Oswald and Ruby Transcript Not so Far-Fetched as Corporate McPravda Wants You to Believe

[Octafish]

News surfaced last weekend that a “transcript” detailing a conversation between Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby had just been found in a Dallas safe.

Gary Mack, curator of the Sixth Floor Museum, was seen on the teevee and quoted in newspapers around the world. He described the transcript as likely created for a movie deal Henry Wade had signed. A copy of the deal was in the newly opened safe. Look how much space Mr. Mack got in this article:

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hybrZ1gy0HbS3jViswJ3W8NpAuigD8UT0GQ80

The Thing Is: What went unmentioned is that there are no books that advance a conspiracy in the death of President Kennedy available in his museum, located in the Texas School Book Depository. See for yourself:

http://www.jfk.org/Store/Product_List.asp?Category=Books

Anyway, an acquaintance, let alone a conversation, between Oswald and Ruby in the weeks before the assassination is not so far-fetched as Mack and what Allen Dulles dubbed “The Mighty Wurlitzer” would have us believe.

The fact is there are many reports from credible witnesses linking the two. For instance, there’s the word of a waitress who saw Ruby and Oswald dine together. Her son, Jim Mattox, remembers. He was Texas Attorney General.

Mattox to Investigate New Kennedy Theory

Dallas Morning News
Aug. 8, 1990

EXCERPT…

Mr. Mattox said Monday that he is interested in pursuing the story because he was once told by his mother, a former waitress at Campisi’s Egyptian Restaurant in Dallas, that Oswald’s killer, Jack Ruby, frequented the restaurant.

She believed that she saw mr. Ruby and Oswald eating dinner there together, according to Mr. Mattox.

Mattox spokesman Kelly Fero said Tuesday that Mr. Mattox has agreed to review the evidence.

“They contacted Mattox yesterday afternoon asking whether he would look at their evidence were they to supply it. He said yes,” Mr. Fero said. “But they haven’t presented it yet.”

CONTINUED…

Dallas Morning News
Aug. 8, 1990
Associated Press

Well, we know where that investigation went. Don’t we?

Not satisfied with “Case Closed” for an answer, one researcher put together more than a few dots—Paul Kangas:

Newly discovered FBI documents prove that Jack Ruby has been an employee of Richard Nixon since 1947. That that FBI document Ruby is listed as working as a spy & hit man for Nixon. On Nov. 22, 63 Ruby was seen by a women who knew him well, Julian Ann Mercer, approximately an hour before the arrival of JFK's motorcade, unloading a man carrying a rifle in a case at the Grassy Knoll from his car. Ruby later was seen on national TV killing a witness who could link Nixon & Bush to the killing of JFK: Oswald. On the Trail of the Assassins, Garrison, p xiii.

SOURCE: http://independence.net/jfk/kennedy.html

Then, there’s the case of Mr. James A. Wilcott, formerly a CIA employee.

JAMES WILCOTT’S TESTIMONY

James B. Wilcott, a former CIA accountant, swore in a secret session of the House Select Committee on Assassinations that he was told by other CIA employees that Lee Harvey Oswald was paid by the CIA, and that money he himself had disbursed was for "Oswald or the Oswald project." The HSCA report indicated that other CIA employees discounted Wilcott's testimony, but none of their statements were included in the report. The document excerpted below was acquired by John Armstrong after his JFK Lancer NID97 presentation. Selected pages from the National Archives are presented graphically; the remainder, to preserve bandwidth, are excerpted typographically. A link to the complete text of Wilcott's testimony is provided near the bottom of this page.

SOURCE w LINKS:

http://home.wi.rr.com/harveyandlee/Wilcott/Wilcott.htm

Gee. Other people with intel backgrounds have sworn the same thing. Richard Case Nagell, for one.

Richard Case Nagell

Spartacus.Schoolnet

EXCERPT…

According to Nagell, when he recovered he began working for the Central Intelligence Agency as a double agent. This involved becoming an activist in the American Communist Party. This included distributing Marxist propaganda in Mexico.

Nagell also claimed he was involved in monitoring a group of Cuban exiles plotting against Fidel Castro. In 1963 Nagell discovered that this group was planning to assassinating John F. Kennedy while making it appear that it had been ordered by Castro. When he told the KGB they ordered him to warn Lee Harvey Oswald about what was happening. Nagell also claimed he warned the FBI and CIA about the plot.

In September, 1963, Nagell walked into a bank in El Paso, Texas, and fired two shots into the ceiling and then waited to be arrested. Nagell claimed he did this to isolate himself from the assassination plot. This was successful and Nagell was charged with armed robbery and ended up spending the next five years in prison.

On his release Nagell told Jim Garrison about his knowledge of the assassination of John F. Kennedy . He claimed that David Ferrie, Guy Banister, and Clay Shaw were involved in this plot with Lee Harvey Oswald. However, Garrison decided against using him as a witness in the court-case against Shaw.

Dick Russell wrote about Nagell in his book, The Man Who Knew Too Much (1992). Nagell claimed the initial plan to assassinate President John F. Kennedy was financed by Haroldson L. Hunt and other individuals. The operation was to be performed by a anti-Castro group. According to Nagell the conspirators believed that if they set-up Lee Harvey Oswald, a well-known supporter of Fidel Castro with links to the Soviet Union, the assassination would result in a full-scale war against Cuba.

CONTINUED…

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKnagell.htm

Going by the mass coverage The Press Corpse gave Gary Mack and the no-conspiracy-it’s-just-an-unfinished movie script crowd, it is pretty clear the press wants you to think, “Case Closed.”

Now, the case is open whether Oswald and Ruby knew each other prior to their meeting in the basement garage of the Dallas Police Department, a moment captured live on national TV.



I DO know it’s mighty interesting coincidence that the Dallas District Attorney Henry Wade could come up with an idea like that “dialogue” created for a possible film—a project for which a contract was found in the safe along with the alleged pre-assassination transcript between Oswald and Ruby. Don’t fiction writers often base their writings on ideas based in reality?

So, I don’t know about you, but when it comes to the assassination of the President of the United States—the last true Liberal President of the United States—I demand to know what the facts are. I demand the Truth. I demand to know what happened. I demand to know what the facts are. And I especially demand to know who was responsible and why no one has been prosecuted, let alone punished, for treason—that is apart from material witnesses to conspiracy, including Ruby and Oswald.

[Buzz Clik]

1. I'm thinking of going to the prom this year in a tinfoil tuxedo. Care to be my date?

[Octafish]

2. WHO RULES AMERICA? HOW DID WE GET HERE?

Even if it's been more than 44 years, there's nothing I find funny when it comes to the death of President Kennedy.
All he did was use his office to keep the peace, unlike so many of his successors.

Here's a bit on the subject:

WHO RULES AMERICA? HOW DID WE GET HERE?

Joan Mellen
Stewart Mott House, Washington, D.C., September 14, 2007.

I like to begin my talks with a mantra. It goes like this. Jim Garrison, district attorney of Orleans Parish, whose investigation into the Kennedy assassination is the subject of my book, “A Farewell To Justice,” after it was all over and Clay Shaw was acquitted, was asked: how could you ever have believed that you could convict CIA operative Clay Shaw for participation in the conspiracy to kill President Kennedy in a state court in Louisiana?

“I guess I thought I was living in the country I was born in,” Garrison said.

This line has particular resonance today. Many of us were not born in a country where martial law was legitimized; where the President could countermand any law he wanted to with promiscuous signing statements; where there was illegal government surveillance of citizens accompanied by neither warrants nor probable cause; where what library books you took out could become known to the government; where America, having legalized the use of torture, was defined as a country inevitably pursuing preemptive foreign wars, and where, as in George Orwell's “1984,” war was a permanent part of the country's identity. You all know the litany.

It also has become clear even to those in deepest denial that the Democrats are not about to reverse these assaults on the U.S. Constitution. In policy, in principle and in action, the Democrats are revealing themselves as offering no substantive difference from the party in power. Howard Zinn made the point that there was little difference between the two parties in “A People's History of the United States,” first published in 1980. Zinn's observation is more true than ever today as some people, albeit half-heartedly, continue to be tempted to place their faith in a change of administrations in the hope of reversing the damage to the democratic fabric we have witnessed in the past eight years.

In our continuing attempt to understand when this assault on the Constitution began in earnest, so that in the administration of George W. Bush it accelerated at so astonishing a pace, I would like first to raise the question of whether it is in to fact true that with Bush and Cheney we have seen an inflation of the power of the Executive. Or has the power of the president in fact shrunk so drastically that it is entirely inappropriate to blame Bush for the war, or for the assault on the Constitution? Let me suggest that it is the organ grinder with whom we have to be concerned, rather than the monkey.

Sometimes there is a historical moment where a society suffers a dramatic reversal in political direction.

I would place that moment at the assassination of President Kennedy. At that instant, the Bushes and the Cheneys, serving so diligently the Bechtels and Halliburtons and their multifarious cohort, mostly in the western part of the country, seized the political control of this country. This is why discussion of the murder of President Kennedy is as relevant today as it was in 1963 and 1964, and why there has never been nor will there ever be an honest investigation of this crime so long as that investigation is government-sponsored. That the Kennedy family, in particular Robert Kennedy, opposed any open investigation of President Kennedy's death is one dimension of the story that has led me to the conclusion that we must not look today to the Democratic Party for redress.

I spent seven years on my investigation of the Kennedy assassination. I went beyond Jim Garrison's work to include the thousands of documents released after his death to the National Archives under the JFK Act passed by a Congress with some interest in transparency. We are not likely to see similar legislation to open the records of the 9/11 Commission. That is not speculation. Philip Zelikow, the executive director of the 9/11 Commission, admitted on NPR that he was not about to make the same mistake the Warren Commission did; he was not about to release for public and scholarly scrutiny the documents his commission collected. When Lieutenant Colonel Tony Shaffer came forward with information about the “Able Danger” unit of military intelligence, he was swiftly discredited. The “New York Times” buried his astonishing revelations in its back pages. Col. Shaffer told me when I met him at the office of his attorney, Mark Zaid, that he had lost his job.

I interviewed more than a thousand people in my effort to contribute to the question of who planned the murder of President Kennedy. Among them was a former mercenary and soldier-of-fortune named Gerald Patrick Hemming, a shrewd former CIA asset, who remarked to me in passing, that “John F. Kennedy was the last president who thought he could take power.” In his youth, inexperience and sense of entitlement, Kennedy could not imagine that his CIA enemies would eliminate him.

CONTINUED...

http://www.joanmellen.net/whorules.html

Hey, Buzz Clik! If that's your picture, you don't write the way you look.

[halobeam]

7. I thoroughly read Joan Mellen's writing you linked to.

It was so well done, I took out her book "A Farewell to Justice" just a few days ago. I wonder what she makes of this. Have you read her book? I'm almost nearly a third of the way through. I think she is incredible for picking up where Garrison left off.

Bookmarked, and recommended.

Thanks for the post.

[Octafish]

15. John Whitten - The Good Spy

Prof. Mellen is amazing. I've been reading a page or two a day, enjoying "Farewell to Justice" for as long as I can.

Those who believe Richard Helms probably won't like this:

The good spy: how the quashing of an honest C.I.A. investigator helped launch 40 years of JFK conspiracy theories and cynicism about the Feds

Jefferson Morley

It was 1:30 in the morning of Nov. 23, 1963, and John F. Kennedy had been dead for 12 hours. His corpse was being dressed at Bethesda Naval Hospital, touched and retouched to conceal the ugly bullet wounds. In Dallas, the F.B.I. had Lee Harvey Oswald in custody.

The lights were still on at the Central Intelligence Agency's headquarters in Langley, Va. John Whitten, the agency's 43-year-old chief of covert operations for Mexico and Central America, hung up the phone with his Mexico City station chief. He had just learned something stunning: A C.I.A. surveillance team in Mexico City had photographed Oswald at the Cuban consulate in early October, an indication that the agency might be able to quickly uncover the suspect's background.

At 1:36 am, Whitten sent a cable to Mexico City: "Send staffer with all photos of Oswald to HQ on the next available flight. Call Mr. Whitten at 652-6827." Within 24 hours Whitten was leading the C.I.A. investigation into the assassination. After two weeks of reviewing classified cables, he had learned that Oswald's pro-Castro political activities needed closer examination, especially has attempt to shoot a right-wing JFK critic, a diary of has efforts to confront anti-Castro exiles in New Orleans, and has public support for the pro-Castro Fair Play for Cuba Committee. For this investigatory zeal, Whitten was taken off the case.

C.I.A. Deputy Director of Plans Richard Helms blocked Whitten's efforts, effectively ending any hope of a comprehensive agency investigation of the accused assassin, a 24-year-old ex-Marine, who had sojourned in the Soviet Union and spent time as a leftist activist in New Orleans. In particular, Oswald's Cuba-related political life, which Whitten wished to pursue, went unexplored by the C.I.A. The blueribbon Warren commission appointed by President Johnson concluded in September 1964 that Oswald alone and unaided had killed Kennedy. But over the years, as information which the commission's report had not accounted for leaked out, many would come to see the commission as a cover-up, in part because it failed to assign any motive to Oswald, in part because the government's pre-assassination surveillance of Oswald had been more intense than the government ever cared to disclose, and finally because its reconstruction of the crime sequence was flawed.

Both the story of Oswald and the C.I.A., and the way in which it leaked out in bits and pieces fueled a generation of conspiracy-minded authors, journalists, and filmmakers who mined Richard Helms's dubious legacy--a rich vein of ominous ambiguity and unanswered questions about one of the most jarring events of modern American history. The untimely end to Whitten's investigation, which prevented a public airing of what the government actually knew, also contributed to a generation of public cynicism about Washington--to a national mythology of skullduggery, and the suspicion that secret agencies in Washington were up to no good and the truth never gets out. In the decades since Kennedy's death, the "rogue C.I.A. assassin" has become a stock Hollywood character, his villainy engrained in spy movies and the popular culture.

Whitten's story, told here for the first time, has an uncomfortable new resonance today, as the Bush administration tries to thwart investigation into, among other things, what our intelligence agencies knew about Saddam's WMD programs before we went to war with Iraq. Whitten was a rare C.I.A. hero in the Kennedy assassination story whose personal odyssey is a poignant but unsettling reminder that inquiries into a national tragedy can be compromised early on. Intelligence mandarins, seeking to protect their positions, can override independent subordinates. Official deceptions can take decades to unravel. Embarrassing secrets, however, don't simply go away; eventually, they filter out, as the Kennedy case shows, often doing more harm to the country than they would have had the public known the truth earlier.

CONTINUED...

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1316/is_12_35/ai_111897441

Rogue management.

You are very welcome. Thanks for giving a damn, halobeam.

[TheCentepedeShoes]

77. One of the things I like about DU

is the great book suggestions. Got Farewell to Justice from the library this afternoon.

[MinM]

83. Richard Case Nagell

Here's some more on Richard Case Nagell ..

The Man Who Knew Too Much

Zachary Sklar explains what role RCN played in the movie JFK at the end of this clip and the beginning of this one.
http://www.ctka.net/backisss.html">
The Life & Death of Richard Case Nagell

The Private Correspondence of Richard Case Nagell

[LibraLiz1973]

86. GREAT book

Everyone interested should read it

[defendandprotect]

100. Yes . . I agree when the OPENLY VIOLENT assault on the Constitution began . . .

That would have been the coup on JFK ---

But there had been political violence before that ---
Much I'm not familiar with, but vaguely --

At the United Nations --- Dag Hammarskjold dedicated to world peace --- !!!
1961, 18 September -
Died in fatal plane accident near Ndola, Zambia while on a peace mission in the Congo

Here are a few reasons why the fascist warmongers might have been allergic to Hammarskjold . . .
Hammarskjold refused to submit to McCarthyism and rejected the idea put forward by John Foster Dulles that the Federal Bureau of Investigation should investigate the staff of the UN.

