who really believed the Warren Commission report. Most people suspected that a lot of information was omitted and/or covered up.

An odd censorship, considering the facts, that holds to the present day. For instance, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and his sister Rory Kennedy, told Charlie Rose in front of a live studio audience in Dallas that their father, then-Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, thought his brother the president was the victim of a conspiracy, murdered by domestic political opponents.

Details on this important revelation were ignored by Mainstream Media -- and this one Charlie Rose program never aired: reported in an interview with Charlie Rose.



It's also what author and Salon founder David Talbot reported, when he called Robert F. Kennedy the "first conspiracy theorist" in 2007.

Here's why the news from Robert and Rory is so important:

Those are the facts we learned Friday, Jan. 11, 2013. It's called history. The fact the nation's MOCKINGBIRD of a press corpse ignore the information is most telling.

What's more telling is what didn't get noted in the nation's corrupt mass media at all: The fact that Attorney General and later Senator Robert F. Kennedy also was assassinated. Some think that was a coincidence, because the mass media told them so. One thing's for certain, the questions still surrounding the deaths of two liberal icons doesn't get discussed at all today in our supposedly "free press."

This is not ancient history. We are living in a world created by the assassination of the President -- a Liberal, Progressive and Democratic President -- almost 52 years ago.

It would be a joyous day around the World if the BFEE were
held to account.

We may yet see the day, MoreGOPoop! This writer sheds light on the Org designed to keep Poppy's CIA "open for business" during the Carter years. It also sheds light on why things never really change, such as wars without end and trickle-down economics:

When Carter's CIA director, Adm. Stansfield Turner, tossed out the bad apples, rogues, etc. -- Poppy was ticked. They were his chums. So, the petrodollar-connected friends found a work-around. Voila! The hostages are held past the election and Pruneface and Poppy are back in the White House.

The invisible powers that might demand participation in Welfare
Deformation? That would insinuate themselves in head positions
in the various depts. of our govt.? That would lead a righteous
man to declare amazement at how little power he actually had
as president?

Thank you, Octafish, for trudging through the sludge to find us
some Truth.

coincidence but I also add in MLK. Whoever did this were taking out our liberal leaders both political and domestic one way or another.

This is the era when suddenly the liberal wing of the party came up missing leaders. Either they were killed or some scandal was pushed by the MSM until most of them were gone.

I feel like the narrator in "Road Warrior"... I'm old now, but I remember then.

Thank you for caring about the truth, jwirr. The assassination narratives, like the wars without end, are built on lies. This attempt to "control" our history -- even when told for the "good of the country" -- serves instead to advance the cause of tyranny.

do if we NOW opened up the truth to the public? The problem is that we are way too late to be able to change the direction we took back then. I assume that there is someone at the Archives who could find much more proof but what then do we do with it?

I always thought (still do) that there was more to it than a "lone gunman".

Lucky Luciano was released from prison as part of a deal in 1947 and he received a Medal of Honor. Thomas Dewey described it only as "“Upon the entry of the United States into the war, Luciano’s aid was sought by the Armed Services " and that is 16 years prior to JFK.

So it was just the Cuba/Castro/mafia thing they wanted secret ?

In fact, CIA went out of its way to keep that hidden not only from the Warren Commission and the American people, but hidden from President John F. Kennedy and Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy. Something very telling is how CIA connected individuals now float the idea that the assassination plots were these Kennedy brother's idea. Nothing could be further from the truth, it was CIA director Allen Dulles under Eisenhower (and Nixon) who contracted with the MAFIA to assassinate Castro in 1960. Since then, the rightwing and their cronies in the mass media have done all they could to associate the Kennedys with the smear.

A little history:

Details on the actual sit-down, which to an amateur democratic detective interested in justice would seem like a lead worth pursuing:



Yet, for some reason, the CIA continues to the present day to imply that it was Kennedy who did that.



Yet, the Mighty Wurlitzer continues to play the false tune that Kennedy was the guy who wanted Castro dead -- never mentioning Kennedy ordered the program halted.



Why would CIA not want the Warren Commission, and the American public to which it reported, know the truth about its illegal assassination program?

From the Water is Wet as all Wetwork Department:

If things had gone according to plan, Nixon would've been president during the Bay of Pigs and would've sent in the Marines, along with the Army, Navy, Air Force and Coast Guard, making Allen Dulles and Meyer Lansky and all their rich and corrupt friends very, very happy.

President Kennedy, temporarily, put a kibosh on the warmongers' plans during the Bay of Pigs, during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and in Vietnam.

Lucky on the docks may've been known to Naval Intelligence and those who the history of the United States in World War II, but to Everyman, no. The CIA and Mafia working together to kill leaders is news. And it shouldn't have been kept from the Warren Commission by the CIA as an agency and by its representative on the Warren Commission, Allen Dulles.

Octafish, for putting the truth out there!

The motorcade in Dallas, Nov. 22, 1963...



From a very good overview:



PS: You are welcome, Bobcat! Thank you for caring about this important history we are living.

As you know, WillyT, but known by too few others: This essay from former Presient Harry S Truman got published in early editions of the Washington Post but, evidently, very few other U.S. newspapers exactly one month after the assassination.

We see that one month after the assassination, President Truman expressed public concern CIA had strayed off the reservation from intelligence gathering of foreign news sources to cloak-and-dagger operations. Time -- and the Church Committee -- has since shown CIA operated, illegally, domestically.

So, Allen Dulles, on behalf of CIA, even asked former President Truman to retract it. When Mr. Dulles couldn't get a retraction, he FORGED a retraction. Details from Ray McGovern...



The record shows Capitalism's Invisible Army benefits secret agencies and secret agents, not Democracy.

Thanks for new info -is he connected to Poppy??

The news from Langley concerned a report by (the current?) CIA historian, David Robarge. He is the fellow who was trotted out before the cameras a few years' back to say the CIA wouldn't release part of its Bay of Pigs history, the part of the report written by Inspector General Lyman Kirkpatrick that apparently assigned responsibility for the Bay of Pigs fiasco to CIA ops guy Richard Bissell.

Background on the Bush connection from historian and political science guy Larry J. Sabato, author of "The Kennedy Half-Century: The Presidency, Assassination, and Lasting Legacy of John F. Kennedy," in April 1969, Prescott Bush wrote Clover Dulles:

Clearly shows how the players, like the aspens, look like a forest of individual trees above ground, but really are connected by their roots underground.

For the record, based on his analysis of the FBI memos naming Midland Texas oil man George H.W. Bush and "Mr. George Bush of the Central Intelligence Agency," Dr. Sabato does not believe Poppy Bush was involved directly, or anything more than indirectly, in the events in Dallas.

