A recent article in Vanity Fair, written by Susan Cheever, purports to blow the lid off the behavior of Secret Service agents in Dallas on November 21-22, 1963. As usual, though, popular magazines and “investigative reporters” are slow to catch up to the inside facts of how and why JFK was killed. Cheever’s revelations may seem earth-shattering to the uninformed, but long-time assassination researchers yawn at her supposed bombshells.
For instance, anyone who has seriously investigated the Secret Service’s actions in Dallas has known for almost 50 years that key members of JFK’s protection detail were drunk or hungover during the fatal motorcade. At least six, and probably closer to nine, agents had partied at a notorious local club until the early morning hours of November 22. The club, The Cellar, was known for catering to cops, politicians, reporters, and Mafia types. Cheever thinks she has uncovered dynamite; in reality she is 50 years late to the party. She writes:
“It took the Cellar’s owner, Pat Kirkwood, however, more than 20 years to provide a more detailed account of the night. In the letters he wrote in 1963, he was certain that none of the Secret Service agents in his establishment had been drinking. Then, in 1984, as Jim Marrs would note in his book Crossfire, published five years later, Kirkwood opened up in an article in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram, recounting the glory days of the club and explaining that although he did not ‘officially’ serve liquor, he actually handed out large quantities of booze, especially to people like lawyers and politicians and policemen who might later be helpful. ‘About 3:30,’ Kirkwood said, “these Secret Service men were sitting around giggling about how the firemen were guarding the president over at the Hotel Texas.’
“Cellar manager Jimmy Hill would also tell his side of the story in that same Star-Telegram article: ‘After the agents were there we got a call from the White House asking us not to say anything about them drinking because their image had suffered enough as it was. We didn’t say anything but those guys were bombed. They were drinking pure Everclear.” (Everclear is a strong intoxicant—either 151- or 190-proof—and was known at the time as a spike for drinks such as a Salty Dick.) In addition, the waitresses at the Cellar—a late-night drawing card for the club—were scantily clad. These underdressed women sometimes attended to over-served men, and if their testimony was ever provided, it has never surfaced.’”
Cheever, in a half-hearted attempt to be thorough, also quotes Abraham Bolden, the first African-American Secret Service agent. “‘I knew it would happen. I told those playboys that someone was going to get the president killed if they kept acting like they did. Now it’s happened,’ said Bolden. Today, Bolden, a 79-year-old retiree in Chicago, thinks that drinking definitely had something to do with the ‘lackadaisical’ Secret Service performance when the Kennedy motorcade was under attack. ‘The biggest problem I ran into with the Secret Service when I was an agent was their constant drinking,’ he told me.”
What Cheever doesn’t reveal is that Bolden’s book contains much more explicit and explosive indictments of the Secret Service in JFK’s time. Bolden asserted that several agents regularly professed their hatred of the president and insisted they would step aside if anyone tried to assassinate him. Not exactly the best attitude for those entrusted with Kennedy’s life. But Cheever ignores this. She never even hints that perhaps the Secret Service was in on the hit, despite overwhelming and long-standing evidence that it was. Cheever ascribes the agents’ culpable behavior to negligence or drunkenness. High treason and conspiracy to commit murder aren’t considerations.
However, the evidence for Secret Service participation in the plot and the cover-up is overwhelming. I believe at least four agents could have been tried and convicted as accomplices to murder: Roy Kellerman, Winston Lawson, William Greer, and Emory Roberts. For 50 years, though, no mainstream media outlet has dared to explore this dark alley because doing so would lead to back to the real brains behind the dirty project: Lyndon Johnson and the CIA, the men who recruited into the plot Secret Service agents who hated Kennedy and wanted him dead.
http://neverlandpublishing.com/tpm.html
Friday, October 31, 2014
Monday, October 27, 2014
More Proof That CIA Hired Mass-Murdering Nazis
Upon publication of my first novel, Murder Of An American Nazi, I was ridiculed in many quarters for having the audaciousness and affrontery to suggest that the CIA hired thousands of Nazis after World War II to help do its dirty work. The central thesis of my novel is that Allen Dulles and other American spymasters employed these mass murderers to spy on the communists, indoctrinate U.S. intelligence in torture techniques learned in the Nazi death camps, show the CIA how to use LSD as a mind control drug, and develop space rocketry and weapons for American use in the Cold War (see Operation Paperclip). As the years have passed, and I’ve been proven right, my detractors have cowered back under the slimy rocks from which they emerged, because they have no ground on which to stand. The declassification of millions of CIA documents have exposed more immoral, ruthless, and senseless Nazi collaboration than even I had imagined.