He was also involved in what he called "preventive diplomacy". This included attempts to solve the disputes in Palestine, Vietnam and Egypt. During the Suez Canal Crisis Hammarskjold managed to persuade the United Nations Security Council to condemn the actions of Israel, France and Britain.

VIETNAM would have been a big issue --- American action in VN was actually counter to United Nations decisions on Vietnam ---

Adlai Stevenson is suspected of being a victim of the right-wing ---
John Lennon and many, many others.
In fact, John Lennon managed to fight for years and defied Nixon and the FBI ---
perhaps giving some impetus to Nixon's Watergate mess?

The McCarthy Era --- not responded to appropriately by citizens --- not responded to appropriately by our press until one man --- Edward R. Murrow -- began to show the flawed McCarthy.
And Murrow suffered for what he had done; losing his prominent program and being sidelined from news.

So what we're actually looking at is corruption and political violence going back decades ---
Of course, as Jim Marrs makes clear, the elites understood immediately that democracy was going to be a threat to them --- but not immediately!


AND . .
is THIS actually clear to anyone here who should be concerned with small "d" democracy
and protecting our Constitution . . .

It also has become clear even to those in deepest denial that the Democrats are not about to reverse these assaults on the U.S. Constitution. In policy, in principle and in action, the Democrats are revealing themselves as offering no substantive difference from the party in power. Howard Zinn made the point that there was little difference between the two parties in “A People's History of the United States,” first published in 1980. Zinn's observation is more true than ever today as some people, albeit half-heartedly, continue to be tempted to place their faith in a change of administrations in the hope of reversing the damage to the democratic fabric we have witnessed in the past eight years.

Being concerned with supporting a PARTY is not necessarily where our attention should be;
in fact, it's a distraction from understanding reality.
The Rah, Rah of party loyalty cannot sideline small "d" democracy ---

[Demagitator]

103. Non-violence is....

the most powerful force in the universe; that is why "preventive diplomacy" is a direct threat to the MIC.

[defendandprotect]

108. Yes . . . !!!

[defendandprotect]

104. Agree with much of what Mellen unveils; but not of the second half of this ---

As we can see --- and as I believe Joan Mellen is pointing to here, as well --
this is a large agenda -- and 9/11 is part of this overall corruption.

As I tried to make clear, political violence has been with us BEFORE the JFK coup --
who put Germany back in the war business post-WWI which prevented them from rearming?
That's certainly history which changed the world and America's role in militarism and
intelligence gathering! Herbert Walker, Prescott Bush, Allen Dulles - Sullivan & Cromwell
and various front companies raised funds for Hitler by demanding gold against the American
dollar and tapped elites around the world.

I think JFK was a multi-purpose target --- ranging from the elites not wanting to have another
FDR in the White House to Vietnam -- and certainly he was sympathetic to civil rights --
perhaps not as immediately as he should have been, but his speeches attacking Segregation
certainly moved Americans in the right direction.

There is an excellent movie which was made in 1972, I think --
Burt Lancaster, Robt Ryan called "Excecutive Action" --- a title which was used again for a later movie not to be confused with this one. Many people seem to think that we have a long way to go with gaining information on the JFK coup. That isn't true. Almost all of the story is known and has been for a long time.

We've also had the John Tunnheim Panel conclusion from the 1992 JFK Classifed Records Act that ...

"OSWALD WAS EMPLOYED BY THE CIA WORKING ON HIGH LEVEL ASSIGNMENTS AND PROBABLY ALSO FOR THE FBI."

Additionally, the Director of the CIA notified the Secret Service that they had trained Oswald
for spying missions in Russia.

As for Vietnam and the attempt to assassinate Castro --- we have to remember that it was NIXON who was strongly involved in the planning of those projects --- actually Bay of Pigs was originally
Operation 40.

The Gulf of Tonkin incident was yet one more dirty trick ---
and there is a screenplay in print of Oliver Stone's JFK . . .
and there are some interesting scenes which didn't make the movie ---
one pertaining to Nixon's involvement with VN/Gulf of Tonkin --

And, as far as I'm aware, RFK was talking about opening the JFK assassination investigation
even at the time of his death. I don't think that as far as the Kennedy family that we can
overlook threats of violence --- and we may have seen it again in the death of JFK, Jr. not
so long ago --

It seems that JFK never flew without a Co-Pilot ---
and that the response time was alarmingly delayed ---
Needless to say, there are numerous ways to bring down planes ---
Microwave, etc.

[progressoid]

5. Yummm. That picture makes me hungry.

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2007/12/12/nigella400_narrowweb__300x430,2.jpg

[Adsos Letter]

13. ...wow...

...nipple tape for sure with that outfit...

:D

[JackRiddler]

32. Shame on the lot of you for having nothing to contribute but meaningless insults.

You want to debunk? Go ahead and try. Namecalling is bankrupt.

[Buzz Clik]

37. Meh. We've been listening to this for nearly 45 years. There is nothing left to debunk.

If he wants to hang this silliness up in GD, he's going to pay a price in ridicule. I offer no apologies for that.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

78. No. The problem is, there is PUH-LENTY left to debunk.

The actual evidence on the scene defies the faux conclusions by the powers-that-be.

This event at that point in history is hardly "silliness"; particularly given the governance just wanted to "go forward" and put it behind, without satisfactory closure to anyone other than powerful politicos.

Perhaps, the war for power seems foggy, to you. For those who were actively involved in the activities of that decade or have taken keen interest in revealing one of the most impactful periods in U.S. history, that war is clear: the truth foggy.

Meanwhile, we are living under an administration that does NOT give a damn about any of its abuses because they figure THEY will be writing that history,...just as history has been written by their for-bearers. They have their heads above the clouds and expect we can never see them here on the ground. However, now,...we have access to more information than they possessed. We have to swim through the sea of unfounded crap dumped into the information station but become ever more able to sort fact from fiction simply by accessing real 'evidence'.

Of course, you always have the power to dismiss anything you please.

[defendandprotect]

101. They are threatened by the subject and need to stop discussion of it ---

[Beam Me Up]

38. Denial isn't a river in Egypt and "hope" won't help you if it isn't reality

based. So far as I know, Continuity of Government is still in effect going on seven years after 9/11.

[Buzz Clik]

45. That's great. Next meeting is in your basement, right?

[Beam Me Up]

50. Not surprised you scoff and dismiss.

After all, you have nothing else.

http://georgewashington.blogspot.com/2008/02/continuity-of-government-plans-were.html

[Kingofalldems]

3. Question: How would they get a transcript of a

private conversation? Wiretap? Don't get it.

[Octafish]

4. Possibly based on an FBI report. Word is that Oswald was an informant.

Same for Ruby. Both worked for FBI. Government files also show Oswald had operational roles with CIA and Customs.

When Oswald was arrested in New Orleans, he asked for a specific FBI agent by name. As soon as the guy came by, Oswald got sprung, scot-free.

Here's something on Ruby rubbing shoulders with an up-and-coming BFEE connected politician:

Richard Nixon's Greatest Cover-Up:

His Ties to the Assassination of President Kennedy

by Don Fulsom
Crime Magazine.com
 
Seared into the memories of all Americans who lived through the assassination of President John F. Kennedy is exactly where they were on November 22, 1963. Yet private citizen Richard Nixon, who — believe it or not — was in Dallas, could not recall this fact in a post-assassination interview with the FBI.

The interview dealt with an apparently false claim by Marina Oswald that her husband —alleged Kennedy assassin Lee Harvey Oswald — had targeted Nixon for death during an earlier trip to Dallas. A Feb. 28, 1964 FBI report on the interview said Nixon "advised that the only time he was in Dallas, Texas, during 1963 was two days prior to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy."

SNIP...

Giancana's half-bother Chuck and nephew Sam claimed in their 1992 book Double Cross that the Mafia don had a long, warm, and mutually rewarding relationship with Nixon that dated back to the 1940s. In those times, Giancana was helping Chicago Syndicate boss Anthony Accardo consolidate the city's rackets and gambling operations, and Nixon was a freshman congressman from California. In recounting for his relatives a big favor the congressman did for Giancana back then, the gangster established a direct link between Nixon and a Chicago hoodlum who later moved to Texas and went on to shoot Lee Harvey Oswald: "Nixon's done me some favors, all right, got us some highway contracts, worked with the unions and overseas. And we've helped him and his CIA buddies out, too. Shit, he even helped my guy in Texas, (Jack) Ruby, get out of testifying in front of Congress back in forty-seven … By sayin' Ruby worked for him."

A 1947 memo, found in 1975 by a scholar going through a pile of recently released FBI documents, supports Giancana's contention. In the memo, addressed to a congressional committee investigating organized crime, an FBI assistant states: "It is my sworn testimony that one Jack Rubenstein of Chicago ... is performing information functions for the staff of Congressman Richard Nixon, Republican of California. It is requested Rubenstein not be called for open testimony in the aforementioned hearings." (Later in 1947, Rubenstein moved to Dallas and shortened his last name.) The FBI subsequently called the memo a fake, but the reference service Facts on File considers it authentic.

Undercover work for the young Congressman Nixon would have been in keeping with Ruby's history as a police tipster and government informant. In 1950, Ruby gave closed-door testimony to Estes Kefauver's special Senate committee investigating organized crime. Committee staffer Luis Kutner later described Ruby as "a syndicate lieutenant who had been sent to Dallas to serve as a liaison for Chicago mobsters." In exchange for Ruby's testimony, the FBI is said to have eased up on its probe of organized crime in Dallas. In 1959, Ruby became an informant for the FBI.

Ruby's old Chicago boss, Giancana, was murdered in his home in Oak Park, Ill., in 1975 — shortly before he was to have appeared before a Senate committee investigating assassinations. Seven .22-caliber bullets were blasted into his mouth and neck, Mob symbolism for "talks too much."

CONTINUED...

http://crimemagazine.com/03/richardnixon,1014.htm

And Momo was talking with the Feds.

[halobeam]

11. Warren de Brueys... that's right.

That's the guy Oswald asked for by name. He didn't show up to get him out, but de Brueys sent someone else instead.


Pena, the guy from the cafe testified HSCA, he saw Oswald, de Brueys, David Smith and Wendall Roche leave the restaurant together and walk over to the Customs bldg. together. Pena's record was sealed for twenty five years...

Smith is CIA, du Brueys, FBI and Roache, Customs. Interestingly, Roache was investigating Ferrie and it seems Oswald was investigating Ferrie, "rather than the other way around". This NO field office guy H.Leake told Roache that Garrison had good intelligence and was onto something.

After the assassination, they were scattered around; Smith, Uruguay and Roache to Puerto Rico.

In the Church Committee hearing in '75, Roache was notified to testify and his response was he was waiting 12 years to talk about this. His testimony is classified still today. Pieces of it are known, and it's interesting because it comes down to de Brueys again. It touches on the a cuban exile guy Sergio Arcacha Smith who worked all three agencies too... his head guy was de Brueys.

No wonder Garrison went on with this, it's completely mind boggling yet something doesn't let you stop. I guess it's a part of people who want the damn answers. The truth.

[defendandprotect]

102. Sen. Frank Church's hearings on the CIA brought some shocking info to the public ---

but the full report has never been released . . .

Church Committee hearing in '75

[defendandprotect]

109. More than FBI . . .

John Tunnheim Chaired the 1992 JFK Classifed Records Act ---
The Panel concluded that . . .

"OSWALD WAS EMPLOYED BY THE CIA WORKING ON HIGH LEVEL ASSIGNMENTS AND PROBABLY ALSO FOR THE FBI"

Additional the CIA Director wrote the Secret Service to relate that Oswald had been trained by the CIA for spying in Russia.

Presumably the Tunnheim Panel got to see Oswald's employment records -- and IRS returns ---
all the documents requested by journalists at the time and denied ---

[gateley]

6. As soon as I stop laughing about "McPravda", I'll read this -- thanks! nt

[Octafish]

17. The Golden Slouches™.

Allen Dulles pegged them:

Journalism and the CIA: The Mighty Wurlitzer

by Daniel Brandt
From NameBase NewsLine, No. 17, April-June 1997

Alongside those Greek morality plays and Biblical injunctions, we are also reminded by history itself that the use of unethical means to achieve a worthy end can be self-destructive. Power, by definition, is isolated from the correcting signals of external criticism. Or perhaps the feeling of fighting evil fits so comfortably, that it's difficult to shed even after objective circumstances change.

The history of U.S. intelligence since World War II follows both patterns. The Office of Strategic Services, the CIA's predecessor, had jurisdiction over wartime covert operations and propaganda in the fight against fascism. OSS chief William Donovan recruited heavily among social and academic elites. When the CIA was launched in 1947 at the beginning of the Cold War, these pioneers felt that they had both the right and the duty to secretly manipulate the masses for the greater good.

OSS veteran Frank Wisner ran most of the early peacetime covert operations as head of the Office of Policy Coordination. Although funded by the CIA, OPC wasn't integrated into the CIA's Directorate of Plans until 1952, under OSS veteran Allen Dulles. Both Wisner and Dulles were enthusiastic about covert operations. By mid-1953 the department was operating with 7,200 personnel and 74 percent of the CIA's total budget.

Wisner created the first "information superhighway." But this was the age of vacuum tubes, not computers, so he called it his "Mighty Wurlitzer." The CIA's global network funded the Italian elections in 1948, sent paramilitary teams into Albania, trained Nationalist Chinese on Taiwan, and pumped money into the Congress for Cultural Freedom, the National Student Association, and the Center for International Studies at MIT. Key leaders and labor unions in western Europe received subsidies, and Radio Free Europe and Radio Liberty were launched. The Wurlitzer, an organ designed for film productions, could imitate sounds such as rain, thunder, or an auto horn. Wisner and Dulles were at the keyboard, directing history.

The ethos of the fight against fascism carried over into the fight against godless communism; for these warriors, the Cold War was still a war. OSS highbrows had already embraced psychological warfare as a new social science: propaganda, for example, was divided into "black" propaganda (stories that are unattributed, or attributed to nonexistent sources, or false stories attributed to a real source), "gray" propaganda (stories from the government where the source is attributed to others), and "white" propaganda (stories from the government where the source is acknowledged as such).<1>

After World War II, these psywar techniques continued. C.D. Jackson, a major figure in U.S. psywar efforts before and after the war, was simultaneously a top executive at Time-Life. Psywar was also used with success during the 1950s by Edward Lansdale, first in the Philippines and then in South Vietnam. In Guatemala, the Dulles brothers worked with their friends at United Fruit, in particular the "father of public relations," Edward Bernays, who for years had been lobbying the press on behalf of United. When CIA puppets finally took over in 1954, only applause was heard from the media, commencing forty years of CIA-approved horrors in that unlucky country.<2> Bernays' achievement apparently impressed Allen Dulles, who immediately began using U.S. public relations experts and front groups to promote the image of Ngo Dinh Diem as South Vietnam's savior.<3>

CONTINUED...

http://www.namebase.org/news17.html

Unlike the Soviets, the turds in America's Press Corpse know how to make a buck. In addition to blackmail, advertising.

[motocicleta]

8. Thanks for keeping after this, Octafish

The plot sickens.
K n R

[Octafish]

18. Somebody impersonated Oswald in Mexico City to link Castro to Dallas...

CIA said this fellah was Lee Harvey Oswald, coming out of the Cuban embassy.