I heard him speak at Duquesne, where he gave the keynote address. He believes the bungled investigations into JFK's death may keep the truth under wraps forever. I took away an understanding that we need to continue searching for it, no matter whose toes get stepped on. Dr. Sabato is tops in every way.

by Steve Kangas

The wealthy have always used many methods to accumulate wealth, but it was not until the mid-1970s that these methods coalesced into a superbly organized, cohesive and efficient machine. After 1975, it became greater than the sum of its parts, a smooth flowing organization of advocacy groups, lobbyists, think tanks, conservative foundations, and PR firms that hurtled the richest 1 percent into the stratosphere.

The origins of this machine, interestingly enough, can be traced back to the CIA. This is not to say the machine is a formal CIA operation, complete with code name and signed documents. (Although such evidence may yet surface — and previously unthinkable domestic operations such as MK-ULTRA, CHAOS and MOCKINGBIRD show this to be a distinct possibility.) But what we do know already indicts the CIA strongly enough. Its principle creators were Irving Kristol, Paul Weyrich, William Simon, Richard Mellon Scaife, Frank Shakespeare, William F. Buckley, Jr., the Rockefeller family, and more. Almost all the machine's creators had CIA backgrounds.

SNIP...

How did this alliance start? The CIA has always recruited the nation’s elite: millionaire businessmen, Wall Street brokers, members of the national news media, and Ivy League scholars. During World War II, General "Wild Bill" Donovan became chief of the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), the forerunner of the CIA. Donovan recruited so exclusively from the nation’s rich and powerful that members eventually came to joke that "OSS" stood for "Oh, so social!"

SNIP...

Historically, the CIA and society’s elite have been one and the same people. This means that their interests and goals are one and the same as well. Perhaps the most frequent description of the intelligence community is the "old boy network," where members socialize, talk shop, conduct business and tap each other for favors well outside the formal halls of government.

CONTINUED...

http://www.american-buddha.com/illum.originsofoverclass.htm

Capitalism's Invisible Army also employs a very generous amount of nepotism to keep the old lines in service. It's a legacy thing.

A national news media with integrity soul work to light a fire under the Ownership Class and their servants in government. Instead, they protect tje privileged. Lucky to write that I learned about that on DU in 2003: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x455573

Not saying it shows the agency was involved -- but that is some serious shit, especially considering how the President has just been killed. What else is missing from the recent reportage is the role played by a six CIA officials who were aware of, and monitoring, the movements and actions of Lee Harvey Oswald more than a month before the assassination.

Thanks for grokking, panader0!

&feature=player_detailpage

...and this thread are great. Thanks for posting.

the CIA did it

Head of the Warren Commission .....must have known about the cover up...and here's proof

...

Great memory, yours, lovuian.

A very good thing!

K&R!

OS

We can discuss the assassination of President Kennedy on DU and GD. Some of what I learned at Duquesne University and shared about the subject, thanks to DU:

These OPs represent news and information on the assassination of President Kennedy that most people would never see in the Corporate Owned Press. Thanks to DU, many Americans and people around the world now have learned there is much important information that we need to know. That is democracy.

So. Why not refute the facts?

Of course, Allen Dulles never spoke a word about the plans he and his underlings entered into to assassinate Fidel Castro with the Mafia in December, 1960.

Interestingly, that's the same mob of killers, dope dealers, gamblers and money launderers who J Edgar Hoover never acknowledged existed until one of his underlings got a tip from a New York State policeman in Appalachin in November, 1957.

So, their word isn't what I'd take unequivocally. I would take the word of the late President's brother, Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy on the matter. He called the Warren report "a shoddy piece of workmanship."

Certainly those who benefit from never ending war are running the show.

"Money trumps peace" is how George W Bush put it on Feb. 14, 2007, words uttered at a press conference in which not a single member of the callow, cowed White House press corpse saw fit to ask a follow-up.

I remember Cindy Sheehan tried to bring it to our nation's attention.

As for his Poppy: Bush Sr told the FBI he was in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963.

That's why I bother to do what you call fun. It's called seeking justice to preserve democracy.

about certain issues. Looks like you almost have that poster in tears! GIVE UP GIVE UP!

That must be their manta in life and why they are such sad little people with no critical thinking skills. Keep it up! You must be doing something right if people are crying and begging you to stop talking about something!

Many of us do care and appreciate Octafish's enlightening reports.

for a dem forum? The person murdered was a Democratic president. I would think that qualifies.

Kennedy a good source of material for those studying the assassination.

Both LA and FL were "hosts" to extensive guerilla training/recruitment for Bay of Pigs invaders, and could easily serve as sources for men, guns and anonymity in any assassination. Trafficante (out of Tampa) was the alleged gun runner for the assassins.

Arrogant, Lying fuckheads -- Best for who?...Those who needed their asses covered?

No matter what their secret charter says. No. Really. Ask one of the last Congressmen who dared ask the Intel Community to sit down...

Pike asked NSA produce its charter. He was told 'It's Top Secret' & Congress was not cleared.

This history from way back when is why the in-crowd occupying Wall Street-on-the-Potomac are doing so swell from all the wars without end, while most of the rest of the country can get tossed out of their jobs and homes by banksters without anyone really doing anything about it.

It was a benign coverup. Nothing more.

...Then, where and when else did they obstruct justice in the context of the JFK assassination?

We KNOW a lot of examples of where else they ostructed justice in matters of war and peace: Iran, Guatemala, Congo, Vietnam, Brazil, Indonesia, Iraq...

Regarding JFK, CIA is closely holding files of George Joannides, the company's man in New Orleans when the violent anti-Castro Cuban group DRE was rubbing elbows with Lee Harvey Oswald. Later, Mr. Joannides would help bury and stonewall the story as CIA's second and uncooperative liaison to the House Select Committee on Assassinations.

(which seems missing from Detroit's and so many other of America's daily newspapers):

Author and former WaPo reporter Jefferson Morley reports the story is evolving.

Politico founder Robert Allbritton is son of the late Riggs Bank boss Joe Allbritton of Houston. The elder Mr. Albritton was a close associate of George H.W. Bush.

Riggs Bank was colorful, Compay Hermana.

That train could very easily have jumped the track and tumbled down into a thermonuclear war with the USSR

The Cuban missile crisis had occurred barely a year earlier. Two years earlier the USSR had tested a 58 megaton hydrogen bomb;n and the US and USSR had restarted nuclear testing after a joint 1958 moratorium ended. Three and a half years earlier, France had successfully tested nuclear weapons. Four years earlier, the US obtained operational ICBMs. Six years earlier, the UK had successfully tested a hydrogen bomb

Congress has always had its share of noisy grandstanding blowhards, eager for a fight. It was no different then -- and it was terrifying

Declassified report on JFK assassination says top CIA officials were part of ‘benign cover-up’

Barbara Tasch and Michael B Kelley
Business Insider/National Post | October 15, 2015

EXCERPT...

