for the Commission returned home to run and win a job as the city’s district attorney. Specter was a bright, ambitious young lawyer who, it turned out, was being credited with postulating “the single-bullet theory,” essential to the Commission’s lone assassin contention. An interview with the budding celebrity Specter was a natural for a local publication.

I had known Specter and respected his integrity. He was exceptionally smart, unabashedly ambitious and articulate enough to once be captain of the Yale Debating Team. If there were seeming inconsistencies in the Commission Report and disparities between its conclusions and the evidence, Arlen Specter would explain it all. After all, he was there.

Before I interviewed Specter, I got access to a copy of the Report and the 26 volumes of evidence. It would later turn out that I was the first reporter to confront Specter knowing the details of the evidence from which the Commission drew its conclusions. And I had especially studied the evidence in that area of the case – the actual killing itself, the shots and the trajectories – out of which Specter pulled the single-bullet theory critical to the Commission’s conclusions.

After two sessions and almost four hours of interviewing Specter, I came away with great doubts about the key conclusions in the Warren Commission Report. While vigorously defending his single-bullet theory, Specter admitted that one of the principal factors in favor of the theory was that there was no other way to explain what happened to the bullet which emerged from the President’s neck – unless it also hit Connally. (Connally later testified that he disagreed because he heard the first shot but wasn’t hit until later.) Specter had an answer but no factual explanation to the Commission’s claim that a single bullet went through President Kennedy’s body before it went through and did extensive damage to Governor Connally’s body before it emerged in what appeared to be pristine condition.

Specter’s answer to that anomaly: “It’s possible.”

I was, however, much more shaken by Specter’s responses to questions I asked about the locations of the bullet holes in Kennedy’s shirt and jacket and the location of the so-called exit hole in his throat. Considering the sixth-floor shooting lair from which Oswald was supposedly firing and the downward trajectory of the bullet, the shot had to hit Kennedy high in his back and then track downward in order to emerge at the lower part of Connally’s throat. In the Report itself, an artist’s profile rendering of Kennedy’s head and shoulders showed exactly that.

However, actual photographs of Kennedy’s jacket and shirt which were not in the Warren Commission Report but released as supplemental evidence by the FBI indicate exactly where the bullet entered his back. The holes in both the jacket and shirt were almost six inches from the top of the collars, and well below the so-called exit wound in Kennedy’s throat.

Specter attempted to explain this discrepancy by pointing out that Kennedy was waving to the crowd when he was hit and that gesture led both the jacket and shirt to ride up his back and double over. I pointed out that both Kennedy’s jacket and shirt were tailored tightly and, if they both became rolled up by his waving, wouldn’t they each have two bullet holes in them?

At that point, Specter became uncharacteristically nervous and began to stammer a bit. Suddenly he jumped from his chair behind his desk and quickly came behind me, grabbed my arm and began waving it. See, he said, see how your jacket rides up? See... well, it doesn’t do it much in your case but it normally it does.

Was Specter saying there was no inconsistency between the Commission’s location of the wound and the holes in the clothing?

Specter’s exact response, including his hesitancies, as recorded: “No, not at all. That gave us a lot of concern. First time we lined up the shirt...after all, we lined up the shirt....and the hole in the shirt is right about, right about the knot of the tie, came right about here in a slit in the front....”

But, I asked, where in the back did it hit Kennedy?

“Well, the back hole, when the shirt is laid down, comes....aah....well, I forget exactly where it came, but it certainly wasn’t higher, enough higher to...aah....understand the....aah....the angle of decline which....”

Was it lower? Was it lower in the slit in the front?

“Well, I think that....that if you took the shirt without allowing for its being pulled up, that it would either have been in line or somewhat lower.”

Somewhat lower?

“Perhaps. I....I don’t want to say because I don’t really remember....”