JFK Lancer is tops:

Tape: Call on JFK Wasn't Oswald

By DEB RIECHMANN
.c The Associated Press
Sunday, Nov 21, 1999

WASHINGTON (AP) - Hours after President Kennedy was assassinated, FBI agents reportedly listened to a tape of a phone call that a man identifying himself as ``Lee Oswald'' had placed to the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City.

They made a startling discovery: The voice on the tape was not Oswald's, government records say.

This controversial tape has been a question mark in the assassination investigation since Kennedy was killed Nov. 22, 1963. Only now - 36 years to the day after the murder - has the government released a flurry of new details about it.

The CIA said years ago that the tapes on which it recorded the call were erased. Documents released in recent years said otherwise. The latest and newest of declassified documents offer more evidence that the tapes survived.

The discovery that the voice on the tape was someone other than Oswald was a ``disquieting discovery because the man who impersonated Oswald was still at large,'' said John Newman, an ex-military intelligence analyst, author and professor at the University of Maryland.

Oswald was in Mexico City in September and October 1963. During his one-week stay, he contacted the Soviet Embassy and the Cuban consulate, inquiring about visas needed to go to the Soviet Union via Cuba.

CONTINUED...

http://www.jfklancer.com/LNE/LHO-Mexi.html

If it was our government, it would never lie to We the People.

[Swamp Rat]

9. McPravda!

:rofl: :thumbsup:

[Octafish]

19. Maverick! Wonder if he ever met Rose Cheramie?

Tha'ss bee-yoo-tee-ful, Compay Primero.

Truly captures the essence of Mr. Ford's party mobile.

Rose Cheramie was beautiful and told the truth, too.

Rose Cheramie: How She Predicted the JFK Assassination

By Jim DiEugenio
Probe Magazine (Also in “The Assassinations”)
July-August 1999 Vol. 6, No. 5

On November 20, 1963, Lt. Francis Fruge of the Louisiana State Police received a phone call from Moosa Memorial Hospital in Eunice. A Mrs. Louise Guillory, the hospital administrator told him that there was an accident victim in the emergency ward. Guillory knew that Fruge worked the narcotics detail and she felt that the woman was under the influence of drugs.

Fruge immediately left for the hospital. When he got there he encountered a middle-aged white female sitting down in the waiting room outside emergency. There were no serious injuries; only bruises and abrasions. She was only partly coherent. But Moosa was a private hospital and since the woman seemed bereft of funds, Guillory had called Fruge to see what he could do to help. The woman identified herself to Fruge as Rose Cheramie.

Fruge had no choice at the time except to place Cheramie in the Eunice City Jail. He then went out to attend the Eunice Police Department’s Annual Ball. About an hour later a police officer came over to the function and told Fruge that Cheramie was undergoing withdrawal symptoms. Fruge came back and, after recognizing the condition, called a local doctor, Dr. Derouin, from the coroner’s office. Derouin administered a sedative via syringe to calm her down. The doctor then suggested that she be removed from the jail and taken to the state facility in Jackson. After Fruge agreed, Derouin called the facility at about midnight on the 20th and made arrangements for her delivery there. Afterwards, Fruge called Charity Hospital in Lafayette and ordered an ambulance for the transport to the hospital.

Fruge accompanied Cheramie to the hospital. And, according to his House Select Committee deposition, it was at this point that Rose began to relate her fascinating and astonishing tale. Calmed by the sedative, and according to Fruge, quite lucid, she began to respond to some routine questions with some quite unusual answers. She told him that she was en route from Florida to Dallas with two men who looked Cuban or Italian. The men told her that they were going to kill the president in Dallas in just a few days. Cheramie herself was not part of the plot but apparently the men were also part of a large dope ring with Rose since Cheramie’s function was as a courier of funds for heroin which was to be dropped off to her by a seaman coming into the port of Galveston. She was to pick up the money for the drugs from a man who was holding her child. It seemed a quite intricate dope ring since she was then to transport the heroin to Mexico. The two men were supposed to accompany her to Mexico but the whole transaction got short-circuited on Highway 190 near Eunice. In the confines of a seedy bar called the Silver Slipper Lounge, Cheramie’s two friends were met by a third party. Rose left with the two men she came with. But a short distance away from the bar, an argument apparently ensued. And although some have written that she was thrown out of the vehicle and hit by an oncoming car, according to Fruge, Rose said that the argument took place inside the Silver Slipper, and that the two men and the manager, Mac Manual, threw her out. While hitchhiking on the 190, she was hit by a car driven by one Frank Odom. It was Odom who then delivered her to Moosa. As Fruge so memorably recalled to Jonathan Blackmer of the HSCA, Cheramie summed up her itinerary in Dallas in the following manner: “She said she was going to, number one, pick up some money, pick up her baby, and to kill Kennedy.” (p. 9 of Fruge’s 4/18/78 deposition)

At the hospital, Cheramie again predicted the assassination. On November 22nd, several nurses were watching television with Cheramie. According to these witnesses, “…during the telecast moments before Kennedy was shot Rose Cheramie stated to them, ‘This is when it is going to happen’ and at that moment Kennedy was assassinated. The nurses, in turn, told others of Cheramie’s prognostication.” (Memo of Frank Meloche to Louis Ivon, 5/22/67. Although the Dallas motorcade was not broadcast live on the major networks, the nurses were likely referring to the spot reports that circulated through local channels in the vicinity of the trip. Of course, the assassination itself was reported on by network television almost immediately after it happened.) Further, according to a psychiatrist there, Dr. Victor Weiss, Rose “…told him that she knew both Ruby and Oswald and had seen them sitting together on occasions at Ruby’s club.” (Ibid., 3/13/67) In fact, Fruge later confirmed the fact that she had worked as a stripper for Ruby. (Louisiana State Police report of 4/4/67.)

CONTINUED...

http://www.ctka.net/pr799-rose.html

Jim DiEugenio and Lisa Pease are tops. ¡Como tu, Herman'!

[Swamp Rat]

20. Todo bien amigo

:hi:

[Joanne98]

30. McPravda needs to be nationalized!

[starroute]

10. It's not the Oswald-Ruby connection I doubt, it's the Mafia part

That whole *the boys want Bobby Kennedy off their backs but killing him would create too much fuss, so let's kill John instead* business just doesn't ring true.

If you want to speculate that someone created the transcript on a basis of genuine knowledge -- but was also trying to cover up the true culprit and motivation -- I might buy that. But I can't accept it as it stands.

[Wiley50]

12. Agree,starroute. I've been thinking the same way

It had to be the CIA as agents of the M-I-C

it's the only thing that makes sense at all.


I'm a hardcore member of the Octafish Fan Club.

Don't ever stop chasing this thing, Octafish

[AntiFascist]

14. It wasn't just domestic mafia issues...

the Mob also had a vested interest in setting up casinos in Cuba. The CIA also had hired mafia hitmen to take out Castro - some of these men later confessed to their participation in the JFK assassination. Hoffa was also involved peripherally, which might explain his disappearance. Giancana later confessed to his participation, then was later executed by being shot in the mouth and throat for talking too much. See the entire Fulsom article, above.

Edit: the article also mentions that Ruby had strong mafia ties, and perhaps Oswald as well. When it comes to domestic CIA affairs, the mafia may have played more of a role than we realize - albeit much having to do with support of the MIC.

[JDPriestly]

53. And since the Republican heirs to Nixon and Bush senior

have taken over the government, gambling has become more and more widespread right here. I think it is absolutely awful. People, especially poor people waste enormous amounts of money in the aggregate on gambling. It's a scourge.

[defendandprotect]

105. Hard to tell whether GAMBLING or TATOOS are more popular on our TVs lately . ..!!!

This is, of course, purposeful ---

[Octafish]

24. The dialogue is stilted. The strategy is flawed. The plausible deniability is everywhere.

Who does that sound like?

Besides Howard Hughes, a few popular public figure link the Mafia, Texas Oil and CIA.

The following, by a former Kennedy Justice Department attorney, sums the issues up:

JFK, RFK, the Mob and Dallas

by Ronald Goldfarb

The vast and intriguing post-assassination literature contains shocking and controversial disclosures bearing on the relationship between the work of the Justice Department's organized crime section and the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. While some of these disclosures are embarrassing and many are questionable, not all can be ignored or automatically discredited. Taken together they form a thesis that has to be pondered.

The Thesis:
Top mob members wanted Robert Kennedy and later John Kennedy murdered. First, they were outraged at what they perceived as the brothers' hypocrisy, and second, they were alarmed at the increasing danger of being further investigated and prosecuted. The hypocrisy they saw derived from their notion that Joseph Kennedy's history with organized crime figures plus some racketeers' support of JFK's election warranted protection from, not their selection for, aggressive prosecution. This compromising history was compounded by the administration's use of mob members in its attempts to deal with Castro. They delivered, and they expected appropriate acknowledgment of their cooperation. Rather than laying off, the Justice Department was piling on. Major mob leaders were outraged and planned revenge.

SNIP...

The mob was a certain beneficiary of the assassination. Committee Counsel Bob Blakey speculates that "the most plausible explanation for the murder of Oswald by Jack Ruby was that Ruby had stalked him on behalf of organized crime." Oswald and Ruby both had ties to the organized crime world in New Orleans and Dallas. "The fingerprints of organized crime are all over Jack Ruby." Blakey concluded at the time of the House Assassinations Committee's report: "The mob did it. It's a historical fact."

Startling disclosures supporting the theory that there was a conspiracy to kill President Kennedy were suggested by a former mobster lawyer in 1992. New York Post columnist and Robert Kennedy biographer Jack Newfield interviewed a longtime Tampa- based lawyer for Trafficante and Hoffa, Frank Ragano, who told of chilling conversations with his two clients and with Carlos Marcello. Each of the three had strong motives for revenge and survival; each of them had been harassed and endangered by Robert Kennedy's organized crime drive; each was fighting for his life and fortune. One evening early in 1963 when Ragano was with Hoffa and other Teamsters playing cards in Florida, Hoffa asked his cohorts what they thought might develop if something should happen to Bobby, Ragano reports. They agreed the president would go after his enemies with added determination. What if something happened to the president, Hoffa asked; LBJ would get rid of Bobby, one of Hoffa's lawyers speculated. "Damn right he would," Hoffa replied, according to Ragano. "He hates him as much as I do."

On July 23, 1963, Ragano reports, he was in Washington with Hoffa when Hoffa asked him to tell Trafficante and Marcello when he saw them next, "Something has to be done. The time has come for your friend and Carlos to get rid of him, kill that son-of- a-bitch John Kennedy. This has got to be done." Ragano passed on Hoffa's message and told Hoffa he had done so when in August he saw him again in Washington.

After the assassination, Hoffa told Ragano that he was delighted. "Did you hear the good news? They killed the son-of-a- bitch bastard." This meant that LBJ would get rid of Bobby, Hoffa rejoiced. Hoffa pulled down the flag that hung at half mast at Teamsters headquarters. Hoffa told one reporter, on the day Ruby killed Oswald, "Bobby Kennedy's just another lawyer now." Several days after the assassination, he took Ragano aside, saying: "I told you they could do it. I'll never forget what Carlos and Santo did for me." Later, in New Orleans, Marcello, who was waiting for approval of a huge Teamsters pension fund loan, told Ragano, "When you see Jimmy, you tell him he owes me, and he owes me big." He got his loan. Ragano's conclusion: "They had actually acted on the message I had delivered to them from Jimmy and now they wanted payoffs from him."

CONTINUED...

http://www.cosmos-club.org/web/journals/1996/goldfarb.html

Of course, other, lesser-known, names run in all three circles as well. DeMohrenschildt springs to mind.

I'm in agreement with you, starroute, wiley50 and AntiFascist. We need more evidence regarding the transcript.

Regarding Dallas to today: I have total respect for your work and analysis.

[defendandprotect]

106. The elite have always used the Mafia for their own purposes . . .

and for more worldly projects --- !!!

The US RAISED the Mafia in Italy post--WWII in order to help run OPERATION GLADIO -- which was intended to keep Italians from voting in liberals and to keep right-wing government in place.

Same elsewhere in the world ---

Currently, this seems to have been acted out again in Russia ---

[RaleighNCDUer]

41. The mob connection is not unlikely. They lost ten, maybe hundreds of millions when Castro

took over Cuba, and if they could help provoke an invasion of Cuba and get their properties back, why wouldn't they? The fact that they hated Bobby was incidental to the hit they took with Batista being kicked out.

Wheels within wheels.

[defendandprotect]

107. It has to be understood that organized crime can only exist with the cooperation

of corrupt government and corrupt police enforcement --- overall with the protection of elites.

In other words, there are benefits for the elite in having these criminals on hand --
and the rewards are probably also financial -- consider the Drug War --- for one.

[ConsAreLiars]

16. Oswald has to be the most thoroughly well-connected "loner" in history.

Setting up a one-man "Fair Play for Cuba" front in the offices of Anti-Castro CIA/Mafia-linked Cuban exiles in New Orleans, sponsored in Dallas by White Russian/CIA anti-Soviet aristocrats. The idea that he played patsy and pal with the Dallas branch seems of the same political gang is no stretch. Hitting JFK to get RFK makes a bit of sense from a gangster perspective, since leaving the older brother in charge of the whole state apparatus would likely result in bringing the whole state apparatus into an effort to seek maximum vengeance on the killers of RFK, while taking out JFK would put some other political faction in power.

[Octafish]

26. The Assassination of John F. Kennedy as Coup D'Etat

..."taking out JFK would put some other political faction in power" is exactly it, ConsAreLiars.

Here's more light from another brave academic, Prof. Sharrett:

The Assassination of John F. Kennedy
as Coup D'Etat

by Christopher Sharrett

It occurs to me that two lines of discourse currently affect public understanding of the John Kennedy assassination. Both narratives obscure the reality of the assassination as a state crime carried out by the official enforcement apparatus, a coup d'etat.

One narrative that informs numerous conspiracy books details a plot to kill Kennedy consisting of some small, marginal grouping, usually including the Mafia and anti-Castro Cubans (although at times including pro-Castro Cubans), occasionally with support of one or two "renegade" CIA agents. This narrative, which has been in circulation at least since the 1970s, seems to me to have a particular function in shaping our perception of the assassination and events surrounding it.

The second narrative, which is becoming steadily more dominant, acknowledges that there was indeed an official cover-up of the assassination, but that this cover-up was "benign," in the interests of the American people, and spontaneously constructed in order to avoid a confrontation with the Soviet Union or Cuba, who were suspected by some in state power of being the real assassins. One recent variation of this narrative argues that this cover-up was put in place largely to protect the public from the consequences of the Kennedy brothers' depraved foreign policy. This narrative also argues that while Oswald was the lone assassin, Castro perhaps influenced him. But the whole affair comes down to the ruthless prosecution of the Cold War by the Kennedys, often against the sober counsel of others within state power.

The small-scale conspiracy model indeed dates to the post-Vietnam, post-Watergate period, when state power suffered one of many profound legitimation crises. The cover-ups of the assassinations of the 1960s had already unraveled; an issue for many who wished to relegitimate the state was the most efficient way to acknowledge the public's skepticism, and in so doing reconstruct the state's authority and credibility. The small-scale cabal is most efficient at the task, even as it defies reason. It offers a conspiracy that addresses many concerns, at least for those people who do not wish to look at the particulars of the assassination, its historical moment, and its context within similar acts known to history. The exposure of a conspiracy of the Mafia and some Cubans would have only further legitimated the state, since it offered a conspiracy that is an unfortunate, arcane aberration unrepresentative of true state interests. The CIA agents involved are described as "renegade" and "rogue elephants" for the same reasons. These agents are portrayed not as functionaries of the state, not as representatives of policy interests held by others in authority, but as loners working out of personal, pathological impulse or overzealous ideology. This is often suggested to be the case in the matter of David Atlee Phillips --- whose involvement in the assassination has been incontrovertibly demonstrated by Gaeton Fonzi --- even when we know that Phillips, the renegade, was given a major promotion within the executive ranks of the CIA. Another function of this form of narrative is the erasure of the historical moment and the presentation of the Kennedy period as ideologically seamless. The historical record tells us that the period leading up to the assassination was filled with conflict within the halls of state.