While living in New Orleans in 1963, for example, Oswald shared office space with a CIA-backed anti-Castro group.

Oswald had handed out pro-Castro literature with the address 544 Camp Street on it. FBI agent Guy Banister and a CIA-backed Cuban Revolutionary Council also rented space at the same location.

“One thing that I’ve always wondered about is (Oswald’s) time in New Orleans because he was apparently associated with Guy Banister, who clearly had FBI and CIA ties, and yet he’s also scuffling on the street with [the local representative of] an anti-Castro group,” Sabato told Business Insider in 2013.

And Sabato’s book notes that “it could be that Oswald was just a Forrest Gump-like character who popped up at interesting moments wherever he happened to live.”

“But just as conceivably, whether related to the Kennedy assassination or not, Oswald actually had secretive contacts with the CIA or the FBI, or both,” he said.

The report also reveals that in 1978, McCone lied about failing to divulge the Castro plots.

When a House committee asked him whether the spy agency had withheld information from the commission about the plots to kill Castro, McCone said he couldn’t answer because he had not been told about the plots.

The report says McCone’s answer “was neither frank nor accurate.”

CONTINUED...

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/declassified-report-on-jfk-assassination-says-top-cia-officials-were-part-of-benign-cover-up

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/10/13/did-allen-dulles-order-the-hit-on-jfk.html

The arguments in James Warren's piece bear little resemblance to reality. John Newman, author of JFK and Vietnam, can debunk a couple of Warren's assertions ..

1) JFK’s “differences with the hardliners … were mostly tactical not strategic.” Newman's JFK and Vietnam thoroughly debunks that line of thinking.

2)

That said NPR probably had the best piece debunking the revisionist history that frequently gets projected onto JFK's policies...

I'm at the top of my library's list when it comes in.

I have for years strongly suspected that Allen Dulles was the man who signed off on the Kennedy murder. His reasons for happily doing so were, to say the least, voluminous.

DUer Jim DiEugenio further destroys the argument that JFK's differences with hardliners were mostly tactical...

TRUTH for so many years now. You keep up the good fight, despite the detractors and naysayers... who are oddly silent right now, except for one *TRUE BELIEVER* who thinks our Government could do no wrong, especially something like assassinating a sitting President, despite all of the other crimes and cover-ups that have been exposed over the years... From the "Gulf of Tonkin Incident", the plans for "Operation Northwoods", Watergate, Iran-Contra arms sales, CIA Cocaine smuggling, assassinations of other foreign Leaders for regime change, torture, warrantless wire-tapping and lying us into 2 wars of aggression against 2 Countries that did nothing to us.

When they mock you and laugh at you, you know you're hitting a nerve and you are winning.

Thanks for giving a damn!

Peace,

Ghost

Tom Hayden saw the CIA director wasn't just another nice guy and had an undemocratic streak:

PS: Sorry so late in reply. Busy, weird days at the salt mine.

PPS: Thank you for the kind words, Ghost in the Machine. Your Friendship means the world.

Reagan pledged during the (1966) campaign that he would appoint former CIA director John McCone to lead an investigation into why "the campus has become a rallying point for Communism and a center for sexual misconduct" (quoted in DeGroot, 1996: 111).

Source: A Companion to Ronald Reagan, edited by Andrew L. Johns, p. 36

was on the Warren Commission. Dulles had more blood on his hands than can be imagined while director of the CIA. Regime change was his specialty.

And of course he had no reason to conceal the Company's role in the assassination, right?

Dulles was almost certainly one of the people, and in all likelihood the main or ONLY one, who gave the final approval for the hit on JFK.

And then he turns up on the Warren Commission. Pure coincidence, I am sure.

...to proceed, right to JFK's face. It's on the record, and too much public scrutiny may significantly decrease the treasonous bastards getting away with it.

The Cubans knew the time and place of invasion. And the United States knew they knew. Yet, JCS Chairman LEMNITZER and CIA Director DULLES knew Bay of Pigs Op was COMPROMISED, yet told President Kennedy their plan -- developed under Eisenhower and presumably for the Nixon madministration to come -- would work without the United States having to intervene militarily.

Castro knew the time and place for the attack. Knowing the plan was the compromised, let alone stupid from a military and political point of view, Dulles and JCS Chairman Lyman Lemnitzer failed to inform the President. How is that not treason?



Three MO' bits on JFK and the Bay of Pigs Thing...

Know your BFEE: At every turn, JFK was opposed by War Party

"Wasn't that, like, the Bay of Pigs Thing?"

JFK Would NEVER Have Fallen for Phony INTEL!

If it wasn't for JFK saying, "No," to the warmongering anticommunist paranoid greedheads, it's very possible none of us would be here now.

That's a new DU record!

a week or so before the anniversary.

Sorry to associate the negatives with you. It's just the JFK hate never stops; it's a year-round thing for some, tossing water on any discussion of his assassination. What they do is cut off contemplation and discussion and what his life meant, his political legacy, and how his death would give rise to a nation permanently at war -- of the rich, by the rich, and for the rich.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Press_International#Current_ownership



One would think that anything written about the JFK assassination by Moonie Press International would be designed to deflect attention away from the BFEE, considering that Bush 41 is perhaps the only American of a certain age who cannot (?) remember where he was on Nov. 22, 1963, but it is known he was in Dallas.

PDF of CIA historian Robarge's report:

http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB493/docs/intell_ebb_026.PDF

As for the Moonie Times: Oh yeah. It's Poppy's favorite paper.

Has it been 10 years? Gee. Where does the time go? No wonder the Bonesmen get the clock pre-set to 8 p.m.

had some dubious connections pre-Moonies too. So that's pretty much par for the course when you deal with corporate controlled media. [font color=darkred]Caveat Emptor.[/font]

Fortune magazine, the Saturday Evening Post, the Washington Post, Time Inc., ... a lot of them have sketchy relationships and conflicts over the years.

Keep up the great work, Octafish

and keep digging up the truth and exposing it to the worlld. You rock Octafish! They're just jealous!

From the Warren Commission transcripts:

Mr. McCone never was asked about, nor brought up, the framing of Oswald.

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/32954-focus-the-murder-of-jfk-another-puzzle-piece-solved

What the mainstream media has not yet realized is that the JFK case is being solved, thanks largely to the brute force of the power of the Internet. As in most suppressed stories, the revelations come one piece at a time. The following story is illustrative of how social media is able to force long-hidden stories to break open.