Don’t really remember? The man who was responsible for developing the theory that would keep the whole Warren Commission Report afloat says in 1966, about crucial evidence relating to that theory, “I don’t really remember?” I couldn’t believe I was listening to the bumbling, evasive efforts of a former member of the Yale Debating Team. What Specter was admitting was that the Single Bullet Theory was not really even a probability, it was a possibility!


Arlen Specter attempting to demonstrate the possibility of the single bullet theory.
I felt the implications of that were enormous. If the Single Bullet theory wasn’t built on unassailable evidence – and Specter himself dramatically illustrated that it wasn’t – the Warren Commission’s final conclusions were more than suspect. In fact, the mendacious cornerstone upon which the Warren Commission built its case against Lee Harvey Oswald was so transparently, almost arrogantly distorted, so much so that the early independent researchers were jolted with a patriotic zeal to pursue and reveal to the public the truth about President Kennedy’s assassination. These researchers started by doing something the press and almost all the public hadn’t done: Read the Warren Commission Report and check the validity of its conclusions against the evidence in the 26 volumes of evidence.

Thus were Conspiracy Believers born.

* * *
Let’s talk about another area of JFK’s assassination probe in which, because of my position as an official government investigator, I had singular knowledge of the details and facts. And maybe that’s why Bugliosi never approached me to get his facts right. The search for an intelligence agent who used the name of Maurice Bishop was a multi-mirrored exercise out of an intricate game of spy play.

Like any adept fact-spinning defense attorney would, Bugliosi lays a heavy camouflage of half-truths and foggy distortions on those particular areas of evidence which unerringly point to a conspiracy. He does it in the face of Arlen Specter’s admission that his Single Bullet theory rests on the negative assumption that there is no other way it could have happened. But Bugliosi also blatantly ignores any evidence which isn’t to his liking. If Bugliosi, for instance, had approached me – the single lead HSCA investigator handling the Committee’s search for Maurice Bishop -- because he simply wanted to make his book as truthful and factually correct as possible, he wouldn’t have had to distort and stretch the truth as much as he did in order to support so many of his asinine conclusions.

The search for Bishop began before the formation of the HSCA, when I was working for the JFK subcommittee of the Church Senate Intelligence Committee. I first approached a Miami Cuban named Antonio Veciana, the founder and chief finance officer of Alpha 66, one of the most militant anti-Castro groups in action at the time of Kennedy’s assassination.

Bugliosi, in questioning Veciana’s credibility about the existence of Bishop and his contact with Lee Harvey Oswald, fails to note that, in my initial approach to Veciana, there was no initial mention of the JFK case. My interest, I hedged, was in the relationship between Miami’s anti-Castro groups and the U.S. intelligence agencies. In a world of strong egos and jealous rivalries, Veciana’s reputation among anti-Castro group leaders as trustworthy and honest was, I discovered, very unusual. He had a background in accounting and banking. As a matter of fact, he was still in Cuba in 1960 when an American approached him in his bank office in mid-1960. Veciana thought the American was interested in banking with him but as the conversation went on it became apparent the American was recruiting him for anti-Castro activities. Veciana had been leaning that way and his close friends knew it, including the owner of the bank, Julio Lobo, also known as the Sugar Kind of Cuba and who, we later learned, worked closely with the CIA.

The American said his name was Maurice Bishop and Veciana wound up working closely with him as his strategic planner and advisor from 1960 until 1973, including at least two Castro assassination attempts. After the first failed attempt, Veciana and his family were forced to flee Cuba for Miami. There he was approached again by Bishop and their anti-Castro activities resumed. Not all of their work together involved military actions or assassination attempts; some involved sophisticated economic schemes to sabotage Cuba’s monetary system. Bishop would call Veciana to meet him at irregular intervals in a variety of cities in the U.S. and Latin America. One such meeting took place in the lobby of a tall office building in Dallas in the late summer of 1963. As Veciana entered he saw Bishop appearing to finish up a conversation with a young man whom Veciana would later recognize on television as Lee Harvey Oswald. Bishop never introduced Veciana to Oswald and Veciana, like a good intelligence agent, never asked about him.