This conflict was actually reflected in contemporary press accounts of the period. One account is Harry S.Truman's Washington Post article, published exactly one month after the assassination (and not mentioned by anyone since) in which Truman expressed profound concern about the CIA's violation of its initial mandate. Another piece is Arthur Krock's Oct. 3, 1963 New York Times article, published just over a month before the assassination, detailing an "intra-administration war" directed at Kennedy from the CIA. These articles articulate real, material conditions of the Kennedy Administration that any reasonable person must examine if interested in motivations within the state to remove Kennedy from office.

Kennedy himself spoke to the importance of these matters. After reading the novel Seven Days in May in the wake of the Bay of Pigs, Kennedy confided to his friend Red Fay that after one or two more such episodes (and we know about the Missile Crisis --- about which more in a moment --- the Test Ban Treaty, and the American University speech), he could be perceived as weak and "soft on Communism" by others in state authority, and a coup d'etat was conceivable.1 Kennedy encouraged director John Frankenheimer to film the novel in order to further sensitize the public to the political dynamics of the period.

Many critics argue that the leading and intimidation of witnesses during the investigation by governmental authorities may merely reflect the typical bullying by Hoover's FBI. But much of the investigation, and certainly its presentation to the public, was accomplished not by crude bullies but by sophisticated, erudite men learned and respectful of the law. Many critics also suggest that emotionalism and the panic of the moment could have motivated the prompt removal of Kennedy's body from the jurisdiction of the murder. Did emotionalism also motivate the removal and reconstruction of the presidential limousine, and subsequent destruction of forensic evidence? Did the panic of that afternoon motivate continued obfuscation about the smallest details of the assassination even thirty years after the crime?

CONTINUED...

http://spot.acorn.net/jfkplace/09/fp.back_issues/28th_Issue/coup.html

I wish I didn't have to snip the above. It fills in a lot of the "Why."

Thanks for giving a damn, ConsAreLiars.

[AntiFascist]

36. Another question I have: was the Watergate breakin all about covering up the coup d'etat?

Is it possible that the Democrats had gotten hold of incriminating photos and other evidence linking Nixon and his aids to the crime, which they could use against him? Aren't there Nixon tapes where he explicitely states that the "Bay of Pigs" thing needs to be hushed, and where he setup the Plummers operation in order to protect the reputation of the presidency and the CIA? Didn't he call the Warren commission a "great hoax"?

[MinM]

55. The Real History of Gerald Ford, Watergate, and the CIA

AntiFascist, here's what Lisa Pease believes Nixon was after:

Real History Blog: The Real History of Gerald Ford, Watergate, and the CIA

The real story of Watergate has never been fully told, although in my opinion, Jim Hougan’s excellent book Secret Agenda comes closest. He opens by noting that E. Howard Hunt was, at the time of Watergate, on his third retirement from the CIA, implying, of course, that Hunt never really left the agency. (On a side note -– I find great irony in E. Howard Hunt being called a “plumber” because, as Richard Helms once described, the first step in coup plotting was “putting in the plumbing.” Hunt was ostensibly brought to the White House to plug leaks, hence the overt meaning of the term plumber. But I believe he was working under Helms’ definition as well.)

Hougan also describes how improbable it was that James McCord, a 40-year veteran of CIA’s Office of Security -– the in-house police agency that taps, follows, and spies on CIA employees to ensure sure they don’t spill agency secrets -- got caught). McCord was a skilled break-in artist, and a skilled placer of taps. So it’s inconceivable that he bungled the Watergate burglary unless he planned on getting the operatives caught. McCord’s secretary told the FBI McCord seemed to be saying a permanent goodbye to her when he left the office that day, thanking her for all her work over the years, a very strange thing to say if just going home for the night. McCord’s secretary also noted that he kept a picture of Richard Helms on his desk at the Republican National Committee, his ostensible employer that was personally inscribed by Helms to McCord.

To me, the most interesting and least discussed piece of the Watergate puzzle is the piece related to Howard Hughes. By the early sixties, the Hughes corporation was already enmeshed with the CIA. Hughes had selected Robert Maheu to run his organization. Maheu had been a CIA asset for years, and was their chosen “go-to” guy when the Agency decided to kill Cuban leader Fidel Castro.

Howard Hughes knew before President John Kennedy and his brother Robert Kennedy did that the CIA was trying to kill Castro. Hughes found out when Maheu had to ask for a leave of absence to run the operation.

The Kennedy brothers found out about the plots shortly after the FBI uncovered a bugging operation in Las Vegas. Sam Giancana, one of the Mafia members hired to kill Castro, had suspected his mistress Phyllis McGuire was having an affair with Dan Rowan (of the Rowan and Martin “Laugh-In” comedy team). Maheu, as a favor to Giancana, hired a Florida detective to bug Rowan’s hotel room. But the detective left his equipment in plain sight, and the maid reported the equipment to the police, who contacted the FBI. The CIA admitted to Hoover that CIA was directly involved in the bugging and convinced Hoover not to further investigate. The CIA then told Robert Kennedy about the CIA’s use of Giancana in a plot to kill Castro. Given that Robert Kennedy had faced Giancana down in a courtroom (where he famously accused Giancana of giggling like a little girl), trying to prosecute him for Mafia activities, Robert was understandably furious at CIA for using the Mob, and furious at them trying to kill Castro.

In its own Inspector General Report, the CIA reported that while they told Kennedy about the plots that had already concluded, they never divulged that additional plots that were continuing. I’ll do a separate post on the Castro plots at some point -– but my conclusion will be the same as that in the CIA’s internal study, which no proponent of the Kennedys' guilt in this matter ever cites: the Kennedys never approved any plots to kill Castro. The CIA, by its own admission, had no executive authority for these plots.

In 1968, John Meier, who worked for Howard Hughes, learned inadvertently of the CIA’s relationship with Howard Hughes when Maheu told Meier that Michael Merhage was going to be working with them in South America, asking Meier to help Merhage with contacts in Ecuador. Meier did, not knowing that Merhage was not really a Hughes employee, but a CIA employee using Hughes’ company for cover. Merhage assumed that Meier was himself CIA, and spoke openly to Meier about the Agency’s interest. (Merhage was so bumbling that one of Meier’s Ecuadoran contacts told Meier they had figured Merhage for an agent right away.)

Merhage’s next bumble takes us right back to the primary subject of this article. Thinking Meier was a CIA man like himself, Merhage gave Meier a directive from the CIA to Hughes dated September 2, 1968, containing a list of American politicians the CIA wanted funded through the Hughes corporation. Among the names Strom Thurmond, Wallace Bennett, Paul Laxalt, James Eastland, and many others, was the name Gerald R. Ford. The CIA wanted Hughes to give money to Ford’s campaign. (Source: “Hughes, Nixon, and the CIA: The Watergate Conspiracy Woodward and Bernstein Missed,” by Larry DuBois and Laurence Gonzales, Playboy, September, 1976.) Was the agency rewarding Ford for his service on the Warren Commission?

Shortly after the assassination of Bobby Kennedy, John Meier had occasion to speak with J. Edgar Hoover, whom he knew personally. Hoover told Meier that the FBI knew that Maheu had been responsible for the hit on Bobby Kennedy, but that he was powerless against the CIA. He was, of course, powerless, so long as that blackmail photo was out there. (For more on this episode, see my articles on the Robert Kennedy assassination in The Assassinations: Probe Magazine on JFK, MLK, RFK and Malcolm X. And while Meier’s credibility is shaky on some issues, I believe it was more than a coincidence that Robert Maheu called John Meier out of the blue, after ten years, the very day I was en route to see Meier. And when I met Meier, it was to talk about a different topic, not the RFK case, which I had not yet written about. This came up tangentially, which made his assertion all the more credible, I felt.)

Two year later, Hoover cut off all communication between the FBI and the CIA. I know Hoover couldn’t have done that without risking the exposure of that photo unless he had, by then, put together counterblackmail material. I wonder if Hoover’s independence from CIA came, at least in part, from something Hoover could prove about the assassination of Robert Kennedy in 1968.

After Robert Kennedy’s assassination, the CIA’s relationship with the Hughes organization became even closer. Hughes ordered Maheu to seize the moment and hire away Robert Kennedy’s political organization. Hughes, ever Machiavellian, knew that Larry O’ Brien and other top lieutenants from Bobby’s campaign would be jobless. Maheu was tasked with hiring them into the Hughes organization. If the CIA was behind the assassination of Robert Kennedy, what better way to keep Kennedy’s closest associates dependent for their lives and careers on the CIA? In any case, this simple act paved, in many ways, the start of the road to Watergate.

When Nixon took office as President, Hughes ordered Maheu to give Nixon either $100,000 or $1,000,000, depending on whose story you believe. (The official version is $100,000. It makes no difference – both were egregious sums, and both amounts were equally illegal for the President to have accepted.) So when Larry O’Brien, after working for Hughes, moved over to head the Democratic National Committee, Nixon worried very much what O’Brien might know about the Hughes loan.

Terry Lenzner, an investigator for the Watergate committee, told CBS on a Sixty Minutes segment last year that he wrote an entire section for the Watergate report suggesting that Nixon’s concern over the Hughes loan was the main motivation for the break-in at Watergate. Lenzner did not remember being given an explanation as to why this was omitted, but CBS noted speculation that the omission was due to the fact that Republicans and Democrats alike had received similar payoffs. Remember that Gerald Ford himself received money from Hughes. And undoubtedly, the CIA would not have wanted their role in the Hughes corporation to be exposed. Their connection with Hughes was not public knowledge at the time of the Watergate investigation.

In addition, R. Spencer Oliver, who worked at the DNC, was the son of an operative at the Mullen Company, the PR firm for the Hughes organization. So Nixon wanted to know what Oliver knew, as well..

http://realhistoryarchives.blogspot.com/2007/01/real-history-of-gerald-ford-watergate.html

"The Bay of Pigs" angle:

By giving this direction, Nixon sealed his fate on two counts. He was suggesting an obstruction of justice, and he was attempting to blackmail the CIA with some information. The latter action guaranteed that the former action would get exposed.

Haldeman’s account of his attempt to do as Nixon asked bears repeating:

John Ehrlichman and I were to meet the CIA officials. I went to John’s office to await their arrival. “Guess what,” I said to John. “It’s Bay of Pigs time again.”

“The man will never quit,” Ehrlichman said.

He thought about it and added, “Well, the President has a point. It will put pressure on Helms. But this time you’re going to push the red button, not me. I’ve had it on that route.”

Haldeman pressed the “red button,” and told Helms what he had been asked. The famously cool and composed Helms suddenly lost it:

“The President asked me to tell you this entire affair may be connected to the Bay of Pigs, and if it opens up, the Bay of Pigs may be blown." . . .

Turmoil in the room, Helms gripping the arms of his chair leaning forward and shouting, “The Bay of Pigs had nothing to do with this. I have no concern about the Bay of Pigs.”

Silence. I just sat there. I was absolutely shocked by Helms’ violent reaction. Again I wondered, what was such dynamite in the Bay of Pigs story?

Helms slowly settled, and acquiesced, to a degree. Walters later testified that Helms told him to remind Gray of the informal agreement between FBI and CIA to notify each other if their operations and investigations ran into the business of the other. And the seeds of Nixon’s ouster had been planted.

Haldeman came to believe that the reference to the Bay of Pigs was some sort of code for the Kennedy assassination. He read in Daniel Schorr’s book Clearing the Air of the plots against Castro, and wondered, as Schorr did, if those plots might have led, indirectly, to Kennedy’s own assassination. Haldeman even suggested to Nixon that, now that they were in office and had the power to do so, they should get to the bottom of who really killed Kennedy. Nixon rejected this idea.

Haldeman speculated about what Nixon knew about the assassination, and how he might have found out what he knew:

In a chilling parallel to their cover-up at Watergate, the CIA literally erased any connection between Kennedy’s assassination and the CIA. No mention of the Castro assassination attempt was made to the Warren Commission by CIA representatives. In fact, Counterintelligence Chief James Angleton of the CIA called Bill Sullivan of the FBI and rehearsed the questions answer answers they would give to the Warren Commission investigators, such as these samples:

Q. Was Oswald an agent of the CIA?

A. No.

Q. Does the CIA have any evidence showing that a conspiracy existed to assassinate Kennedy?

A. No.

And here’s what I find most interesting: Bill Sullivan, the FBI man that the CIA called at the time, was Nixon’s highest-ranking loyal friend at the FBI (in the Watergate crisis. He would risk J. Edgar Hoover’s anger by taking the 1969 FBI wiretap transcripts ordered by Nixon and delivering them to Robert Mardian, a Mitchell crony, for safekeeping).

It’s possible that Nixon learned from Sullivan something about the earlier CIA cover-up by Helms. And when Nixon said, “It’s likely to blow the whole Bay of Pigs” he might have been reminding Helms, not so gently, of the cover-up of the CIA assassination attempts on the hero of the Bay of Pigs, Fidel Castro -- a CIA operation that may have triggered the Kennedy tragedy which Helms desperately wanted to hide.

Angleton, of all people, knew that Oswald did indeed have a relationship with the CIA. He had a very curious pre-assassination file on Oswald. Rather than keeping Oswald’s file in the general Counterintelligence department where, one could conceivably argue, it could have innocently belonged, Angleton instead secreted the file to his tiny mole-hunting group, the Special Investigations Group, CI/SIG. There, only a handful of people would recognize the name Lee Oswald before the assassination. SIG was so secretive it was the part of Angleton’s empire designated to work with “Staff D,” Bill Harvey’s “Executive Action” (assassination) unit in CIA. Oswald’s file shows that not only was the CIA keeping track of Oswald, they were lying about him to other agencies before Kennedy was assassinated. For these and many other reasons I detailed in my long two-part article on Angleton in the book The Assassinations, I believe Angleton knew he was lying to the Warren Commission. The fact that he felt the need to coordinate with Sullivan suggests strongly that Sullivan knew the truth as well.

Whatever the meaning of the Bay of Pigs reference, the conversations of June 23, 1972, produced the “smoking gun tape,” showing Nixon was attempting to stop the wheels of justice, or specifically, the Justice Department’s Federal Bureau of Investigation, from pursuing the truth. Had that tape never surfaced, Watergate would have gone down in the history books the way it was first reported: as a “third rate burglary.”..

http://realhistoryarchives.blogspot.com/2007/01/real-history-of-gerald-ford-watergate.html

Listen to Lisa give her synopsis of this account here.

[AntiFascist]

60. Thanks for this!

I'm definitely bookmarking this thread.

It's interesting that suddenly there seems to be this meme spreading throughout broadcast and cable media that JFK wasn't such a great president after all, primarilly because he bungled the Bay of Pigs operation leading to a close call with nuclear conflict in the Cuban Missile Crisis. This was particularly notable on Friday's Bill Maher, but I had also heard it elsewhere recently. Perhaps the CIA propagandists are worried about something?

It's interesting, also, reading about speculation that the CIA had purposely setup Kennedy for failure in order to stir up anger against him on behalf of right-wing anti-communists. Recall the 'umbrella man' who was seen next to the JFK motorcade as JFK was being shot. He had testified to the Warren commission that he was there with the umbrella (as a reference to Neville Chamberlain) to protest Kennedy's anti-war stance towards the Soviet Union.