Just two years ago, the story of the murder of Dallas police officer J.D. Tippit on November 22, 1963, took a most unexpected twist.

A local TV newscast showed footage taken by the local ABC affiliate WFAA on that date more than 50 years ago. In the film, Dallas police captain Pinky Westbrook can be seen handling a wallet at the scene of Tippit’s murder. It appears to be the wallet of the accused assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald.

What makes the footage remarkable is that the official story was that the wallet was not found until about an hour later, when Dallas police detective Paul Bentley removed it from Oswald’s back pocket shortly after taking him into custody at the Texas Theatre, several blocks away from where Tippit was gunned down.

FBI agent Bob Barrett, who was at the scene of Tippit’s murder and is still alive in Pell City, Alabama, now calls Paul Bentley’s story “hogwash.”

The wallet is important because its contents connected Oswald to the guns used in the murder of President Kennedy and Officer Tippit

Thank you for the heads-up on that important news, eridani. For some reason, it did not turn up in my local newspapers or television screen. Planting evidence is a serious charge. FBI Agent Hosty also destroyed a note Oswald had left at the Dallas FBI office -- just after Oswald was murdered.

FBI Special Agent James HOSTY destroyed evidence: a ''threatening'' note from Oswald.

A couple of weeks before the assassination, Hosty paid a visit to Marina Oswald's residence at the home of Ruth Paine. Hosty was looking for Lee Harvey Oswald, who was not home. Oswald later found out about the visit and stopped by the Dallas FBI office and dropped off a note addressed to Hosty that threatened to "blow up the FBI building" in the words of the secretary who received the note in an unsealed envelope and read it.

Hosty and the FBI never admitted the note's existence until 1975 when the HSCA looked investigated the matter. Hosty said the note was not a threat and, therefore, not material to the case. Investigators believe Dallas SAC Gordon Shanklin ordered the note destroyed on direct orders from FBI Director J Edgar Hoover, a couple of hours after Oswald's own assassination while in police custody.

Destroying evidence is obstruction of justice The note was never mentioned to the Warren Commission.

Special Agent Don Adams of the FBI deserved to be seen and heard by billions. The guy was the real deal, a brave agent who stepped forward. Among his assassination-connected work, FBI Special Agent Don Adams interviewed racist Joseph Adams Milteer, a guy an FBI informant had taped detailing a pre-Dallas plot in Miami.

He wrote a book on the experience:

http://adamsjfk.com/?page_id=30

Why Milteer matters:



Joseph Adams Milteer, the guy Adams was sent to interview, had outlined what would happen in Dallas before it happened. For some reason, Mr. Hoover "let him go."

Then, there's the evidence of various threats against President Kennedy that Hoover ignored. Author and former NYT reporter Edwin Black wrote about the Chicago Plot, the same M.O. as Dallas, ambush, high-power rifles, high-rise, and one patsy by the name of Thomas Arthur Vallee, a USMC veteran from a U-2 base in Japan. The plot was broken up by the Secret Service in Chicago. Not that they wanted to, they sort of had to when the local cops got a call from a landlady with the guns, passports, maps and "parade route" in Highlighter still on the bed.

Very important read in PDF:

http://www.thechicagoplot.com/The%20Chicago%20Plot.pdf

Thank you for grokking, eridani. The audience is noticing the bricks.

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/33005-the-murder-of-jfk-part-2-counterfeit-id-planted-in-oswalds-wallet

Here, I pose another question: Was a phony identification card for “Alek Hidell” inserted into the wallet after Oswald’s arrest? “Alek Hidell” was the name used to order the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository the day JFK was killed.

Listen here to Dallas Police Department Officer Gerald Hill discuss the capture of Lee Harvey Oswald on November 22, 1963. [Editor’s note: to cut to the chase, go to 3:17 in the audio file.]

Listen for what Hill does not say:

He does not say anything about “Hidell” or an identification card.

Is this omission significant? I think it is.

My previous article recounted the details. FBI agent Bob Barrett said he saw Oswald’s wallet in the hands of DPD Captain Pinky Westbrook at the scene of the murder of Dallas police office J.D. Tippit on November 22, 1963.

The article also recounted that the arresting officer, Paul Bentley, told a different story. Bentley said he found Oswald’s wallet while frisking him in the police car after leaving the Texas Theatre, where Oswald was arrested on November 22.

Both men say that the wallet contained identification cards for both Lee Harvey Oswald and “Alek Hidell.”

So was Oswald carrying the Alek Hidell ID in his wallet when he was arrested?

He had not been previously seen using the ID card, or the Hidell alias. Oswald wasn’t carrying a “Hidell” ID card in his wallet three months before in August 1963 when he was arrested in New Orleans for fighting with Cuban exiles disturbed by his pro-Castro activism. After his arrest, Oswald said he was in touch with a fellow Castro supporter named “Hidell,” which was a lie.

Thank you, eridani, for the heads-up.



There may have been four Oswald wallets -- I bet more, if they include all the Oswald impersonators' wallets.

Discovering the close relationship between Allen Dulles, John McCone and Prescott Bush made me sad. It makes me glad to know people care, though, and that means democracy has a fighting chance.

Details from historian and political science guy Larry J. Sabato, author of "The Kennedy Half-Century: The Presidency, Assassination, and Lasting Legacy of John F. Kennedy," in April 1969, Prescott Bush wrote Clover Dulles:

Something to do with Winchester Rifles and the song "In the year 2525"?

It is good to know that others care.

In the Old West, the guy with the best gun wins. The mentality thrives today, kept alive and strong by the likes of the Brothers Dulles.

Same in 1873 when the repeating rifle laid waste to the nations of the Native people, as well as the buffalo; today, those with their fingers on "The Button" get to say who gets the crumbs after they are done feasting.

One nice day in 1967...



Bohemian Grove has changed a lot since those days. Now they admit non-whites as guests, not just as servants. Considered "renters" and not "owners," though.

Went to see the final performance of the "workshop" of the new Medoff play, ...focusing on Marilyn Monroe and the group in the title as related by her "best friend" for the last 6.5 years of her life...

It was based on the tapes she made.

The production was top quality, full of people in from NY...however, I didn't think it was that good as these connections were sort of squeezed in at the end.....The woman playing Monroe reminded me of the woman who plays HRC on SNL these days....played it like a tough gal, supposedly the real MM...

But, here's the article..which details what was related in the tapes about all these connections:

http://www.abqjournal.com/657956/entertainment/conspiracy-theory.html


Mark Medoff investigates Marilyn Monroe’s death in his new play, ‘Marilee and Baby Lamb’
By Kathaleen Roberts / Journal Staff Writer
Sunday, October 11th, 2015 at 12:02am

ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — A gilded tornado of desire, Marilyn Monroe blazed a path of stardust across the American psyche.
If you go

But she also read Shakespeare and Steinbeck, drank sparingly and was determined to sculpt herself into a serious actress.