Bugliosi questions both the existence of a Maurice Bishop and the fact that Bishop was in truth David Atlee Phillips, once one of the CIA’s most talented covert operatives, an agent who would later be elevated to the Agency’s highest supervisory rank as Chief of the Western Hemisphere Division. However, in dismissing the fact that Bishop was in reality David Phillips, nowhere does Bugliosi reveal or put into context how the confirming details were developed – in intelligence work, perhaps the most important factor in judging the validity of information.


Antonio Veciana, leader of the militant Cuban exile group Alpha-66. Veciana told Fonzi about his handler, a "Maurice Bishop," identified by Fonzi as CIA propaganda expert David Phillips.
When Veciana first revealed the existence of a Maurice Bishop, the Church Committee was in the midst of probing the CIA’s unauthorized activities. In reaction, David Atlee Phillips had “retired” from the Agency to form the Retired Intelligence Officers Association to defend the Agency from unfavorable public criticism. He had gotten some press notice, including a brief article with his photo in People magazine. I wasn’t aware of that when I was questioning Veciana about “Bishop,” nor had I ever heard of Phillips. After exhausting our short list of possible CIA agents who had worked anti-Castro activities, showing Veciana as many photos as we could get, we decided to have him work with a police artist to develop a sketch of Bishop. When Senator Schweiker saw the sketch, he said the face looked familiar. Perhaps, Schweiker guessed, he was one of the string of CIA agents called to testify before the Church Committee in secret sessions. That evening he recalled the name of one of the agents who strikingly resembled the sketch of Bishop. His name, Schweiker remembered, was David Atlee Phillips.


A sketch of "Maurice Bishop" produced from Veciana's description at left, and CIA officer David Phillips at right.
Bugliosi knows all that because he read The Last Investigation. At least he listed it as a source. The book reveals the surfeit of junctions that testify to the multiple points of “coincidences” between Bishop’s and Phillips’ activities, locations and contacts. It reveals the labyrinthine reasons for Veciana’s decision not to publicly identify Phillips as Bishop, including his secret desire to re-establish a relationship with “Bishop” and resume anti-Castro terrorist activities, a passion he continued to pursue despite an attempt on his life. More significantly, the book reveals the story behind the dramatic circumstance that led Phillips to perjure himself in sworn testimony before the House Assassination Committee. That involved an issue that would have confirmed his covert identity as Maurice Bishop. (Since I had witnesses willing to confirm Phillips had lied, I strongly urged HSCA chief counsel Bob Blakey to pursue the perjury charges. Blakey refused. At that point, the Committee staffers were working on final reports and pursuing an issue involving the CIA’s relationship with Oswald would have opened doors no Committee member wanted touched.)

Yet Bugliosi misleadingly concludes: “The effort to find “Bishop” was likewise unsuccessful.”

That is simply not true. There were enough mating circumstances of time, place and activity and enough witnesses, including retired CIA agents who confirmed an awareness of Phillips’ use of the name of Bishop as covert cover. More significantly, anyone who takes the time and effort to write a 1600-plus page book on any subject surely must keep abreast of developments in the subject area while the project is in progress. Thus Bugliosi shouldn’t be able to claim ignorance of the subsequent revelations regarding the Bishop-Phillips issue which emerged after the life of the Assassination Committee. This includes Phillips’ operational activities with his closest CIA associate, David Sanchez Morales, a trained hit man for the Agency. (Morales, partying one night with hometown friends he considered trustworthy, began a drunken tirade against President Kennedy, ranting about the “traitorous” deals the President had made with Khrushchev and Castro. Morales ended his rant by muttering: “Well, we took care of that son of a bitch, didn’t we?”