In reading about the anti-Castro operations I recall that it was really Nixon who was behind the planning for the overthrow of Castro around 1960, and he was originally considered a shoe-in for the presidency when he ran against Kennedy.

Also I've read a very good detailed article which mentions that, at some point, the CIA (and GHWB) may have turned against Nixon because they didn't want peace to be achieved between Taiwan and mainland China, which Nixon was famously on the path toward achieving. I wonder if this could have contributed to the bungled Watergate breakin and subsequent impeachment proceeding?

[AntiFascist]

73. Interesting article here about "The Fixer"

http://www.thechicagosyndicate.com/2007/10/how-cia-enlisted-chicago-mob-to-put-hit.html

How the CIA Enlisted the Chicago Mob to Put a Hit on Castro

...

Maheu forged a friendship with Giancana, meeting him every day, sounding the gangster out on his views toward Castro. Maheu quickly realized that Giancana needed little persuading to go after the Cuban leader. Not only had Castro robbed him of his casino income; Giancana had lost out on a shrimp boat operation he was trying to build, as well as on a plan to offer gambling on tourist boats traveling from Miami to Cuba. "He had all these wonderful things going for him," Antoinette Giancana told me. "As an heir to <Giancana's> estate, I can say that we lost everything to Fidel Castro. He took everything away from us." The mere mention of Castro's name in the Giancana house, the daughter recalls, "would make him flip his lid."

...

[MinM]

85. "The Hoax"

Good stuff AF, Robert Maheu seems to have been busy:

See "The Hoax" ..

Every now and then a little Real History sneaks into the cinema. The movie "The Hoax" tells the story of Clifford Irving's attempt to sell an "autobiography" of Howard Hughes written with or without the help of the man himself...

According to screenwriter William Wheeler, several people in a position to know think Robert Maheu, the CIA man chosen to head the Castro assassination plots, who also worked with Hughes for years, aided Irving in his project with the goal of getting that damning Hughes loan to Nixon info to the public. Seeing as the CIA was definitely working against Nixon during his second administration, this theory makes sense. Nixon had already lost his race for the Governor of California in 1962 when a $200,000 loan from Hughes to his brother was made public. When Nixon realized that the more recent Hughes loan to Nixon via Bebe Rebozo would be made public through Irving's book, the White House got very nervous. The film strongly implies this concern was a direct motivation for the Watergate break-in. As regular readers remember, this is my theory as well re the original reason for the break-in (but see my long article on Gerald Ford, Watergate, and the CIA for the reason why I think the break-in itself was sabotaged)..

http://realhistoryarchives.blogspot.com/2007/03/see-hoax-when-it-opens.html

And here's a link to Nixon's quote:

BBC News | AMERICAS | Revelations and gaps on Nixon tapes

Nixon gave new fodder for conspiracy theorists who question whether Lee Harvey Oswald was the only shooter involved in the assassination of President John Kennedy.

Referring to the report by the Warren Commission, "it was the greatest hoax that has ever been perpetuated," Nixon said. He did not elaborate why he questioned the report.

The tapes also record a conversation between President Nixon and former Treasury Secretary John Connally who was in the car with President Kennedy when he was killed.

It contains graphic details of the shooting.

"I was lying... down on (wife) Nellie's lap like this to shield her head on top of me and I had my eyes open and I heard that bullet hit his head ... I knew he was dead," Mr Connally said..

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/1848157.stm

[Demagitator]

88. I agree

I think Watergate was all about the JFK assassination.

[defendandprotect]

99. This is highly interesting re PAYOFFS TO Republicans & Dems . . .

which are financed by the CIA/elites thru the Howard Hughes Corp -- and Republicans and Democrats alike had received similar payoffs.

We can see the reluctance here for Democrats to begin to unmask that duplicity --
did they even know? They were being betrayed from within . . . as in "what's new?" ---

This is post the coup on JFK ---

a directive from the CIA to Hughes dated September 2, 1968, containing a list of American politicians the CIA wanted funded through the Hughes corporation. Among the names Strom Thurmond, Wallace Bennett, Paul Laxalt, James Eastland, and many others, was the name Gerald R. Ford.
The CIA wanted Hughes to give money to Ford’s campaign. (Source: “Hughes, Nixon, and the CIA: The Watergate Conspiracy Woodward and Bernstein Missed,” by Larry DuBois and Laurence Gonzales, Playboy, September, 1976.) Was the agency rewarding Ford for his service on the Warren Commission?

And so when we talk about liberal Democrats having been targeted by the CIA, for one --
Frank Church being a prominent member of Congress who was trying to uncover the crimes of the CIA . .

and about election steals with computers coming in during the mid-1960's --

We also have to understand how right-wing Democrats/Repugs were kept in place with CIA money.

In other words, Nixon wasn't the only one being given a slush fund by Prescott Bush and his GOP gang --- other right-wing Dems/Repugs were also being paid to play their game.

Btw, there was a loan to Nixon's brother --- Donald -- of something like $200,000 from Hughes --
and I believe that Larry O'Brien, among many others, knew about that.



Also --
re Hughes Corp --- I think that later is part of The Octopus which Danny Cassalaro seems to
have died investigating ---

PS: Of course, the JFK assassination was kinda like an Agatha Christie crime -- multiple murderers ---a murdering jury of 12 in "Murder On The Orient Express" --- I think that was the one?
It's been a long time since I've read Christie.

Presumably that idea would have appealed to E. Howard Hunt ---
and certainly NIXON, himself, was involved -- LBJ; couldn't have been done without a future sitting president --- BUSH, Sr./CIA -- and of course, Hoover wanted RFK dead ---!!! Hoover was guaranteeing a cover up by having all the files turned over to the FBI.

Angleton, of course --
Allen Dulles at the top of the lists ---

[Demagitator]

81. Exactly -- when all the politicians in Bush v. Gore

were whining about a possible constitutional crisis on TV; they were not thinking of rioting in the streets, but rather -- they were afraid that it would be exposed that democracy is dead; and has been dead in the USA. If the common people figure that out -- how can they get them to waive the flag, pay taxes, etc.?

[Demagitator]

80. The coup d'é·tat began in the early 50s....

They (the politicians) have been in power, only because the M-I-C wants them to be in power, as good soldiers -- but, they don't wear a military uniform. JFK was shot, as well as President Gore was stripped of his power in -- Bush v. Gore -- because they would of exposed this -- and many would of lost their jobs. Enron, is just the tip of the Iceberg of the M-I-C , in the private/military industry.

[MinM]

59. White Russian | Albert Schweitzer College | Atsugi Air Base | QKENCHANT

Good point CAL, the "lone nutters" would have you believe that Oswald had nothing going for him. Actually the opposite was the case as you and others have pointed out. From LHO's buddy George DeMohrenschildt:

George H. W. Bush's bizarre comments about the John F. Kennedy assassination

January 25, 2007 -- Washington observers are still puzzled by George H. W. Bush's bizarre comments about the John F. Kennedy assassination and Warren Report during his eulogy of President Gerald Ford at the Washington National Cathedral. Bush, who has made it clear that he does not care for the information posted about him and his family on the Internet, has good reason to be worried about the availability of information on the web.

After Lee Harvey Oswald returned, along with his Soviet wife and daughter, to the United States from the Soviet Union, he was "handled" by Belarusian immigrant..

George DeMohrenschildt, a Dallas businessman who once worked in New York for Humble Oil, Prescott Bush's company. DeMohrenschildt was active in the right-wing anti-Communist circles and had close links to the CIA. DeMohrenschildt "committed suicide" in 1977 shortly before he was to testify before the House Select Committee on Assassinations. He also wrote a manuscript in which he stated he did not believe that Oswald could have killed Kennedy.

Nevertheless, it is interesting whose name appeared in DeMohrenschildt's address book, provided to House investigators after his "suicide":

Poppy Bush has a fuzzy memory about where he was on Nov. 22, 1963 but his name, address, and phone number were found in the address book of Lee Harvey Oswald's close friend..

Octafish's Journal - Regarding JFK Assassination—Who do You Trust: Poppy Bush or Your Own Eyes?

To Jim DiEugenio also making the point in this interview that by ignoring the work of the ARRB (JFK Records Act of 1992) you would know nothing of Oswald's application to the 'Spooky' --

Albert Schweitzer College:

Covert History | Oswald and Albert Schweitzer College

On March 4, 1959, 5 days prior to be being promoted to Private 1st Class for the second time, Lee Harvey Oswald completed an application to attend the Albert Schweitzer College in Switzerland. The application was lodged on 19 of March, with a $25.00 registration fee being made on June 19. August 17 found him applying for a dependency discharge from the Marines which was duly granted on the 28th of that month. Exactly one week later, Lee applied for a passport, listing his occupation as "shipping export agent", and the purpose of his travel as attendance at the Albert Schweitzer College, Churwalden, Switzerland..

Covert History | More On Albert Schweitzer College:
Covert History | Project QKENCHANT:
The Atsugi Air Base -- where Oswald was a radar operator at that base with the 1st Marine Aircraft Wing -- was a major CIA stronghold. One of their biggest bases in the world in the 1950's. The U2 spy planes flew out of there, including the one that Francis Gary Powers was shot down in 1960.
http://www.ctka.net/lho_ghost.html

[kentuck]

21. No. Ruby killed Oswald because he loved Kennedy.

Isn't that the official line?

[JohnyCanuck]

23. Just the most transparent, asinine excuse/bullshit/spin I ever heard, n/t

[Octafish]

27. Ruby knew a LOT about Oswald... ''Free Cuba Committe?'' ''No. 'Fair Play for Cuba Committee.' ''

Jack Ruby showed up at a press conference at the Dallas PD and corrected a reporter
who asked the cops if it was true that Oswald belonged to the "Free Cuba Committee."



Ruby cut in and corrected the questioner: "Fair Play for Cuba Committee."

Jack Ruby

There is no doubt that Jack Ruby played a significant part in the assassination. Apart from the obvious fact that he murdered Oswald on the pretext of protecting Mrs Kennedy from having to testify at Oswald’s trial, he also appeared, openly, in several other critical situations.

Ruby was seen and recognised by local journalist Seth Kantor who knew him, shortly after the arrival of the President and Governor Connally at Parkland Hospital. Indeed Kantor actually spoke to Ruby, and although the Warren Commission believed Kantor to be mistaken, this would seem unlikely. What was Ruby doing at Parkland Hospital at that time? It is easy to believe that Ruby was the means by which the bullet, CE 399, found itself on a stretcher where it was bound to be found later. Given the minimal distortion, the bullet was almost certainly fired into something like a bucket of water and recovered to be used (perhaps planted) as evidence.

During one of the few press conferences held after Oswald’s arrest, Ruby was seen and indeed filmed, standing at the back of the press crowd. What is more, he spoke out and corrected someone who said that Oswald had been a member of the Free Cuba Committee, whereas in fact he had been a member of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, an opposite faction. Why was Ruby there and most importantly, how did he know anything of Oswald’s associations with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee?

Some witnesses claimed to have seen a man of Ruby’s description on the morning of the 22 November unloading something looking suspiciously like a rifle from a flat-bed pick-up truck, parked part on the pavement on the north side of Elm Street, just below the Grassy Knoll.

SNIP...

http://markccollins.com/jfk_jack_ruby.htm

Gee. Oswald's association with the FPCC must've been big news in Dallas -- before 22 November 1963.
At least in some circles.

Thanks for giving a damn, kentuck.

[Demagitator]

89. Ruby, a Nixon supporter loved JFK

:rofl:

[lonestarnot]

22. Bush, Nixon, Ruby, Oswald pass the bisquits!

[Octafish]

28. JUST THE FACTS - ESTABLISHED FACTS ABOUT THE JFK ASSASSINATION THAT POINT TO CONSPIRACY

Here's stuff from a real expert on the subject, Michael T. Griffith:

JUST THE FACTS:

ESTABLISHED FACTS ABOUT THE JFK ASSASSINATION

THAT POINT TO CONSPIRACY


Michael T. Griffith
2001
@All Rights Reserved
Fourth Edition
Revised and Expanded on 3/5/2002

EXCERPT...

* Oswald's notebook contained the word "microdots," a common spy technique of photographically reducing information to a small dot.

* An unregistered Minox camera was found among Oswald's belongings. Cameras of this type were reportedly used in spy work. Kurt Lohn, who was formerly in charge of Minox distribution in New York City, informed newsman Earl Golz of the DALLAS MORNING NEWS that the serial number of the Minox camera found among Oswald's possessions did NOT exist among any Minox cameras distributed for commercial sale in the United States. The FBI tried to have the Dallas police change their reports so as to remove the references to the camera and to replace them with the entry of "light meter."


* The day after the assassination a call was intercepted in Dallas between Ruth Paine's home and Michael Paine's office. In the FBI report on this conversation, it states that a male and female were talking, that the male said he did not feel Oswald was responsible for the crime (though he felt Oswald had done the shooting), and that the male then said, "We both know who is responsible." Ruth Paine was the one who arranged for Oswald to work at the Texas School Book Depository (TSBD). It was also Ruth Paine who arranged for Marina Oswald to live with her while Marina and Lee were separated. Michael Paine held a security clearance and worked for a defense contractor.

* When Oswald applied for a tourist card at the Mexican consulate in New Orleans, the man in line in front of him, was William Gaudet, who worked for the CIA. Oswald's tourist card was number 24085; Gaudet's was 24084. Eight days after the assassination the FBI claimed there was no record of who had obtained the tourist card before Oswald's. This claim was proven false in 1975 when, due to a bureaucratic blunder, the name of the card's owner was revealed.

* Gaudet told the HSCA that on one occasion he saw Oswald talking on a street corner with Guy Banister, an ultra-conservative former FBI agent with ties to the anti-Castro movement and the CIA.

* Several of Oswald's "Fair Play for Cuba" handbills were stamped with the address of 544 Camp Street. This was the location where Banister and the Cuban Revolutionary Council, a militant anti-Castro group set up by the CIA, maintained their offices.

* According to an FBI report, G. W. Gill, an attorney for Mafia kingfish Carlos Marcello and Santos Trafficante, told David Ferrie's roommate, Layton Martens, that when Oswald was arrested by the Dallas police, Oswald was carrying a library card with Ferrie's name on it. The report was based on an interview with Martens himself. David Ferrie worked for Marcello, was involved with CIA-backed anti-Castro Cubans, and was a fanatical opponent of President Kennedy. On one occasion, Ferrie had to be removed from the podium in the middle of a speech for making virulent, inflammatory anti-Kennedy remarks. An FBI report observed that on occasion Ferrie had said Kennedy "ought to be shot."

SNIP...

* Two WC staffers wrote the following in an internal Commission memo:

In short, we believe that the possibility exists, based on evidence already available, that Ruby was involved in illegal dealings with Cuban elements who might have had contact with Oswald.

* According to an 11/25/63 Associated Press report, William Crowe, an entertainer who had performed at Ruby's Carousel Club, told an AP reporter he was "positive" he had seen Oswald in the club. DALLAS MORNING NEWS reporter Kent Biffle said Crowe told him the same thing several days later.

* Karen Carlin, who had been a dancer at Ruby's club, told FBI agent Roger Warner on 11/24/63 that "she was under impression that Lee Oswald, Jack Ruby, and other individuals unknown to her, were involved in a plot to assassinate President Kennedy."

* Another Ruby dancer, Janet Conforto, told Dallas newsmen shortly after the assassination that she had seen Oswald in Ruby's club. Yet another Ruby dancer, Kathy Kay, told the DALLAS TIMES HERALD the same thing in 1975.