Many believe she was ready to leave Hollywood. But just as she stood on the precipice of re-invention, she died.

Conspiracy theories have swirled around Monroe’s 1962 death for decades, ever since the Los Angeles County coroner declared the cause a “probable suicide” from “acute barbiturate poisoning.”
Mark Medoff.

Tony Award-winning New Mexico playwright Mark Medoff has decided to confront the controversy head-on, fueled by his own research into Monroe’s untimely death.

His play, “Marliee and Baby Lamb: The Assassination of an American Goddess,” opens at the Rio Grande Theatre in Las Cruces on Tuesday, and Broadway producers have already expressed interest in the piece.

In 2007, record and concert producer Dennis D’Amico conducted a series of interviews with Monroe’s confidant, seamstress and best friend Lena Pepitone, who lived with the actress for 6½ years before her death at age 36.

A former student, D’Amico sent 20 hours of interview tapes to Medoff, who teaches at New Mexico State University, as a potential project.

Medoff told D’Amico to winnow the information down to 20 critical bullet points.

According to Pepitone, after being nearly devoured by her sex goddess image, Hollywood exploitation and a series of users and abusers, Monroe desperately needed a friend who would never betray her.

“She has never been allowed to be herself,” Medoff said. “She wanted to make herself anew. In the play, I have her asking to play Electra and Medea. She has to purge herself of all the stupidities and idiocy of her life.”

Two days before her death, Monroe planned to give a press conference naming the men who had tried to control her, identifying both John and Robert Kennedy and her psychiatrist as her lovers, according to Pepitone. She said Monroe planned to return to New York, possibly reunite with her ex-husband, Joe DiMaggio, and resume her acting studies.

“There was no way they would allow her to bring down the Kennedys,” Medoff contends. “They didn’t do it personally. But it came through the Kennedy family. The Kennedy family had a relationship with the Mafia. Joe (Kennedy) had always been involved with the Mob.”

Medoff called the drug overdose ruling “logically impossible” for several reasons, citing previously reported details from the autopsy report. It said the star took more than 50 Nembutal and chloral hydrate capsules from the empty prescription bottles found next to her bed.

But there was no water glass on her night table. Her housekeeper said her bathroom was out of order with no running water. The autopsy found no tell-tale gelatin from the capsules in her stomach.

“She was held down with pillows so there were no marks,” Medoff said.

“Lena was not there when she died, so these are deductions, extrapolations,” he acknowledged. “She was placed in bed in a way, according to Lena, that she never slept.”

A puncture wound found in her armpit was dismissed as an ingrown hair, D’Amico said.

“Taking control cost her her life,” Medoff said.

“The thing that really convinced me (she was murdered) is that Marilyn called Lena the night before she died,” D’Amico said. “She said, ‘I can’t wait to come back to New York. I’m off drugs; I’m off booze and I’m feeling healthier than I’ve ever been in my life.'”

Pepitone was adamant that Monroe had been murdered, D’Amico said.

“She said over and over, ‘They killed her.’ I said, ‘Why?’ She said, ‘There are too many Kennedys still alive for me to talk.”

The Posthumous Assassination of JFK Part II

Sy Hersh and the Monroe/JFK Papers:
The History of a Thirty-Year Hoax

By James DiEugenio

On September 25, 1997, ABC used its news magazine program 20/20 to take an unusual journalistic step. In the first segment of the program, Peter Jennings took pains to discredit documents that had been about to be used by its own contracted reporter for an upcoming show scheduled for broadcast. The contracted reporter was Seymour Hersh. The documents purported to show a secret deal involving Marilyn Monroe, Sam Giancana, and President John F. Kennedy. They were to be the cornerstone of Hersh’s upcoming Little, Brown book, The Dark Side of Camelot. In fact, published reports indicate that it was these documents that caused the publisher to increase Hersh’s advance and provoke three networks to compete for a television special to hype the book. It is not surprising to any informed observer that the documents imploded. What is a bit surprising is that Hersh and ABC could have been so naive for so long. And it is ironic that ABC should use 20/20 to expose a phenomenon that it itself fueled twelve years ago.

What happened on September 25th was the most tangible manifestation of three distinct yet overlapping journalistic threads that have been furrowing into our culture since the Church Committee disbanded in 1976. Hersh’s book would have been the apotheosis of all three threads converged into one book. In the strictest sense, the convergent movements did not actually begin after Frank Church’s investigation ended. But it was at that point that what had been a right-wing, eccentric, easily dismissed undercurrent, picked up a second wind—so much so that today it is not an eccentric undercurrent at all. It is accepted by a large amount of people. And, most surprisingly, some of its purveyors are even accepted within the confines of the research community.

The three threads are these: 1) That the Kennedys ordered Castro’s assassination, despite the verdict of the Church Committee on the CIA’s assassination plots. As I noted last issue, the committee report could find no evidence indicating that JFK and RFK authorized the plots on Fidel Castro, Rafael Trujillo of the Dominican Republic, or Ngo Dinh Diem of South Vietnam. 2) That the Kennedys were really “bad boys,” in some ways as bad as Chicago mobsters or the “gentleman killers” of the CIA. Although neither JFK nor RFK was lionized by the main centers of the media while they were alive, because of their early murders, many books and articles were written afterward that presented them in a sympathetic light, usually as liberal icons. This was tolerated by the media establishment as sentimental sop until the revelations of both Watergate and the Church Committee. This “good guy” image then needed to be altered since both those crises seemed to reveal that the Kennedys were actually different than what came before them (Eisenhower and the Dulles brothers) and what came after (Nixon). Thus began a series of anti-Kennedy biographies. 3) That Marilyn Monroe’s death was somehow ordained by her “involvement” with the Kennedy “bad boys.” Again, this was at first a rather peculiar cottage industry. But around the time of Watergate and the Church Committee it was given a lift, and going back to a 1964 paradigm, it combined elements of the first two movements into a Gothic (some would say grotesque) right-wing propaganda tract which is both humorous and depressing in its slanderous implications, and almost frightening in its political and cultural overtones. Egged on by advocates of Judith Exner (e.g. Liz Smith and Tony Summers), this political and cultural time bomb landed in Sy Hersh’s and ABC’s lap. When it blew up, all parties went into a damage control mode, pointing their fingers at each other. As we examine the sorry history of all three industries, we shall see that there is plenty of blame (and shame) to be shared. And not just in 1997.