Among the more recent revelations – yet well within the time period in which Bugliosi was still researching and writing his book – were disclosures from the former head of Cuban State Security, General Fabian Escalante. While still working undercover in Havana running a “public relations” business, Phillips was kept under regular surveillance by Escalante’s men. This included the time period in which “Bishop” recruited Veciana and planned their first Castro assassination attempt in October, 1961.

Plans for the attempt were centered on a welcoming ceremony for visiting Russian spaceman Yuri Gagarin. Castro was scheduled to appear on the balcony of the Presidential Palace and Veciana’s shooters would be firing their weapons, including a bazooka, from an eighth-floor apartment across the street. Veciana had rented the apartment in the name of his mother-in-law. Bishop, he said, had told him they were fortunate to have found it available because its owner, an American woman, was returning to the States.

The assassination attempt had to be aborted. At the last moment, having received a tip that something was going to happen, General Escalante flooded the area around the Palace with scores of his agents. Bishop had arranged for Veciana to flee the island by boat the night before, leaving the actual hit to his trusted firing team. However, when the firing team saw Escalante’s men swarming around the area, they left their weapons in the apartment and fled the scene. Moments later, Escalante’s men stormed the apartment and found the weapons.

Escalante was very familiar with the apartment. It had been kept under surveillance for quite some time because the American woman who owned it was a spy and the apartment had been used as a covert meeting base for CIA operatives in Havana. Among those seen visiting the apartment long before Bishop and Veciana planned their Castro assassination attempt was David Atlee Phillips.

In sum, then, there seems to be something mysteriously significant about Bugliosi writing a 1600-page book loaded with almost as much misleading information and mis-spun interpretation of the evidence as the Warren Commission Report.

* * *

Gaeton Fonzi.
Gaeton Fonzi was an investigator for both the Church Committee and the House Select Committee on Investigations. His discoveries and an accounting of the failure of the latter body are recounted in his book The Last Investigation.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
483 Posts
Wow, great stuff there, TM7! I'll have to sticky that.

Never heard about the limo driver doing any shooting. Sounds a little suspicious to me. No question, though, that a shot came from the front and exiting out the back of JFK's head. Eyewitnesses at the scene confirmed that. That is an EXIT hole coming out the back of his head!!!

The evidence is unbelievable. Of course, there's also E. Howard Hunt admitting on his death bed his involvement in the drama.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
483 Posts
zasxcd said:
Furthermore, I don't think that it is unconnected that Joe Kennedy, JFK's father, was well known as being a Nazi sympathizer in WWII, who has been described as being a spy for Germany while he was the Ambassador to Great Britain during the same war. Back in the early 60's, they were still familiar with the truth about the PT109 incident (a hint: JFK was no hero). Nor had they forgotten how Joe Kennedy bought JFK's way into politics to begin with (he had to, because of the infamy of the PT109 incident).
Also for side reference, let's not forget about Prescott Bush, GW's grandfather and also a Bonesman, who was a Nazi money launderer, supporting them in organized financial crime, etc.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
483 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,772 Posts
jk3006 said:
zasxcd said:
Tell us more about Prescott Bush....
I can't run off all the different aspects of his involvement off the top of my head, so I'll post this link to google video. It's a 10 minute blurb out of Alex Jones' "Marshall Law 911". Very educating and very chilling!!

http://video.google.com/videoplay?d...351&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

I'll post some of what's on that video if you don't have high speed to watch it. Enjoy!
.
Concise video. ...makes you wonder how much is accurate and where Hitler got his marching orders from.

..TM7
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
94 Posts
Anybody seen the Movie EXECUTIVE ACTION with Burt Lancaster and Robert Ryan ?
Might be closer to fact than fiction.

It will make thought provoking viewing. When they start talking money for the "hit" this might be a handy reference in 1963 dollars.

http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/histinc/f07ar.html

Do I believe Oswald was the "one" and worked alone ?......when I see a flock of POLAND-CHINA's head south for the winter.
I don't worry about it because the truth will never come out for more than a hundred years..if ever!
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top