* Four Dallas deputy constables told the DALLAS MORNING NEWS in 1976 that shortly after the assassination they examined a box of handwritten notes and other papers in the Dallas County Courthouse that linked Ruby to Oswald.

CONTINUED...

http://ourworld.cs.com/mikegriffith1/id126.htm

Thanks for giving a damn, lonestarnot!

[Me.]

25. K & R

[Octafish]

29. Posada Carriles and the Kennedy assassination

This may be old news for good DUers, but for those just developing an interest in the subject:

Posada Carriles and the Kennedy assassination

By Deirdre Griswold
Published Jun 7, 2005 9:54 PM

The case of Luis Posada Carriles, a known terrorist whom U.S. authorities have refused to extradite to Venezuela, reaches deep into the shadowy world of CIA covert action, especially against the Cuban Revolution.

There is also mounting evidence that Posada Carriles was connected to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, and was in Dallas's Dealey Plaza the day the fatal shots were fired.

Posada Carriles spent nine years in prison in Venezuela for having masterminded the mid-air bombing of a Cuban civilian airliner in 1976, killing all 73 people aboard. The CIA is known to have bribed Venezuelan prison guards to arrange his escape in 1985. That is the year that George H.W. Bush became head of the CIA. One guard, now retired, recently described these CIA efforts on Venezuelan television.

SNIP...

Bush, Goss and Operation 40

In Escalante's view, it was the members of Operation 40 who had the training and the sharpshooting ability necessary to carry out the assassination of Kennedy. The Cuban counter-intelligence chief identified the North Americans in the group as David Morales, David Phillips, E. Howard Hunt, William Harvey, Frank Sturgis, Gerry Hemming, John Rosselli, "who was second head of the Chicago mafia at that time in '62," and Porter Goss. Goss is now head of the CIA, nominated by George W. Bush, son of the former CIA head.

In “Deadly Secrets,” authors Warren Hinkle and William Turner named Rafael 'Chi Chi' Quintero, Luis Posada Carriles, Felix Rodriguez and Frank Sturgis as members of Operation 40, under the overall control of E. Howard Hunt. Hunt and Sturgis later spent time in prison for the Watergate burglary and are believed to have been in Dallas the day Kennedy was assassinated.

The same cast of characters appears, again and again, committing acts of mayhem, murder and sabotage to keep Latin American countries under the control of U.S. corporate interests. And the same high-up political figures in the United States--with the Bush family at the top of the list--are their sponsors and protectors.

CONTINUED...

http://www.workers.org/2005/us/posada-jfk-0616/

Small world. And very, very bad.



Thanks for giving a damn, Me.

[Me.]

46. This Is The Thing About Your Threads...

The extent of the info you provide is breathtaking. I have always, and continue to, appreciate them.

[Octafish]

65. Thank you, Me. If we didn't do them, who would?

As bobthedrummer, seemslikeadream, H20 Man and other good DUers, I start a thread and everyone is welcome to chip in -- including those who don't agree. In the process, a sizeable amount of information is presented in one place. While it may not be letter-perfect, the data is most useful for further research and analysis.

DU is one of the best places on the net for such collaboration. To my shame as a citizen of the United States, our free press has failed us in this most important matter of life and death -- of people and nations. Thus, we on DU and elsewhere on the web must do it.

[AntiFascist]

94. Gee I've seen that photo before...

In an article about Narco dollars and Mena, Arkansas (Iran/Contra):

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0709/S00059.htm


also Daniel Hopsicker's book: "Barry and the Boys"

[bleever]

31. And for anyone who hasn't seen it, there's this:

[sce56]

44. How about a picture to go with that!

George on one of his Zapata oil platforms

[Octafish]

54. That is the Rosetta Stone of Dallas

The FBI Memo of 22 November 1963 is solid proof Poppy Bush knew of a threat to JFK and did nothing about it until after JFK was assassinated. It also shows that Bush was in Dallas that terrible day.

Here's another one Here's what Mr. Hoover had to say about "Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency"
a week after the assassination, a big de-briefing regarding the anti- and pro-Castro Cuban communities in Miami.



Poppy has a lot of explaining to do. Here's hoping we get to him and ask before his rivals or Mother Nature.

Really appreciate you understand the situation, bleever. Thanks also for giving damn.

[EndElectoral]

33. I was a kid then..who was Oswald's attorney? Who did he call back then after arrest?

Have they been interviewed?

[gordianot]

35. See compilation on all known Oswald statements:

No lawyer given.

link: http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/LHO.html

[EndElectoral]

48. Thanks., "Can I get an attorney?. I have not been given the opportunity to have counsel.".

[Octafish]

56. There's a report Oswald tried to call attorney John Abt.

Known for defending the right to be a communist, Abt was also known for defending those accused of conspiracy.

I'm no expert, but the good folks at Education Forum are. Here's what they have to say on the matter of Oswald's phone calls from jail:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/lofiversion/index.php/t2653.html

Here's info from Abt's memoir:

Best known as the longtime chief counsel to the Communist Party of the United States, John Abt also was one of Angela Davis's first attorneys and the man Lee Harvey Oswald wanted to defend him after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. In Advocate and Activist, John Abt and Michael Myerson provide a detailed account of a life that touched and was touched by the labor and left-wing political movements in the United States for nearly sixty years. Abt went to Washington, D.C., in the early 1930s to join the New Deal. He worked in a succession of government posts and for the LaFollette Civil Liberties Committee. He was Sidney Hillman's counsel in the labor movement and a top aide to Henry Wallace's 1948 presidential campaign. At the height of McCarthyism he became the Communist party's chief counsel. Defending the party in the Smith Act and McCarran Act prosecutions, he succeeded at dismantling the acts piece by piece, establishing precedents and making sure that being a Communist was not illegal.

Advocate and Activist: Memoirs of an American Communist Lawyer

Author: Abt, John
Pages: 311
Adult: Yes
Fiction: No
Language: English

http://www.ebscobooks.com/books/ProductDetails.asp?CatalogID=130433

[gordianot]

34. When people gather for a common purpose they make plans it is human nature.

In order to consolidate plans you keep them to yourself.

I remember at the time seeing Allen Dulles assert on television that all political assassinations were the work of "lone nuts" misfits who acted alone. The television anchors at the time repeated this assertion. Without much comment they related for example that John Wilkes Booth acted alone. As a sixth grader at the time I remember reading the details of the Lincoln Assassination, who obviously did not act alone. Several times I heard the assertion that like Booth, Oswald acted alone in 6th grade class. I actually had to prove my point at school to class mates and my teacher. Even then I encountered skepticism

From 6th grade on I knew someone was lying. Mr. Cronkite said several years ago in reference to the Kennedy assassination that conspiracy's are impossible, someone who knows will talk. It appears there has been much conversation over the years very few listen and Mr. Cronkite continues to miss the conversation.

I learned 2 lessons that finally took hold as an adult:
1. Adults are either stupid or they lie.
2. News anchors lie and are probably stupid.

Even years after this I trusted Cronkite on most issues, it does not bode well for my intelligence.

[Octafish]

57. CIA Instructions to Media Assets re: Assassination of President Kennedy

You're spot-on, gordianot. "To breathe together" is the root phrase from "conspirare," the root word for "conspiracy."

Here's what Richard "The Man Who Kept the Secrets" Helms got "Conspiracies In Action" to do:

Original CIA memo, thanks to Webcom.com:

CIA Instructions to Media Assets

CIA Document #1035-960, marked "PSYCH" for presumably Psychological Warfare Operations, in the division "CS", the Clandestine Services, sometimes known as the "dirty tricks" department.

RE: Concerning Criticism of the Warren Report

1. Our Concern. From the day of President Kennedy's assassination on, there has been speculation about the responsibility for his murder. Although this was stemmed for a time by the Warren Commission report, (which appeared at the end of September 1964), various writers have now had time to scan the Commission's published report and documents for new pretexts for questioning, and there has been a new wave of books and articles criticizing the Commission's findings. In most cases the critics have speculated as to the existence of some kind of conspiracy, and often they have implied that the Commission itself was involved. Presumably as a result of the increasing challenge to the Warren Commission's report, a public opinion poll recently indicated that 46% of the American public did not think that Oswald acted alone, while more than half of those polled thought that the Commission had left some questions unresolved. Doubtless polls abroad would show similar, or possibly more adverse results.

2. This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the U.S. government, including our organization. The members of the Warren Commission were naturally chosen for their integrity, experience and prominence. They represented both major parties, and they and their staff were deliberately drawn from all sections of the country. Just because of the standing of the Commissioners, efforts to impugn their rectitude and wisdom tend to cast doubt on the whole leadership of American society. Moreover, there seems to be an increasing tendency to hint that President Johnson himself, as the one person who might be said to have benefited, was in some way responsible for the assassination. Innuendo of such seriousness affects not only the individual concerned, but also the whole reputation of the American government. Our organization itself is directly involved: among other facts, we contributed information to the investigation. Conspiracy theories have frequently thrown suspicion on our organization, for example by falsely alleging that Lee Harvey Oswald worked for us. The aim of this dispatch is to provide material countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified section and in a number of unclassified attachments.

3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the assassination question be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active addresses are requested:

a. To discuss the publicity problem with (?)and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors), pointing out that the Warren Commission made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by Communist propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.

b. To employ propaganda assets to and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (II) politically interested, (III) financially interested, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories. In the course of discussions of the whole phenomenon of criticism, a useful strategy may be to single out Epstein's theory for attack, using the attached Fletcher article and Spectator piece for background. (Although Mark Lane's book is much less convincing that Epstein's and comes off badly where confronted by knowledgeable critics, it is also much more difficult to answer as a whole, as one becomes lost in a morass of unrelated details.)
4. In private to media discussions not directed at any particular writer, or in attacking publications which may be yet forthcoming, the following arguments should be useful:


a. No significant new evidence has emerged which the Commission did not consider. The assassination is sometimes compared (e.g., by Joachim Joesten and Bertrand Russell) with the Dreyfus case; however, unlike that case, the attack on the Warren Commission have produced no new evidence, no new culprits have been convincingly identified, and there is no agreement among the critics. (A better parallel, though an imperfect one, might be with the Reichstag fire of 1933, which some competent historians (Fritz Tobias, AJ.P. Taylor, D.C. Watt) now believe was set by Vander Lubbe on his own initiative, without acting for either Nazis or Communists; the Nazis tried to pin the blame on the Communists, but the latter have been more successful in convincing the world that the Nazis were to blame.)

b. Critics usually overvalue particular items and ignore others. They tend to place more emphasis on the recollections of individual witnesses (which are less reliable and more divergent--and hence offer more hand-holds for criticism) and less on ballistics, autopsy, and photographic evidence. A close examination of the Commission's records will usually show that the conflicting eyewitness accounts are quoted out of context, or were discarded by the Commission for good and sufficient reason.

c. Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to conceal in the United States, esp. since informants could expect to receive large royalties, etc. Note that Robert Kennedy, Attorney General at the time and John F. Kennedy's brother, would be the last man to overlook or conceal any conspiracy. And as one reviewer pointed out, Congressman Gerald R. Ford would hardly have held his tongue for the sake of the Democratic administration, and Senator Russell would have had every political interest in exposing any misdeeds on the part of Chief Justice Warren. A conspirator moreover would hardly choose a location for a shooting where so much depended on conditions beyond his control: the route, the speed of the cars, the moving target, the risk that the assassin would be discovered. A group of wealthy conspirators could have arranged much more secure conditions.

d. Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they light on some theory and fall in love with it; they also scoff at the Commission because it did not always answer every question with a flat decision one way or the other. Actually, the make-up of the Commission and its staff was an excellent safeguard against over-commitment to any one theory, or against the illicit transformation of probabilities into certainties.

e. Oswald would not have been any sensible person's choice for a co-conspirator. He was a "loner," mixed up, of questionable reliability and an unknown quantity to any professional intelligence service. (Archivist's note: This claim is demonstrably untrue with the latest file releases. The CIA had an operational interest in Oswald less than a month before the assassination. Source: Oswald and the CIA, John Newman and newly released files from the National Archives.)

f. As to charges that the Commission's report was a rush job, it emerged three months after the deadline originally set. But to the degree that the Commission tried to speed up its reporting, this was largely due to the pressure of irresponsible speculation already appearing, in some cases coming from the same critics who, refusing to admit their errors, are now putting out new criticisms.

g. Such vague accusations as that "more than ten people have died mysteriously" can always be explained in some natural way e.g.: the individuals concerned have for the most part died of natural causes; the Commission staff questioned 418 witnesses (the FBI interviewed far more people, conduction 25,000 interviews and re interviews), and in such a large group, a certain number of deaths are to be expected. (When Penn Jones, one of the originators of the "ten mysterious deaths" line, appeared on television, it emerged that two of the deaths on his list were from heart attacks, one from cancer, one was from a head-on collision on a bridge, and one occurred when a driver drifted into a bridge abutment.)


5. Where possible, counter speculation by encouraging reference to the Commission's Report itself. Open-minded foreign readers should still be impressed by the care, thoroughness, objectivity and speed with which the Commission worked. Reviewers of other books might be encouraged to add to their account the idea that, checking back with the report itself, they found it far superior to the work of its critics.

SOURCE

Truly appreciate that you understand, gordianot. Also wish that more people were like you -- tops in every way.

[Demagitator]

76. Ed Morales and JFK

David Sanchez Morales

I need "any and all" information about a Cuban named Ed Morales (or with the name Morales) from the early 1950s to 1974 (the Watergate era). Specifically, was he ever in Puerto Rico, Miami, Arizona, or Texas?

_____________________________________________________

The Baltimore Chronicle
November 22, 2006.

It's Time to Re-Open the Investigation of RFK and JFK Assassinations

On Monday night, the BBC broadcast O’Sullivan’s report on their high-profile programme, "Newsnight." O’Sullivan’s findings shocked many people. Working through an exhaustive analysis of videotapes made at the Ambassador Hotel on the night of RFK’s assassination, O’Sullivan identified three figures as former agents of the CIA. Two of the agents O’Sullivan identified could be seen moving away from the hotel pantry shortly after the shooting of RFK.

Following his preliminary identifications, O’Sullivan presented the video images to more authoritative sources, men who knew the three agents personally. While there was a slender degree of uncertainty (circa 5-10%) the men in the videos were positively identified as the former CIA agents:

* David Sanchez Morales;
* Gordon Campbell and
* George Joannides

Morales was known to be involved in coups d’états throughout Latin America and he had a reputation of a dangerous man with an explosive temper who was capable of violence. had a reputation of a dangerous man with an explosive temper who was capable of violence. To entertain his friends, Morales would tell stories about his involvement in the killing and capture of Che Guevara, coups in Latin America and other nefarious covert activities.

http://baltimorechronicle.com/2006/112206CARMICHAEL.html

[Andre II]

39. Chapeau!

Again another masterpiece!
Thanks and keep on rocking!
And don't give a damn about people who couldn't care less.

[Octafish]

58. So many care, my Friend. Last weekend DUer Horse with no Name let me know about the new info...

...Otherwise, I might've missed the news.

FWIW: I think Oswald -- if he was a plotter -- was not alone.

John F. Kennedy, The Secret Service and Rich, Fascist Texans

Truly appreciate you giving a damn, my Friend.

[RaleighNCDUer]

40. The real silliness of the 'movie transcript' story is that a writer

would keep such a thing locked in his desk drawer, not filed away with legitimate evidence.

I'm a part-time, as yet unpublished fiction writer. I do not keep my writing notes in my files at work (except for one computer file, which will be erased before I leave that job).