As we saw in Part One of this article, as the Church Committee was preparing to make its report, the Exner and then Mary Meyer stories made headlines in the Washington Post. These elements—intrigue from the CIA assassination plots, plus the sex angles, combined with the previous hazing of Richard Nixon over Watergate—spawned a wave of new anti-Kennedy “expose” biographies. Anti-Kennedy tracts were not new. But these new works differed from the earlier ones in that they owed their genesis and their styles to the events of the mid-seventies that had brought major parts of the establishment (specifically, the CIA and the GOP) so much grief. In fact we will deal with some of the earlier ones later. For now, let us examine this new pedigree and show how it fits into the movement outlined above.

CONTINUED...

http://www.ctka.net/pr1197-jfk.html

PS: Thank you for the heads-up on the stage play, Gloria! If I can take in one show this holiday break, it will "Marliee and Baby Lamb: The Assassination of an American Goddess." If I can, I'd love to see it in Las Cruces.

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=17385

That report shows to what lengths someone in uh authority will go to make things um right. Really feel sorry for Reznikoff after hearing the exchange with the lawyer. Wow o wow.

"Can we just give the money back?"

An antidote is the story of one real and truly heroic Lt. Commander:



Old news to MinM. News to America and the planet that, for some reason, the Press doesn't inform the public.

Heads up: the United States government is still hiding JFK assassination information from the American people, even though the Federal courts have ordered the release of the information. In the above example, LCDR Terri Pike was reprimanded after she discovered records of what the Office of Naval Intelligence knew about Oswald's "defection" to the USSR. For doing her job, she was railroaded out of the United States Navy.

Thank you, MinM! While your commitment to understanding and dedication to sharing the truth are their own rewards, I wish out loud and in public that I could send you a million dollars cash every time you move the pile forward.

Kennedy's wanted her to meet Castro...

Just like 9/11...we got the 'best truth'. Pathetic.

Soon, there won't be anything left, except what Conan Doyle observed...

Sounds like someone wanted to blame Dallas on the commies and started planning so long before November 22, 1963:



Thus with Secret Government, things, like policies, and people, like Presidents, get superseded...



So, as Bertrand Russell first asked, if there's no state agency angle to the assassination, why the need for all the state secrecy?

Checkmate on ‘The Devil’s Chessboard’

Exclusive: Since the end of World War II, what some call the “deep state” has taken hold of the American Republic, stripping the citizens of meaningful control over national security issues, with CIA Director Allen Dulles playing a key early role, according to David Talbot’s new biography reviewed by Lisa Pease.

By Lisa Pease
ConsortiumNews.com, Oct. 27, 2015

David Talbot’s new book The Devil’s Chessboard is an anecdotal biography of not just Allen Dulles but of the national security establishment that he helped create. Talbot gave himself the monumental task of summing up a 25-year slice of important history.

Because Talbot has a keen eye for both the absurd and the darkly humorous, he managed to make the disturbing history of that period not only eminently readable but engaging and at times downright entertaining.

I have consumed dozens of books on Allen Dulles, the CIA and Cold War history, yet I was still surprised by numerous revelations in Talbot’s book. He often covers well-known episodes through a less well-known set of incidents and characters.

Talbot writes about the ratlines (escape routes from Europe to Latin America for Nazis), but in the context of one particularly Machiavellian character. He writes about Lee Harvey Oswald from the point of view of one of his friends who sold him down the river to the Warren Commission, likely at the behest of the CIA, a friend who later ostensibly committed suicide just as a member of the House Select Committee on Assassinations was about to interview him. Talbot talks about the CIA’s mind-control programs in the context of Allen Dulles submitting his own son to those horrors.

Talbot and his research associate Karen Croft, to whom he dedicated his book, have found all sorts of nuggets in Allen Dulles’s papers, his appointment calendar, oral histories, and other less-used sources. In addition, Talbot infuses his book with anecdotes from interviews he personally conducted. While I found some points I could nitpick in various episodes, overall this is a worthy addition and a much-needed perspective that elucidates how we came to have two governments: the elected one and the one that doesn’t answer to the elected one.

Talbot’s presentation is not linear but episodic, jumping back and forth like a checker on the chessboard in his title to keep subjects thematically together. Doing this allows him to introduce the character of Allen Dulles quickly, by showing him handing over a World War I girlfriend, “a young Czech patriot,” to British agents who suspected her of being an enemy spy, after which, Talbot tells us, she “disappeared forever.”

Talbot demonstrates that Dulles always found a way to do what he wanted, regardless of what he had been asked to do, even from his entry into the World War II’s Office of Strategic Services, the CIA’s forerunner. OSS chief William “Wild Bill” Donovan had tried to assign Dulles to London to exploit Dulles’s cozy relationships with high-net-worth individuals like the Rockefellers whom Dulles served as a lawyer at Sullivan and Cromwell. But Dulles instead got himself assigned to Bern, Switzerland, at the near center of Europe and a financial Mecca for secret bank accounts.

Allen Dulles’s older brother John Foster Dulles had funneled “massive U.S. investments” into Germany post-World War I that flowed back to the U.S. as war loans were paid off. Both Dulles brothers enabled the Nazis financially and socially, with John Foster Dulles at one point defending the character of a Nazi lobbyist who threw a party in New York City to celebrate a Nazi victory in France.

Sparing the Nazis

Talbot makes the case that Allen Dulles was all but a “Double Agent” for the Nazis during World War II. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt knew how close Dulles was to the Germans but thought Dulles, as an American, would do the President’s bidding, serving as a lure for high-profile Nazis so they could be identified and neutralized.

In pursuing victory, FDR pushed for an unconditional surrender, but Dulles had other plans. He told an agent of SS leader Heinrich Himmler that the Allies’ declaration of the need for unconditional surrender was “merely a piece of paper to be scrapped without further ado if Germany would sue for peace.”

Roosevelt had assigned Dulles to support Project Safehaven, a program to identify and confiscate Nazi assets stashed in neutral countries. But instead Dulles, aided by his friend Tom McKittrick, the head of the Bank for International Settlements, sought to protect his German client’s accounts.

Insubordination to presidents was a running theme in Dulles’s life. But the younger Dulles brother did not yet have the power he would command later in life, so FDR’s policies won out over Dulles’s covert challenges.

Money and the power that money enabled, not ideology, was the predominant motivator for Dulles and his ilk. As Talbot noted, “It is not widely recognized that the Nazi reign of terror was, in a fundamental way, a lucrative racket — an extensive criminal enterprise set up to loot the wealth of Jewish victims and exploit their labor.”