The latest CIA misdeeds are chronicled in the Toronto Globe and Mail, in an article written by Eric Lichtblau. (God forbid an American paper should report on CIA atrocities; of course, most American media outlets have been CIA assets for the last half-century anyway [see Operation Mockingbird]. The establishment hacks have howled at me about this assertion too.) Lichtblau writes:
“One SS officer (hired by the CIA), Otto von Bolschwing, was a mentor and top aide to Adolf Eichmann, architect of the “Final Solution,” and wrote policy papers on how to terrorize Jews.
“Yet after the war, the CIA not only hired him as a spy in Europe, but relocated him and his family to New York City in 1954, records show. The move was seen as 'a reward for his loyal postwar service and in view of the innocuousness of his [Nazi] party activities,' the agency wrote.
“His son, Gus von Bolschwing, who learned many years later of his father’s ties to the Nazis, sees the relationship between the spy agency and his father as one of mutual convenience forged by the Cold War. ‘They used him, and he used them,’ Gus von Bolschwing, now 75, said in an interview. ‘It shouldn’t have happened. He never should have been admitted to the United States. It wasn’t consistent with our values as a country.’
“When Israeli agents captured Eichmann in Argentina in 1960, Otto von Bolschwing went to the CIA for help because he worried they might come after him, memos show.
“Agency officials were worried as well that von Bolschwing might be named as Eichmann’s ‘collaborator and fellow conspirator and that the resulting publicity may prove embarrassing to the U.S.,’ a CIA official wrote.
“After two agents met with von Bolschwing in 1961, the agency assured him that it would not disclose his ties to Eichmann, records show. He lived freely for another 20 years before prosecutors discovered his wartime role and prosecuted him. He agreed to give up his citizenship in 1981, dying months later.
“In all, the American military, the CIA, the FBI and other agencies used at least 1,000 ex-Nazis and collaborators as spies and informants after the war, according to Richard Breitman, a Holocaust scholar at American University who was on a government-appointed team that declassified war-crime records.
“The full tally of Nazis-turned-spies is probably much higher, said Norman Goda, a University of Florida historian on the declassification team, but many records remain classified even today, making a complete count impossible.
“ ‘U.S. agencies directly or indirectly hired numerous ex-Nazi police officials and East European collaborators who were manifestly guilty of war crimes,” he said. “Information was readily available that these were compromised men.’
“None of the spies are known to be alive today.
“The wide use of Nazi spies grew out of a Cold War mentality shared by two titans of intelligence in the 1950s: Hoover, the longtime FBI director, and Dulles, the CIA director.
“Dulles believed ‘moderate’ Nazis might ‘be useful’ to the United States, records show. Hoover, for his part, personally approved some ex-Nazis as informants and dismissed accusations of their wartime atrocities as Soviet propaganda.
“In 1968, Hoover authorized the FBI to wiretap a left-wing journalist who wrote critical stories about Nazis in the U.S., internal records show. Hoover declared the journalist, Charles Allen, a potential threat to national security.
“John Fox, the bureau’s chief historian, said: ‘In hindsight, it is clear that Hoover, and by extension the FBI, was shortsighted in dismissing evidence of ties between recent German and East European immigrants and Nazi war crimes. It should be remembered, though, that this was at the peak of Cold War tensions.’
“The CIA declined to comment for this article.”
http://neverlandpublishing.com/tpm.html
The latest CIA misdeeds are chronicled in the Toronto Globe and Mail, in an article written by Eric Lichtblau. (God forbid an American paper should report on CIA atrocities; of course, most American media outlets have been CIA assets for the last half-century anyway [see Operation Mockingbird]. The establishment hacks have howled at me about this assertion too.) Lichtblau writes:
“One SS officer (hired by the CIA), Otto von Bolschwing, was a mentor and top aide to Adolf Eichmann, architect of the “Final Solution,” and wrote policy papers on how to terrorize Jews.