Is there ANY other evidence that this guy was working on a screenplay? Did he ever publish anything? For every page at work there should be a hundred pages at home - where are they?

You are NOT being paid to write screenplays, mister!

[Octafish]

63. How did DA Wade event GET the Idea for a pre-assassination meeting between Ruby and Oswald?

That's the big part of what bugs me, too, NCevilDUer: There is no way a DA would mix business with pleasure -- unless he was appointed by Karl Rove and Co.

JFK Lancer reports the conversation may be based on testimony of Dallas attorney Carroll Jarnigan -- a conversation that has been discredited by another witness because Jarnigan said he was drunk when he overheard Ruby and one "H.L. Lee" talking at the Carousel Club.



What the truth is, I don't know. However, like you and so many others, I want to find out. Thanks, NCevilDUer, for giving a damn.

[bluesmail]

42. K & R

doubting anyone alive when IT happened will ever know the truth.

[Octafish]

64. I was 6. I've got a pretty good idea of ''How?'', ''Why?'' and ''Who Benefitted?''

But what I care most about are the loss of President Kennedy and what's happened to my country since November 22, 1963.

JFK Lancer presents an excellent overview of what we know:

http://www.jfklancer.com/JFK2.html

I agree with JFK Lancer's position that President Kennedy was assassinated because he worked to advance the cause of world peace, at the expense of the military-industrial complex; and worked to advance the cause of Civil Rights, at the expense of privileged racists:

http://www.jfklancer.com/jfk3.html

Thanks, bluesmail, for giving a damn!

[bluesmail]

68. I was in 6th grade

IT was the turning/defining point in my life. Thanks for the Links, Julie

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

43. Henry Wade in whose safe the transcript was found was the Dallas DA

He was the one supposed to prosecute Oswald until Jack Ruby intervened. He later put Jack Ruby on trial. He is also the "Wade" in Roe v. Wade, the famous abortion case. It's interesting that on the night after the assassination of Kennedy, DA Henry Wade received at least 3 phone calls from Lyndon Johnson or his surrogates asking him and virtually demanding him not to charge Oswald with conspiracy. Johnson stated that he wanted a lone gunman on trial and a simple murder charge to be filed for the good of the country. Why were they so frantic about it, unless maybe they got wind that Wade thought there might be room for a conspiracy? Wade apparently did have a movie deal in the works for a film entitled "Countdown in Dallas". What I wonder is whether it was to be a fictionalized story or a documentary. If it was a documentary, then a real and genuine transcript of the Ruby-Oswald conservation would be important and relevant to that documentary. The mere fact that a transcript is found along with a movie contract doesn't mean that the transcript is a fiction, depending entirely on the type of movie that was in the works. According to some, an almost identical transcript to the alleged conversation between Ruby and Oswald found in the safe was made a part of the Warren Commission's report. A Dallas attorney (I can't find his name on the Internet) supposedly testified before the Warren Commission that he overheard a conservation between Ruby and Oswald in the Carousel Club two months before the assassination. He later recreated a working transcript of the alleged conversation he overheard from memory. I wish I could find the name of that Dallas attorney. What I find interesting is that, even if the transcript found now in former DA Henry Wade's safe is a fictionalized event created for a movie, how does one explain that a hard-nosed District Attorney seems to have wanted to make a film version of the Kennedy assassination that suggests that a conspiracy was at the heart of it? Tough-minded DAs wouldn't expose themselves to claims that they are conspiracy nuts (especially the man in charge in Dallas and who prosecuted Jack Ruby) unless they had some truth that they wanted to get out. The very DA who was in charge in November 1963 in Dallas who wants to make even a fictionalized film a la Oliver Stone suggesting a deeper conspiracy is enough to get me wondering about what he really knew.

ON EDIT: I googled the title of Wade's proposed film "Countdown To Dallas" and the word "documentary", and sure enough the newspaper stories are stating that there were also letters in the safe describing a "documentary-type" film that Henry Wade was trying to get produced. In this case, for a "documentary-type" of film, just because a transcript involves a film doesn't necessarily mean it is fictional. Unfortunately, something has gone haywire in my computer and the copy and paste feature isn't working at the moment.

[Octafish]

66. Dallas County District Attorney Henry Wade was poised to profit off JFK files (Dallas Morning News)

Hot off the press, details on the movie from The Dallas Morning News:

Dallas County District Attorney Henry Wade was poised to profit off JFK files

01:20 AM CST on Sunday, February 24, 2008
By DAVID FLICK and DAVID TARRANT / The Dallas Morning News

Henry Wade was known for his no-nonsense style as a Dallas County district attorney. But even he, it seems, was not immune to the lure of Hollywood. And the man with a reputation for unshakeable integrity was agreeable to receiving thousands of dollars in return for giving filmmakers exclusive access to legal documents connected to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, some of which were kept from the public for another four decades.

The existence of 15 boxes of JFK-related material, locked away in a DA's office safe, was announced Monday by Craig Watkins, the current district attorney, who said his predecessors had kept the documents under wraps even after Mr. Wade's retirement.

Mr. Wade died in 2001, and several calls to surviving family members were not returned.

Tantalizing new details about the little-known episode of Mr. Wade's involvement in a movie venture about the Nov. 22, 1963, JFK assassination and the trial of Jack Ruby were found in a Dallas Morning News examination of the long-hidden files.

CONTINUED...

http://www.dentonrc.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/022408dnmetjfkmovie.3d7772b.html#

That is the puzzler: Why would the DA dabble in drama? IMFO, it's more than money.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

69. This latest bit of news casts even more mystery surrounding the transcript

The film "Countdown To Dallas" according to this story was being produced by a commercial and industrial filmmaker from Colorado who wanted to create an accurate documentary not only about the JFK Assassination but about conditions going on in Dallas, to try to redeem the image of the city. At least that was his pitch. If he was seeking accuracy and the unraveling of controversy, I fail to see how a fictionalized conversation between Ruby and Oswald would have helped further that intention.

According to the story, the movie script was completed and was to be narrated in documentary style by a known Hollywood Actor. Marina Oswald was possibly to play herself. According to the news article, the only surviving copy of the movie script DOES NOT CONTAIN the conversation from the transcript between Ruby and Oswald found in the safe. And shooting for the movie was already under way so the script must have been complete. Therefore, the transcript may very well have had nothing to do with the documentary movie. It might even have pre-existed any discussion of a movie.

And if DA Wade was merely interested in cash and in making money off the files and evidentiary items he had in his safe, would he have written a fictionalized transcript himself? He wasn't a movie maker. Would he have kept a transcript of a fake conversation if he wasn't a movie maker but only interested in profiting from the ACTUAL and REAL files and items from his past?

The transcript seems to be even more of a mystery, as it seems it didn't have anything to do with the movie after all.

[Richard Steele]

47. K&R

[Octafish]

70. FBI special agent James Hosty said he DESTROYED a pre-assassination note from Oswald on 24 Nov 1963.

From Mary Ferrell.org:

destruction of the Oswald Note

In 1975, the allegation surfaced that the FBI had destroyed a note delivered to it by Lee Harvey Oswald, just one or two weeks prior to the assassination of President Kennedy. An internal FBI investigation failed to find any records relating to this, but interviews of Dallas Field Office personnel established that an Oswald visit and note dropoff had occurred.

The House Judiciary Committee heard testimony from several relevant witnesses, as did the contemporaneous Church Committee. The results of this were:

* Oswald definitely did visit the Dallas Field Office a week to two weeks prior to the assassination, looking for Agent Hosty, who had recently visited his wife Marina.
* When told that Hosty was not in, Oswald left a note in an envelope which was unsealed.
* The note contained some sort of threat, but accounts varied widely as to whether Oswald threatened to "blow up the FBI" or merely "report this to higher authorities."
* Within hours after Oswald's murder on 24 Nov 1963, Hosty destroyed the note and a memorandum which Special-Agent-in-Charge Gordon Shanklin had ordered written on November 22.

Hosty maintained that Shanklin, the head of hte Dallas Field Office, had ordered him to destroy the note. Shanklin denied ever having heard of the note until 1975, though Assistant Director William Sullivan did recall the incident. The House Select Committee on Assassinations reviewed the incident and did not find Shanklin's denial credible.

The movie JFK added a new twist based on rumors which have never been substantiated. In the film, New Orleans DA Jim Garrison wonders why the FBI would destroy a note which would tend to confirm Oswald's violent character, and presents his staff with an alternative: "This is just speculation, people, but what if the note was describing the assassination attempt on JFK?"

SOURCE: http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Destruction_of_the_Oswald_Note

Now why would an FBI agent destroy evidence?

We're through the looking glass people. White is black. And black is white.

Thanks, dicksteele, for giving a damn!

[navarth]

49. wow. thank you for this. k&r

I was alive when it happened. I remember it all. I wish we could get to the bottom of it in my lifetime. I'd really like to know. And have it made public.

[Octafish]

52. THE TRUTH BEHIND JFK's MURDER

The FBI memos referenced above by bleever are evidence of high treason.

Why the Press Corpse treats it as kryptonite is understandable, seeing the kinds of fellahs the Bush boys are at "heart."

THE TRUTH BEHIND JFK's MURDER

John Quinn / Newshawk

Rodney Stich's book "Defrauding America" tells of a "deep-cover CIA officer" assigned to a counter-intelligence unit, code-named Pegasus. This unit "had tape-recordings of plans to assassinate Kennedy" from a tap on the phone of J. Edgar Hoover. The people on the tapes were " Rockefeller, Allen Dulles, Johnson of Texas, George Bush and J. Edgar Hoover."

Could George Bush be involved in the JFK assassination? In 1963, Bush was living in Houston, busily carrying out his duties as president of the Zapata Offshore oil company. He denied the existence of a note sent by the FBI's J. Edgar Hoover to "Mr. George Bush of the CIA." When news of the note surfaced, the CIA first said they never commented on employment questions, but later relented said yes, a "George Bush" was mentioned in the note, but that it was "another" George Bush, not the man who took office in the White House in 1988. Some intrepid reporters tracked down the "other" George Bush and discovered that he was just a lowly clerk who had shuffled papers for the CIA for about six months. He never received any interagency messages from anybody at the FBI, let alone the Queen Mary. It is also worth noting that a CIA code word for Bay of Pigs was Operation Zapata, and that two of the support vessels were named Barbara and Houston.

Many say that George Bush was high up on the CIA ladder at the time, running proprietial vehicles and placed in a position of command, responsible for many of the Cubans recruited into "service" at the time. All through the Iran-Contra affair, Felix Rodriguez, the man who captured and had Che Guevara killed for the CIA, always seemed to call Bush's office first.

Continued …

http://www.freeworldalliance.com/jfkmurder/thetruth.htm

A 6-2 start and then they lose five or six they coulda-shoulda-woulda won, if only they believed. And not necessarily what Kitna was thinking.

No knock, my Friend. I also love the Leos. And my country.

[drm604]

51. This doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

They wanted to remove Robert Kennedy from the position of Attorney General, but they didn't want to kill him because "it would get the Feds into everything".

The proposed solution is to kill his brother, the President, instead. Wouldn't that also "get the Feds into everything"? In fact, wouldn't it get them into everything in a much bigger way?

[Octafish]

71. What Jack Ruby was talking about:, This is what Ruby meant when interviewed

The logic escapes me, too, drm604...

According to Matthew Smith, what motive did the Mafia have for assassinating John F. Kennedy?

(H8) Matthew Smith, JFK: The Second Plot (1992)

The Mafia had strong reasons for wanting Kennedy dead. They had lost their huge gambling interests in Havana when Castro seized power, and had been standing on the touchline waiting for action by the Kennedy administration which would reverse the situation and give them their casinos back. It never happened. Instead they watched their government embrace a policy of détente towards Castro's Cuba with growing dismay and anger. Nor was this the only reason for their disenchantment with Kennedy. John appointed his brother, Robert, Attorney General, and Robert had opened up an all-out war against the Mafia. Never before had such success been obtained by the forces of law against mobsters who, for years, had evaded prosecution. It had also a gathering momentum, for law enforcement agents in many cities in the United States were so impressed by Robert Kennedy's campaign they began bringing cases against their local mobsters which past experience of failures had made them reluctant to prosecute. The local success rate also boomed, and the Mafia were shaken. Their instincts were to kill Robert Kennedy, but they knew that this would only cause the President to increase the pressure, leaving the only way to kill the President. If the President was removed, the Attorney General would be replaced, since the appointment was one of patronage.

Chicago mobster, Sam Giancana, was high on Robert Kennedy's hit list, and he was well aware of it. He claimed to have had connections with the Kennedy's father, Joe, who made his fortune as a bootlegger in the days of prohibition. His dealings with Joe Kennedy, he claimed, earned him privileges from the President rather than the persecution to which he was being subjected. In a book. Double Cross: The Story of the Man Who Controlled America, published in Britain in 1992, Sam Giancana's brother and nephew sought to establish that Giancana had rigged the Presidential election vote in Cook County on John Kennedy's behalf, which effectively gave Kennedy the election. This was to ensure a 'relationship' between the President and Giancana, on which the President reneged, and Giancana killed the President for his double cross. It is a spicy, imaginative tale for which no substantiation is provided at any level.

SOURCE: http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/forums/lofiversion/index.php/t15445.html

...That is, unless JFK's successors in power have zero interest in Justice.

[Bolo Boffin]

61. "It is almost certainly a fake."

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/feb/19/usa

More than a B-movie, Wade planned a semi-documentary treatment of the assassination, with the working title Countdown in Dallas. The supposed conversation between Ruby and Oswald, which took place on a night when Oswald is known to have been with his wife, is thought to have been part of the film script.

That's October 4, 1963. Oswald hitchhiked to Ruth Paine's house and spent the night with his wife. He was not with Ruby.

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/parnell/chrono.htm

[Octafish]

72. ''Almost.''

While I'm no fan of Prof. McAdams,
I really believe your heart's in the right place, boloboffin.



Thanks for the links.

[Time for change]

62. We should ALL demand to know these answers

A nation that is afraid to come face to face with its own history is hurting its chances of learning from the past and progressing towards the future.

Very interesting information. I've read a lot about the Kennedy assassination, but I never knew that Oswald and Ruby knew each other or that Ruby worked for Nixon, or some of this other stuff. I am often very tempted to believe that every member of the Warren Commission knew that JFK was shot from the front, and probably a lot more, but that they took a vote and unanimously agreed to suppress any information casting doubt on the lone gunman theory.

[Octafish]

87. The Warren Commission Ignored the Radical Right and its top-dog, J Edgar Hoover.

LBJ indicated to Chief Justice Warren that there was a danger of World War III if they didn't follow the script. The "evidence" presented to the Warren Commission linked Oswald to Cuba and Cuba to the Soviet Union. Someone wanted war. To avoid that, patsy Oswald became the lone-nut scapegoat.

The Radical Right and the Murder of President John F. Kennedy

by Harrison Edward Livingstone

p. 140

The Warren Commission had very major problems as a result of information presented by law enforcement and Attorney General of Texas, Waggoner Carr, that Oswald worked for the FBI. Deputy Sheriff Allen Sweatt was quoted as saying that Oswald was receiving $200 a month and had an informant number.

Both Marina Oswald and his mother believed very strongly that Oswald worked for the government. People don’t often get ideas like this about someone they are that close to if it isn’t true.

But the FBI withheld many facts. The WC staffers could not understand why the FBI had retyped a page from Oswald’s notebook. They learned why after a struggle. This is the reason: the page had the name, number, and license plate number of an FBI agent, James Hosty.

They were not told that Oswald had told Ruth Paine that he had left the famous note at the FBI office in Dallas. The FBI did not tell the Commission that an FBI agent, James Hosty, was ordered by his superior to destroy that note from Oswald to himself. Nobody knew about this until 1975.