Dulles did not appear to have a problem with the decimation of the Jews. Instead, Dulles believed the real enemy were the Communists, who had the potential to shift the balance of financial power. So Dulles found natural camaraderie with the Nazi elite, who also viewed the Soviets as their biggest threat. Dulles ignored or downplayed the reports he was receiving from escapees and journalists regarding the burning of human beings in concentration camps.

Dulles’s declassified communications showed little regard for the killing of the Jews and much more interest in psychological warfare tricks, “such as distributing counterfeit stamps behind enemy lines depicting Hitler’s profile as a death’s skull, and other cloak-and-dagger antics,” Talbot tells us.

When one reporter took a detailed report of what was happening to Dulles, the journalist said Dulles was “profoundly shocked” and thought action should be taken immediately. Yet Dulles had been receiving similar reports for more than two years and had done nothing about it, and he did next to nothing with this report as well.

Dulles wasn’t the only one keeping the atrocities from being reported, of course. First, the Nazis operated in as much secrecy as possible, so credible reports were hard to come by. But even when they came, many others in government, such as Secretary of State Cordell Hull, turned a blind eye. Hull was one of those who advised President Roosevelt not to allow the St. Louis, a ship of German Jewish refugees, to dock at an American port and who had blocked an important, detailed, first-hand account of what was going on in the camps from reaching the President.

In Italy, Dulles pursued his own secret peace agreement, which he dubbed Operation Sunrise, which flew in the face of FDR’s stated policies. And while Dulles presented himself to people as a personal representative of FDR, the absurdity of that was not lost on some of Dulles’s targets.

Launching the Cold War

During the Nuremberg trials, again, Dulles took the side opposite of what FDR had wanted, the meting out of stern justice for such egregious crimes. Where Roosevelt and other Allied leaders saw war criminals, Dulles saw potential spies to be rescued.

Talbot devotes several chapters to Dulles’s cooperation with and protection of the Nazis. One chapter is devoted to Dulles’s bringing the “Gehlen organization” into the fold of U.S. intelligence, with dubious results.

And, Talbot describes how James Angleton appeared to have blackmailed his way into his position of Chief of Counterintelligence by promising not to expose Dulles’s hiding of Nazi funds. That would explain how Angleton rose to such a key position despite his dubious fitness for the job. The paranoid Angleton ruined the lives of many intelligence officers whom he suspected falsely of being foreign spies, while missing the fact that his good friend in British intelligence, Kim Philby, was a Soviet double-agent. But Allen Dulles was ever Angleton’s protector.

Due to the scope of the topics covered, Talbot is necessarily unable to go in great depth into any of them. His coverage of the Hiss case feels superficial to one who has read a great deal on the subject. For example, Talbot speculates that Alger Hiss, a senior State Department official accused of spying for the Soviets, didn’t want to recognize Whittaker Chambers, the chief witness against him, because the two had perhaps engaged in a homosexual liaison.

While that may be true, I’ve always found Hiss’s own reasons compelling: Chambers had gone by another name when he had first known him; it had been many years since they had met; and Chambers’s weight had changed dramatically. That seems to better explain why Hiss claimed he didn’t know Chambers until he had a face-to-face meeting with him. Then, he recognized his long-ago tenant.

Talbot sprinkles a little sexual innuendo throughout the book. Personally, I find that takes away from the telling of history because anyone can say anything about someone else when the person is no longer alive to dispute it. In most cases, these suspicions are neither provable nor relevant. Fortunately, these are minimal interruptions to the overall tale.

Talbot makes a compelling argument that a lot of the abuses of the intelligence apparatus that we are dealing with now had their genesis under Allen Dulles’s version of the CIA. He traces the notion that the CIA is “above the law” and unanswerable to oversight to the McCarthy hearings, where Dulles earned the undying loyalty of the CIA by refusing to turn over Sen. Joe McCarthy’s targets for questioning.

McCarthy was clearly overreaching in his pursuit of suspected Communists and homosexuals – as alleged national security threats – but there should have been another way to deal with that than by claiming the CIA was above the law. That single act of defiance, perhaps more than anything else, paved the way to the egregious CIA abuses that have occurred in the years since, including the illegal wiretapping of elected officials, opening them up to blackmail.

In another part of the book, Talbot details the rise of Nixon under, in part, Dulles’s sponsorship. Most of us know that Nixon received illegal campaign donations when he was running for president. But Nixon also shook down those who wanted him to run for Congress, claiming he couldn’t afford to live on the salary of a Congressman and that he’d need supplementary income if he were to run. These are the kinds of juicy details Talbot’s book provides in spades.

As CIA Director

President Dwight Eisenhower appointed Dulles as the fifth CIA director – and the first civilian director – in 1953, but, as Talbot makes clear, Dulles overrode some of Eisenhower’s wishes by collaborating with his brother, John Foster Dulles, who was Secretary of State. By and large, Eisenhower was okay with letting the Dulles brothers run U.S. overt and covert foreign policy as they helped shape the worsening Cold War.

Their hard-line anti-communism and sympathy for colonialism included organizing coups in Iran in 1953 and in Guatemala in 1954 and blocking a political settlement of the Vietnam conflict that would have involved elections leading to the likely victory of Ho Chi Minh. (John Foster Dulles died in 1959. The international airport outside Washington D.C. is named in his honor.)

One chapter focuses on the killing of “dangerous ideas” in the form of a lecturer at Columbia University, Jesús Galíndéz. He and compatriots had fought in the Spanish Civil War and fled to the Dominican Republic, only to find that they had “left Franco’s frying pan and landed in Trujillo’s fire.” Galíndéz later escaped the Dominican Republic for America and wrote a damning 750-page essay called “The Era of Trujillo,” as his PhD thesis.

Talbot reveals the role of CIA operative Robert Maheu and ex-FBI agent John Frank in the kidnapping of Galíndéz and his delivery to Trujillo, who tortured him, boiled him alive and fed him to the sharks. With the help of Dulles’s CIA, Galíndéz died in 1956.

Talbot also argues that the CIA was “too modest” when it claimed it was not responsible for the death of Congolese independence leader Patrice Lumumba who was assassinated just days before John Kennedy was inaugurated in 1961. The CIA basically handed Lumumba over to the people who killed him, making the Agency, at the very least, strong accessories to the plot, and hardly the failed-plot-bystanders, the story that CIA officials sold to the Church Committee.

Though Eisenhower had given the Dulles brothers a long leash for their foreign policy schemes, President John F. Kennedy had different ideas. As president, he wanted to run his own foreign policy, and this deeply rankled Allen Dulles. However, in his first months in office, Kennedy acquiesced to the failed Bay of Pigs invasion of Cuba in April 1961. Furious that he let the CIA sell him on the scheme that was hatched under Eisenhower, Kennedy vowed to rein in the freewheeling CIA.