“Yet after the war, the CIA not only hired him as a spy in Europe, but relocated him and his family to New York City in 1954, records show. The move was seen as 'a reward for his loyal postwar service and in view of the innocuousness of his [Nazi] party activities,' the agency wrote.
“His son, Gus von Bolschwing, who learned many years later of his father’s ties to the Nazis, sees the relationship between the spy agency and his father as one of mutual convenience forged by the Cold War. ‘They used him, and he used them,’ Gus von Bolschwing, now 75, said in an interview. ‘It shouldn’t have happened. He never should have been admitted to the United States. It wasn’t consistent with our values as a country.’
“When Israeli agents captured Eichmann in Argentina in 1960, Otto von Bolschwing went to the CIA for help because he worried they might come after him, memos show.
“Agency officials were worried as well that von Bolschwing might be named as Eichmann’s ‘collaborator and fellow conspirator and that the resulting publicity may prove embarrassing to the U.S.,’ a CIA official wrote.
“After two agents met with von Bolschwing in 1961, the agency assured him that it would not disclose his ties to Eichmann, records show. He lived freely for another 20 years before prosecutors discovered his wartime role and prosecuted him. He agreed to give up his citizenship in 1981, dying months later.
“In all, the American military, the CIA, the FBI and other agencies used at least 1,000 ex-Nazis and collaborators as spies and informants after the war, according to Richard Breitman, a Holocaust scholar at American University who was on a government-appointed team that declassified war-crime records.
“The full tally of Nazis-turned-spies is probably much higher, said Norman Goda, a University of Florida historian on the declassification team, but many records remain classified even today, making a complete count impossible.
“ ‘U.S. agencies directly or indirectly hired numerous ex-Nazi police officials and East European collaborators who were manifestly guilty of war crimes,” he said. “Information was readily available that these were compromised men.’
“None of the spies are known to be alive today.
“The wide use of Nazi spies grew out of a Cold War mentality shared by two titans of intelligence in the 1950s: Hoover, the longtime FBI director, and Dulles, the CIA director.
“Dulles believed ‘moderate’ Nazis might ‘be useful’ to the United States, records show. Hoover, for his part, personally approved some ex-Nazis as informants and dismissed accusations of their wartime atrocities as Soviet propaganda.
“In 1968, Hoover authorized the FBI to wiretap a left-wing journalist who wrote critical stories about Nazis in the U.S., internal records show. Hoover declared the journalist, Charles Allen, a potential threat to national security.
“John Fox, the bureau’s chief historian, said: ‘In hindsight, it is clear that Hoover, and by extension the FBI, was shortsighted in dismissing evidence of ties between recent German and East European immigrants and Nazi war crimes. It should be remembered, though, that this was at the peak of Cold War tensions.’
“The CIA declined to comment for this article.”
http://neverlandpublishing.com/tpm.html
Friday, October 24, 2014
New Study Reaffirms Conservatives’ Bias and Ignorance
If you are liberal, as I am, you are probably regularly frustrated and mystified by the ignorance and misinformation of your family, friends and acquaintances of conservative persuasion. There is just no way to talk sense to these people, and, thanks to a new study, there are viable and identifiable causes for conservatives' inability to consider alternative philosophies or develop open-minded approaches to societal and philosophical matters. In short, their minds are closed, and they don't want to listen to any other viewpoints. So says Chris Mooney in his new book, "The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science and Reality."
At its core, Mooney's book postulates then proves this immutable fact: Conservatives are largely born into authoritarian households, grow up to be rigid in beliefs and ideology themselves, and then seek out affirmation for those beliefs without considering other viewpoints. Enter FOX News, the perfect outlet for the conservative. Reinforcing old, illusory and non-factual beliefs is what FOX does best.
Mooney's hard data are the results of public opinion surveys which ask respondents about their beliefs and "information media" preferences. The surveys' subject matters were climate change, health care, the Iraq War, the Ground Zero mosque, the 2010 elections, and other currently debated topics. The results show that those who watch FOX News are more likely to be misinformed about factually uncontestable matters (for instance, were there really no WMDs found in Iraq). But this begs the question: Which comes first the conservative or FOX News? Mooney's research provides an interesting answer.