There is no way that the note could have been destroyed without orders from Washington, and that meant from Hoover himself.

CONTINUED…

http://books.google.com/books?id=65-lYkw6-isC&pg=PA140&lpg=PA140&dq=%22waggoner+carr%22+oswald+fbi&source=web&ots=MPoXPH_Gox&sig=1IZLb5UTrPN9ATpoWycm-0c0d2s

I can't even find that book in a library. Parts of it, at least, are online.

Thanks, Time for change, for giving a damn. Your understanding is what these traitors fear most.

[bleever]

67. The interview with Jim Garrison is fascinating.

I'm just through the first of three parts, but it's impossible not to be impressed with the intelligence and character of the man.

From the link provided above by Octafish: http://www.jfklancer.com/Garrison2.html

[defendandprotect]

110. Jim Garrison was terrific -- all of his books are great --- fascinating

-- he was brilliant ---

[bleever]

74. Garrison's investigation lead him to warn of American fascism:

What worries me deeply, and I have seen it exemplified in this case, is that we in America are in great danger of slowly evolving into a proto-fascist state. It will be a different kind of fascist state from the one of the Germans evolved; theirs grew out of depression and promised bread and work, while ours, curiously enough, seems to be emerging from prosperity. But in the final analysis, it's based on power and on the inability to put human goals and human conscience above the dictates of the state. Its origins can be traced in the tremendous war machine we've built since 1945, the "military-industrial complex" that Eisenhower vainly warned us about, which now dominates every aspect of our life. The power of the states and Congress has gradually been abandoned to the Executive Department, because of war conditions; and we've seen the creation of an arrogant, swollen bureaucratic complex totally unfettered by the checks and balances of the Constitution.

In a very real and terrifying sense, our Government is the CIA and the Pentagon, with Congress reduced to a debating society. Of course, you can't spot this trend to fascism by casually looking around. You can't look for such familiar signs as the swastika, because they won't be there. We won't build Dachaus and Auschwitzes; the clever manipulation of the mass media is creating a concentration camp of the mind that promises to be far more effective in keeping the populace in line. We're not going to wake up one morning and suddenly find ourselves in gray uniforms goose-stepping off to work. But this isn't the test. The test is: What happens to the individual who dissents? In Nazi Germany, he was physically destroyed; here, the process is more subtle, but the end results can be the same.

I've learned enough about the machinations of the CIA in the past year to know that this is no longer the dreamworld America I once believed in. The imperatives of the population explosion, which almost inevitably will lessen our belief in the sanctity of the individual human life, combined with the awesome power of the CIA and the defense establishment, seem destined to seal the fate of the America I knew as a child and bring us into a new Orwellian world where the citizen exists for the state and where raw power justifies any and every immoral act. I've always had a kind of knee-jerk trust in my Government's basic integrity, whatever political blunders it may make. But I've come to realize that in Washington, deceiving and manipulating the public are viewed by some as the natural prerogatives of office. Huey Long once said, "Fascism will come to America in the name of anti-fascism." I'm afraid, based on my own experience, that fascism will come to America in the name of national security.

http://www.jfklancer.com/Garrison4.html

Forty years later, we can't say he was wrong.

[Demagitator]

75. Why did Ruby shoot Oswald?

Did anyone ever investigate this question? I think the Ruby transcript is a fake; however, I do think that the JFK investigation should be opened up again for a number of reasons. It seems "impossible" to believe that Ruby would want Oswald shot. Why? Ruby was a -- ultra right-- fanatical Repuke who worked for Nixon; logic, would dictate that Ruby would be happy that JFK was dead. Perhaps, Oswald knew of Ruby's anti-Kennedy activity in Texas?

[defendandprotect]

111. Ruby was blackmailed into killing Oswald as part of the cover-up ---

Next time you're in your library or a bookstore look for Jim Marrs' book --- CROSSFIRE ---
and look up Ruby's letters --- which tell us of coming fascism --- he called them "Nazis" . . .
and there are also details about how he was blackmailed --- they threatened his family -
a sister and brother ---

If he didn't do it successfully, they would have been killed ---

Ironically, Ruby tried in many ways to tell us the truth ---

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

79. According to Vincent Bugliosi, the transcript is from attorney Carroll Jarnagin

He expresses that opinion in the latter part of this article:

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/021908dnmetjfkdocs.11944de.html

Dallas attorney Jarnagin apparently wrote a letter to J. Edgar Hoover describing a conversation he overheard in the Carousel Club between Jack Ruby and Oswald to kill the Texas Governor and the President. Supposedly, he later drafted a transcript of that conversation from memory. DA Wade apparently got hold of that transcript and gave Jarnagin a lie detector test, which he supposedly failed according to DA Wade. I'm betting that the item in the safe is exactly that transcript written by attorney Jarnagin, which was needed in order to formulate questions for the lie detector test and has nothing to do with a movie. I'm wondering what else was in that safe among the boxes of documents and why a District Attorney would keep this stuff secret for so long. I also wonder if the data and results of that lie detector test are available for examination by the public and were among the items in the safe.

[MinM]

82. Exclusive: Help us examine the lost JFK files | Dallas Morning News

Exclusive: Help us examine the lost JFK files | Dallas Morning News | News for Dallas, Texas | Latest News
Given the volume, we haven't been able to review most of the files. That's why were calling on you. Here's your chance to review never-seen-before materials related to the JFK assassination.

Take a look, and let us know if you see something interesting.
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/022208dnmetjfkdocs.15b53191.html

[Demagitator]

84. Excellent...

What is past is prologue...

William Shakespeare

[Demagitator]

91. Help wanted: Dig through records from JFK assassination -- USA Today

Monday we told you that the Dallas district attorney was http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/02/dallas-releases.html">releasing 15 boxes of documents and objects pertaining to the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

Today the Dallas Morning News enlisted readers to help root through 90% of the now-digitized cache of documents, which includes an alleged transcript of an alleged conversation between assassin Lee Harvey Oswald and Jack Ruby, the club owner who in turn shot him in police custody. (Police and JFK experts say it's probably a fake, perhaps part of a failed movie script written by the DA at the time.)

So for all of you out there who just never quite accepted the http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report/">conclusions of the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warren_Commission">Warren Commission, here's your chance to participate in a bit of historical, forensic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crowd_sourcing">"crowd sourcing." The Morning News has posted links to http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/022208dnmetjfkdocs.15b53191.html">29 groups of documents — "exactly as they were received" from the DA. They are "neither cataloged nor indexed" and "are in no apparent order."

Besides the Oswald-Ruby document, the trove includes personal and official letters, newspaper clippings, lists of jurors, police reports, rap sheets, autopsy reports, trial notes, police notebooks, photographs and more.

http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/02/help-wanted-dig.html

[Octafish]

95. Thanks for the heads-up, MinM!

Good thing, this Internets.

I've been at the rabbit a lot in the past days, but what I saw in the record (Group 4, PDF 33) reminds me of how extensive the work of MK/ULTRA is. Specifically, they refer to "organic brain damage" related to psychomotor epilepsy -- the condition suffered by the homicidal man created in Michael Criton's "The Terminal Man."

Gee. Why would a club owner like Jack Ruby have anything to do with that?

PS: A most hearty welcome to DU! I look forward to reading your postings!

[ngGale]

90. Octafish, these threads always keep me up late...

and grab my attention.

When JFK was killed I was in high school. That day I was out sick and saw it live on tee vee.
My father told me this same story right after it happened. He told me to never forget as I grew older. These people were into big oil, Texas, and other things that were bad. To always be aware of who they were because a day might come when they did take over. I'm not sure how he knew all this, but I've never had any doubt that he was correct. Johnson is another story.

There is something odd, this year. Too many boomer buttons being pushed, I don't know why. I do know the "Dallas Morning News" has broken two stories this week. The first one picked up the UK article regarding arms sales that nobody else in the US would touch, except our La La Raw Raw. Obama, his security falling back in Dallas. The next day Hillary's escort being killed in a freak motorcycle accident close to the same area JFK was killed at Dealy Plaza. And he lived on Clinton Avenue!?!
It's '08, not '68 ... but begs comparison to things I don't even want to think about. It's creepy!

http://www.star-telegram.com/dallas_news/story/486413.html

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/22/clinton.motorcade/

I feel something big is going on and I can't fit all the puzzle pieces together. Just that if a coup d'etat started with JFK, this is the end...not the beginning. An intelligence war, maybe ... good or bad...don't know the answer.

This past week I have studied why Eisenhower would leave us with his message regarding the military industrial complex. By the end of his term it was obvious he couldn't tolerate Nixon.

In the 1960 election to choose his successor, Eisenhower endorsed his own Vice President, Republican Richard Nixon against Democrat John F. Kennedy. However, he only campaigned for Nixon in the campaign's final days and even did Nixon some harm when asked by reporters on TV to list one of Nixon's policy ideas he had adopted, replying "give me a week, I might think of one, I don't remember". Kennedy's campaign used the quote in one of their campaign commercials. Nixon lost narrowly to Kennedy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dwight_D._Eisenhower

All of it seems to have started in the 50's. Eisenhower, in retrospect for me, was giving the same message my father gave me.

People can scoff if they want or need, but the reality is all this is more than likely very true.
Not forgetting, RFK and MLK...it's all one big puzzle of manipulation. People need to be asking, how or can we ever get out from under all this. While praying something worse doesn't happen and hoping the good guys finally win out.

You younger ones, it's called, 'thinking outside the box.'

Excellent, as always.

[MinM]

92. Another piece of the puzzle ..

for you ngGale :kick:

New evidence challenges official picture of Kennedy shooting | Science | guardian.co.uk

# guardian.co.uk,
# Friday February 22 2008

The official record states that senator Robert F Kennedy, like his brother before him, was killed by a crazed lone gunman. But the assassination of a man who seemed to embody so much hope for a bitterly divided country embroiled in an unpopular war still troubles this nation.

Little about the official explanation of the events at the Ambassador Hotel on June 5 1968 makes sense. Now a new forensic analysis of the only audio recording of the fatal shots has given new weight to a controversial theory that there were in fact two shooters, and that the man convicted of Kennedy's killing — Sirhan Sirhan - did not fire the fatal shots..

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/feb/22/kennedy.assassination

SECRET SERVICE LEAVES OBAMA AT RISK / RAISES GRAVE CONCERNS

AlterNet: Blogs: Election 2008: Secret Service Responds to Charges of Lax Gun Checks at Obama Rally in Dallas

[MinM]

93. JFK Redux! Déjà vu! Obama in Security Endangerment?

http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/diarypage.php?did=6244">JFK Redux! Déjà vu! Obama in Security Endangerment?

The story on Obama's alleged desertion by the Secret Service shook loose a Redux, a Deja Vu , and an ensuing strain on those who love freedom.

Several months ago, I stated in an article that ala JFK; there may be an orchestrated attempt upon the life of Obama.

When JFK was assassinated, I said that the dupe (Oswald) charged with the crime would be assassinated and then his assassin (Ruby) would die in Prison the result of a toxic dose, which would bring on a heart attack. It did.

JFK was killed because Dallas police and the Secret Service did not occupy the roofs, did not deploy helicopters, did not properly search and occupy the buildings and in fact, were allegedly nowhere to be found above street level. Did war/weapon sales interests buy off the CIA?

At the time JFK was murdered because he refused to go into Viet Nam, refused to pay for and test a variety of weapons against millions of Vietnamese, refused to Napalm Jungles full of women, children and men, refused to do the mass murdering of millions of yellow people, just as Mr. Clinton got impeached because he refused to bribe the Taliban, as asked by the oil "interests," with a few measly billion to "Protect" the intended oil pipeline (which is now in place)

At the end of JFK's presidency, I said, that some of those who were responsible for his safety, were irresponsible. Were I his safety engineer, I would placed Federal Marshals, Secret Service Agents, Green Berets, Texas Rangers, me, my cousins, uncles and a good many members of the Mob, in every window of every building along his path. I would have had helicopters everywhere. JFK was warned not to go to Dallas, but he was not the kind of person to take the back door. He went, he was short-changed by those responsible for his "security," he was killed and the Military Medical Industrial Complex got its war, and we-those who believed we might have had another FDR in the making, got the shaft. America was "taken-in" by the avaristic super wealthy who, in the words of Edward G. Robinson's Rocco, in the film Key Largo, prompted by Bogart's Major Frank McCloud, when asked what he wanted, said "More!"

Jack Kennedy was killed by shots from the ROOF of the book depository and from the grassy knoll, as predicted. In addition, when it happened I sat home and cried. I was a kid. I had helped him and now he was gone. Dead. My dreams were dead with him. It would be twenty years before I got involved in politics again, and then still angry, but ready finally to do something about it, as campaign chair in a community which had a board of trustees, Republicans with a 7-1 advantage over Democrats. I became campaign chair was well paid and we (I solicited and got 160 campaign workers, turned the board around, 6-2 and won the mayoral seat as well.

Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK? Excuse me, but, as Woody Allen said so long ago, "I was quite busy working on the non-fiction version of the Warren report."

Indeed, my words were, The Military, Medical, Industrial Complex will do to Obama what they did to JFK and allegedly, through Prescott Bush, attempted to do to FDR.

I suggest that the Obama Campaign use some of those millions they have collected to hire expert security people for his protection. I do not know if Barak Obama is another FDR. I do not even know if he is another JFK. However, I do not want him to end up as JFK, RFK, MLK and Senator Wellstone and his wife and daughter..

[defendandprotect]

97. Hadn't heard about that . . . !!! Thank you ---

Back later to read this thread and your links fully ---

[defendandprotect]

96. Gary Mack moved to the dark side long ago --- but, of course, there was

a relationship between Oswald and Ruby ---


There was also a relationship between Nixon and Ruby going back to days of McCarthy Era ---


The Tunnheim Panel/1992 JFK Classified Records Act ---
John Tunnheim found that . . .

"Oswald was employed by the CIA working on high level assigments and probably also for the FBI."

[defendandprotect]

98. Nixon and Ruby means Nixon, Prescott Bush and Ruby . . .

Newly discovered FBI documents prove that Jack Ruby has been an employee of Richard Nixon since 1947. That that FBI document Ruby is listed as working as a spy & hit man for Nixon.

Re CIA employees having come forward to Congress to say that Oswald was employed by CIA . . .
elsewhere there's been quite a bit written on that --- evidently MANY CIA employees came forward
immediately --- and immediately discouraged from reporting what they knew!

Those who didn't change their minds were harassed --- seriously harassed ---
until they did change their minds.


I'd also suggest that they haven't left much to chance since then ---
the computer voting machines began to come in during the mid-1960's . . .
And the steals go on and on ---


See Votescam -- The Stealing of America by journalists Jim & Ken Collier

http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=votescam+the+stealing+of+america&fr=yfp-t-111-s&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8

[Kurovski]

112. Kick. (nt)

[MadHound]

113. While I'm perfectly willing to believe that Oswald and Ruby knew each other, and had a conversation,

I seriously doubt that they had that particular conversation. One of the red herrings of the entire Kennedy coverup is the notion that the Kennedy assassination was done by the Mob. Sorry, but given all of the strange "coincidences" surrounding the assassination, there is no way that the Mob could have arranged it all.

There are issues, from changing the page route to planting the full blown cover story in NZ papers that the Mob couldn't have arranged, therefore it is obvious that the Mob didn't plan this one. Were there elements of the Mob involved, sure, but not at the top echelon. Instead they were used more as hired muscle, more patsies if you will. Jack Ruby was one of these. Did he know Oswald, evidence says yes. But there's no way in hell this was a Mob operation.