Dulles hadn’t had to answer to anyone for a long time. But his sloppy Bay of Pigs operation cost him all credibility with Kennedy, who took the high road publicly, refusing to blame the CIA outright. But in private, he made it clear the Agency was not to be trusted and that he wanted to shatter it into a million pieces. The enmity between the pair grew.

Allen Dulles also defied Kennedy’s wishes when the President promoted an opening to the Left in Italy. Under Dulles, the CIA continued working against those same forces while supporting the Right as the spy agency and its predecessor, the OSS, had done since World War II.

Attorney General Robert Kennedy was so suspicious of Dulles’s secret reach that – after the Bay of Pigs fiasco – he found Dulles’s sister working in the State Department and had her fired. President Kennedy ousted Dulles in November 1961, replacing him with John McCone.

But Dulles did not go quietly into the cold night, as Talbot tells it, but ran, essentially, a government in exile from his home on the Potomac. Talbot details some of the comings and goings and how Dulles may have used his own book tour to help plan and plot the assassination of President Kennedy.

The JFK Assassination

Toward the end of the book, Talbot focuses nearly as much on President Kennedy and the plot to assassinate him as he does on Allen Dulles, with mixed results. While Talbot has the facts right in the broad strokes, if not all the small details, his focus was, in my opinion, a tad misplaced in spots. For example, he appears to believe E. Howard Hunt’s deathbed “confession,” which many in the research community do not.

Hunt, a career intelligence officer who became infamous as a leader of Nixon’s Watergate burglary team, implicated President Lyndon B. Johnson in the plot to kill Kennedy, which has never made sense to me. If LBJ was so ruthless that he killed his way to the presidency, why did he decide not to run again in 1968? Historically, when people have killed their way to the throne, they do not voluntarily abdicate it.

And Hunt’s “confession” seemed motivated more by the goal of leaving his family a little money after his death than by a desire to tell the truth. Indeed, even Talbot is puzzled at things Hunt appears not to know that he would necessarily have known had he been privy to the inner workings of the plot.

Clearly, Talbot focuses on Hunt because of Hunt’s well-documented long-term friendship with Dulles. And, I do believe, from my own research, that Hunt was likely in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963, presumably as paymaster, his usual role in operations, based in large part on the fuller evidence from which Talbot created his abbreviated summary on that point. But I’m not persuaded, by this presentation or my other research, that Hunt knew the details of the actual plot.

From my own 25-plus years of research into the documentary record of the Kennedy assassination, I have come to believe it more likely that Richard Helms, James Angleton and David Atlee Phillips were the top plotters, not Dulles. But, to Talbot’s point, all of these men were beholden, at different levels, to Dulles; in fact, Angleton carried Dulles’s ashes at his funeral in 1969.

David Atlee Phillips gained power in the CIA because of his successful operations during the 1954 overthrow of Arbenz in Guatemala under Dulles. Helms was apparently insulated from the Bay of Pigs disaster in April 1961, perhaps by Dulles to keep a loyal person at the upper echelon of the CIA.

Given the hostility between Dulles and Kennedy, it remains a historical anomaly that Dulles managed to finagle his way onto the official investigation of Kennedy’s assassination. In that position, Allen Dulles was more responsible than anyone for the deliberate obfuscations of the Warren Commission. Dulles spent more minutes working for the commission than any other member. I agree with Talbot that the body should more appropriately have been named “the Dulles Commission.”

Talbot repudiated the recently resurfaced canard that Robert Kennedy had asked LBJ to appoint Dulles to the commission, a point lawyer and former House Select Committee investigator Dan Hardway has also recently made in detail recently with additional evidence. (See Section VIII in Hardway’s article “Thank you, Phil Shenon.”)

Dulles really did have ties to the family of Ruth and Michael Paine, the couple that housed the Oswalds in the months before the assassination. And Dulles really did monitor New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison’s case against Clay Shaw through the man Garrison had hired to provide “security,” Gordon Novel.

One of the most interesting people Talbot examined in the latter part of his book was JFK adviser and historian Arthur Schlesinger, who apparently had a distaste for Dulles and the CIA’s actions professionally while maintaining a personal and even warm relationship with Dulles – though Schlesinger came to question that friendship in later years.

One of Talbot’s chapters, “I can’t look and I won’t look,” is named for something Schlesinger said when confronted with evidence of conspiracy in the Kennedy assassination. Here was a man so wedded to his circle that he did not want to believe someone he knew and admired could be responsible for such a heinous crime.

Toward the end of his life, Schlesinger reflected on his “truce” and friendship with Dulles’s protégé Richard Helms and later CIA Director William Casey. Talbot quoted Schlesinger as saying, “I did wonder at one’s [meaning his own] capacity to continue liking people who have been involved in wicked things. … Is this deplorable weakness? Or commendable tolerance?”

The same must be asked of the public’s tolerance of secret operations that run counter to the principles of democracy in an open society. Is it commendable to tolerate assassinations and the darker deeds in the name of preserving the republic, or, more accurately, protecting the holdings of corporate leaders in the republic, or is it our weakness, as citizens of a democratic republic, that we have not raised our voices in protest of a secret, parallel government that has and no doubt will continue to pursue an independent path, out of control of our democracy?

That is the question that Talbot’s book asks between the lines. The Devil’s Chessboard gives us essential information to ponder before we make our answer.

Lisa Pease is a writer who has examined issues ranging from the Kennedy assassination to voting irregularities in recent U.S. elections.

SOURCE: https://consortiumnews.com/2015/10/27/checkmate-on-the-devils-chessboard/

ConsortiumNews allows DU to post entire articles.
Ms. Pease spoke at Duquesne conference on "Soft Power.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024024545

should be enough proof that at any given time there are people within the government capable of most any atrocities.

Thanks for the thread. Bookmarked to read more later.

They said that the best time for attack was "sometime in the fall of 1963," ensuring the nation's maximum nuclear superiority over the Soviet Union. To them, an all-out surprise nuclear attack would end communism, once and for all. The thought that nuclear war might end us "forever," too, must not have occurred to them.

Makes one see where they got the idea for "Better Dead than Red."



Besides those cockroaches crawling out with Henry Kissinger and Donald Rumsfeld from the undermountain secret command bunker, there might not be many Americans around after hitting them with "everything in the bucket," but, hey! As Eisenhower and crazy Gen. Powers said, even if only one American survives and no Russians, "We win!"

PS: Thank you for caring about democracy, ohheckyeah.

can jump off the page - "and we call ourselves the human race".

Terrifying to think of a first strike by either the U.S. or Russia. It seems mankind is determined to cause it's own extinction.

Thanks for the links.