While watching FOX News certainly makes one more misinformed and ignorant, naturally predisposed ignorant and misinformed people seek out FOX News to reinforce their stupidity. In other words, if you're born stupid you cannot get smarter by watching FOX News; however, ironically, the dumber you are the more likely you are to do the one thing that will keep you dumb: seek out outlets like FOX News to reinforce your stupidity. It's a Catch-22, but don't tell conservatives that. They will not understand the reference, and they will deny the scientific results of any survey which claims they are stupid anyway.
According to Mooney, political conservatives tend to have a higher need for closure. They are uncomfortable with loose ends that are a natural residue of life's complexities. For instance, it is comfortable and simplistic for conservatives to decry the welfare state, while at the same time being oblivious to the fact that investment banks and military defense contractors are the biggest welfare vacuums in America. Corporatists suck billions of tax dollars down their greedy holes, compared to the drop-in-the-bucket consumed by the genuinely needy.
Conservatives are, by and large, authoritarian/absolute in their beliefs, and they limit challenges against their belief systems by surrounding themselves with sources of information that will tell them they are right...and by defiantly, even violently, challenging those who tell them they are wrong.
The author then goes on to note that they’re also disinclined to watch anything else. FOX keeps constantly in their minds the idea that the rest of the media are “biased” against them, and conservatives duly respond by saying other media aren’t worth watching—it’s just a pack of lies. According to Public Policy Polling’s annual TV News Trust Poll (the 2011 run), 72 percent of conservatives say they trust FOX News, but they also say they strongly distrust NBC, ABC, CBS and CNN. Liberals and moderates, in contrast, trust all of these outlets more than they distrust them (though they distrust FOX). This, too, suggests selective exposure of conservatives.
What does this all mean? As long as there is a FOX News there will be right-wingers, and as long as there are right-wingers there will be a FOX News. Our only hope is to grab them when they're young before intransigence and ignorance settle like concrete in their brains.
http://neverlandpublishing.com/tpm.html
At its core, Mooney's book postulates then proves this immutable fact: Conservatives are largely born into authoritarian households, grow up to be rigid in beliefs and ideology themselves, and then seek out affirmation for those beliefs without considering other viewpoints. Enter FOX News, the perfect outlet for the conservative. Reinforcing old, illusory and non-factual beliefs is what FOX does best.
Mooney's hard data are the results of public opinion surveys which ask respondents about their beliefs and "information media" preferences. The surveys' subject matters were climate change, health care, the Iraq War, the Ground Zero mosque, the 2010 elections, and other currently debated topics. The results show that those who watch FOX News are more likely to be misinformed about factually uncontestable matters (for instance, were there really no WMDs found in Iraq). But this begs the question: Which comes first the conservative or FOX News? Mooney's research provides an interesting answer.
While watching FOX News certainly makes one more misinformed and ignorant, naturally predisposed ignorant and misinformed people seek out FOX News to reinforce their stupidity. In other words, if you're born stupid you cannot get smarter by watching FOX News; however, ironically, the dumber you are the more likely you are to do the one thing that will keep you dumb: seek out outlets like FOX News to reinforce your stupidity. It's a Catch-22, but don't tell conservatives that. They will not understand the reference, and they will deny the scientific results of any survey which claims they are stupid anyway.
According to Mooney, political conservatives tend to have a higher need for closure. They are uncomfortable with loose ends that are a natural residue of life's complexities. For instance, it is comfortable and simplistic for conservatives to decry the welfare state, while at the same time being oblivious to the fact that investment banks and military defense contractors are the biggest welfare vacuums in America. Corporatists suck billions of tax dollars down their greedy holes, compared to the drop-in-the-bucket consumed by the genuinely needy.
Conservatives are, by and large, authoritarian/absolute in their beliefs, and they limit challenges against their belief systems by surrounding themselves with sources of information that will tell them they are right...and by defiantly, even violently, challenging those who tell them they are wrong.
The author then goes on to note that they’re also disinclined to watch anything else. FOX keeps constantly in their minds the idea that the rest of the media are “biased” against them, and conservatives duly respond by saying other media aren’t worth watching—it’s just a pack of lies. According to Public Policy Polling’s annual TV News Trust Poll (the 2011 run), 72 percent of conservatives say they trust FOX News, but they also say they strongly distrust NBC, ABC, CBS and CNN. Liberals and moderates, in contrast, trust all of these outlets more than they distrust them (though they distrust FOX). This, too, suggests selective exposure of conservatives.
What does this all mean? As long as there is a FOX News there will be right-wingers, and as long as there are right-wingers there will be a FOX News. Our only hope is to grab them when they're young before intransigence and ignorance settle like concrete in their brains.
http://neverlandpublishing.com/tpm.html
Tuesday, October 21, 2014
Oswald Conferred With CIA Chief Just Weeks Before JFK Assassination
Among the revelations at a recent JFK assassination conference was one that definitively links the CIA to its patsy for the crime, Lee Harvey Oswald. At the Assassinations Archives and Research Center meeting at the Bethesda Hyatt Regency in Bethesda, Maryland, former CIA asset Antonio Veciana told the attendees he is convinced the CIA organized the president's murder and that he saw Oswald meeting with a CIA official in Dallas just prior to Kennedy's murder on November 22, 1963. Veciana said he believes Oswald was a CIA operative whom the agency decided to blame for the killing.
Veciana named now deceased CIA covert operations head David Atlee Phillips as the man he saw conferring with Oswald. Phillips was a high-ranking CIA official who used the cover named "Maurice Bishop" during his many meetings with Veciana. Earlier this year, Veciana confirmed to researcher Marie Fonzi, widow of his friend the author Gaeton Fonzi, that "Bishop" was "Phillips." But Veciana never previously answered questions in a public forum.
The CIA placed Phillips in charge of the CIA's Cuba operations after the newly created agency recruited him from newspaper work in the 1950s. According to biographers, Phillips, a former actor born in Texas, used hundreds of aliases in his CIA work. After retirement from the CIA Phillips organized thousands into the politically influential Association of Former Intelligence Officers.
Veciana, 85, spoke through a translator and with a son by his side. He said he was trained as a CPA and admired "Bishop" and the CIA deeply for many years. Now, however, he said he wanted to set the record straight because he has come to admire Kennedy, whom he and Phillips once regarded as a "traitor" for allowing communist Cuban leader Fidel Castro to remain in power.
For the informed JFK researcher, these revelations are not new. Many years ago Veciana named Phillips as one of Oswald's CIA handlers. In his 1989 best seller, "Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy," author Jim Marrs wrote, "...Veciana, a Cuban accountant who turned against Castro...and founded the violent anti-Castro group Alpha 66, claimed to have worked for a CIA officer known to him as Maurice Bishop. According to Veciana, he met with Bishop more than a hundred times, and the CIA officer helped guide the activities of Alpha 66, including plans to assassinate Castro. Veciana said his relationship with the agency did not end until 1973, when Bishop paid him $253,000 as back pay for his services. But Veciana's most astounding claim is that, during a trip to Dallas in late August or early September 1963, he saw [Bishop] in conversation with a man he later recognized as Lee Harvey Oswald...the House Select Committee on Assassinations later developed information that Bishop was none other than form chief of the CIA's Western Hemisphere Division's Directorate of Operations, David Atlee Phillips."
Unless Phillips just happened to bump into Oswald to ask him for directions to Dealey Plaza (I like to amuse myself with the wild justifications coincidence theorists would concoct for a meeting between a CIA chief and JFK's accused killer just days before the President was murdered), it means that the CIA was directly involved in setting up Oswald to take the fall for the murder of the century.
Veciana named now deceased CIA covert operations head David Atlee Phillips as the man he saw conferring with Oswald. Phillips was a high-ranking CIA official who used the cover named "Maurice Bishop" during his many meetings with Veciana. Earlier this year, Veciana confirmed to researcher Marie Fonzi, widow of his friend the author Gaeton Fonzi, that "Bishop" was "Phillips." But Veciana never previously answered questions in a public forum.
The CIA placed Phillips in charge of the CIA's Cuba operations after the newly created agency recruited him from newspaper work in the 1950s. According to biographers, Phillips, a former actor born in Texas, used hundreds of aliases in his CIA work. After retirement from the CIA Phillips organized thousands into the politically influential Association of Former Intelligence Officers.
Veciana, 85, spoke through a translator and with a son by his side. He said he was trained as a CPA and admired "Bishop" and the CIA deeply for many years. Now, however, he said he wanted to set the record straight because he has come to admire Kennedy, whom he and Phillips once regarded as a "traitor" for allowing communist Cuban leader Fidel Castro to remain in power.
For the informed JFK researcher, these revelations are not new. Many years ago Veciana named Phillips as one of Oswald's CIA handlers. In his 1989 best seller, "Crossfire: The Plot That Killed Kennedy," author Jim Marrs wrote, "...Veciana, a Cuban accountant who turned against Castro...and founded the violent anti-Castro group Alpha 66, claimed to have worked for a CIA officer known to him as Maurice Bishop. According to Veciana, he met with Bishop more than a hundred times, and the CIA officer helped guide the activities of Alpha 66, including plans to assassinate Castro. Veciana said his relationship with the agency did not end until 1973, when Bishop paid him $253,000 as back pay for his services. But Veciana's most astounding claim is that, during a trip to Dallas in late August or early September 1963, he saw [Bishop] in conversation with a man he later recognized as Lee Harvey Oswald...the House Select Committee on Assassinations later developed information that Bishop was none other than form chief of the CIA's Western Hemisphere Division's Directorate of Operations, David Atlee Phillips."
Unless Phillips just happened to bump into Oswald to ask him for directions to Dealey Plaza (I like to amuse myself with the wild justifications coincidence theorists would concoct for a meeting between a CIA chief and JFK's accused killer just days before the President was murdered), it means that the CIA was directly involved in setting up Oswald to take the fall for the murder of the century.
Friday, October 17, 2014
Religious Fanatic Costs My Team The Pennant
Please forgive my grief as I pause from politics and history to vent about my baseball team, the St. Louis Cardinals, losing the pennant to the San Francisco Giants. The National League Championship Series was a bitter disappointment, and here in St. Louis fans are irate over the dumb decisions made by Cardinals manager Mike Matheny. This is not just the usual griping from fans sulking over a crushing defeat. Matheny is even being skewered by local sportswriters, as compliant and obsequious a bunch of ink-stained wretches as you'll ever read. Post-Dispatch columnist Bernie Miklasz went so far as to write that "Bruce Bochy (Giants manager) managed circles around Matheny." That's usually considered blasphemy in this red-all-over city. But now it merely reflects the citizenry's palpable contempt. And there is just cause for anger. Matheny, whose only previous experience was managing Little League baseball (seriously), bumbled and gaffed his way through five agonizing games. Not one of his moves worked. And there is a reason for his incompetence. He's a genuine Jesus-loving fanatic who lets his faith guide him in all decisions. This is not a good thing for a baseball manager (and probably not for most of the rest of us at the mercy of such know-it-alls in America today).
See, the problem is when you turn everything over to the Eternal White Man in the Sky, you make decisions which are sometimes unsound and irrational. And the problem with having a not-so-bright religious fanatic as your manager is that he believes fervently in things that are not real, and denies things which are real. When the things he believes do not come to pass, he writes it off as God's will. Thus consigning all reason, logic, and human intelligence to the trash bin. We weren't meant to win because the Almighty didn't deign it so, doesn't matter what bad decisions Matheny made. This is a dangerous philosophy to have when you're a baseball manager, because Faith has nothing to do with solid baseball thinking. Faith prompts you to send out Randy Choate (a gruesomely awful relief pitcher) to face 3 Giants hitters with the game on the line; then do it again the very next night to prove the redemptive powers of the Almighty. Faith prompts you use a pitcher who hasn't pitched in a month in the most crucial inning of the year. Faith prompts you take out pitching wizards John Lackey and Adam Wainwright too soon, and leave shaky Shelby Miller in too long. Faith prompts you to bat Matt Holliday (overpaid choke artist) third and Jhonny Peralta (overpaid choke artist) fourth without any evidence to support it. Faith prompts you to...oh hell, you get the idea. It's all a morality play; baseball sabremetrics (scientific evidence) be damned.
See, the problem is when you turn everything over to the Eternal White Man in the Sky, you make decisions which are sometimes unsound and irrational. And the problem with having a not-so-bright religious fanatic as your manager is that he believes fervently in things that are not real, and denies things which are real. When the things he believes do not come to pass, he writes it off as God's will. Thus consigning all reason, logic, and human intelligence to the trash bin. We weren't meant to win because the Almighty didn't deign it so, doesn't matter what bad decisions Matheny made. This is a dangerous philosophy to have when you're a baseball manager, because Faith has nothing to do with solid baseball thinking. Faith prompts you to send out Randy Choate (a gruesomely awful relief pitcher) to face 3 Giants hitters with the game on the line; then do it again the very next night to prove the redemptive powers of the Almighty. Faith prompts you use a pitcher who hasn't pitched in a month in the most crucial inning of the year. Faith prompts you take out pitching wizards John Lackey and Adam Wainwright too soon, and leave shaky Shelby Miller in too long. Faith prompts you to bat Matt Holliday (overpaid choke artist) third and Jhonny Peralta (overpaid choke artist) fourth without any evidence to support it. Faith prompts you to...oh hell, you get the idea. It's all a morality play; baseball sabremetrics (scientific evidence) be damned.
Friday, October 10, 2014
CIA Still Stalling On Release Of JFK Assassination Records
A San Francisco judge has ordered the CIA to release JFK Assassination records or show cause as to why the documents should not be released by the end of this month. U.S. Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Corley is responding to a suit brought against the CIA by a private San Francisco attorney named Anthony Bothwell. Bothwell is seeking the Agency's records on Jean Souetre, David Morales, and Johnny Roselli, all of whom have been suspected of being involved in the November 22, 1963, murder of President Kennedy.
According to Courthouse News Service, Corley ruled "...that the CIA's description of its final search for records lacked enough detail for Bothwell to challenge the search's adequacy - or for her to rule in the CIA's favor." Corley wrote, "'While the declaration by CIA litigation chief Martha Lutz provides sufficient detail regarding CIA FOIA procedures and the rationale behind searching the National Clandestine Service and Directorate of Support, the description of the CIA's final search lacks the detail 'necessary to afford Bothwell an opportunity to challenge the adequacy of the search,'" Corley wrote. "It does not name the databases searched by the NCS and DS, nor does it provide a scheme of the database systems or any details of the final search strategy other than the use of names. This lack of clarity is compounded by some of the inconsistencies and ambiguities that Bothwell identifies in Lutz's description of the search results, as discussed below, and precludes the court from granting summary judgment in the CIA's favor.'"
Unfortunately Corley, perhaps due to a severe lack of knowledge of the case, has exempted Souetre's files from the suit. Who was Souetre? He was a French-Corsican hit man who was in Dallas on the day JFK was murdered. His whereabouts, definitive identity, and actions that day have been cloaked in mystery since. However, a recently published work by author Jerome Corsi has uncovered valuable information about Souetre, alias Michael Mertz, alias Michael Roux. I wrote about this in a previous blog, and I reprint the information here:
According to author Jerome Corsi, a hit man connected with the SDECE, the French equivalent of the CIA, could have been the assassin who fired the shot that killed President Kennedy. In response to a 1976 Freedom of Information Act request, the CIA released documents 632–796 confirming that Jean Souetre, a.k.a. Michel Roux, a.k.a. Michel Mertz--a world-renowned Corsican hit man with a long and successful history as an assassin and with ties to the French Connection drug trade stretching from Southeast Asia to the U.S--was in Dallas on November 22, 1963. He was a gun for hire who sold his skills to intelligence agencies around the world, including the CIA. A memo, dated April 1, 1964, was discovered among the released documents and it reads as follows:
"Jean SOUETRE aka Michel Roux aka Michel Mertz--On March 5, Dr. Papich [an intelligence source] advised that the French had hit the Legal Attaché in Paris and also the SDECE man had queried the Bureau in New York City concerning subject stating that he had been expelled from the U.S. at Fort Worth or Dallas 48 hours after the assassination. He was in Fort Worth on the morning of 22 November and in Dallas in the afternoon. The French believe that he was expelled to either Mexico or Canada. In January he received mail from a dentist named Alderman living at 5803 Birmingham, Houston, Texas. Subject is believed to be identical with a Captain who is a deserter from the French Army and an activist in the OAS. The French are concerned because of de Gaulle’s planned visit to Mexico. They would like to know the reason for his expulsion from the U.S. and his destination. Bureau files are negative and they are checking in Texas and with the INS [U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service]. They would like a check of our files with indications of what may be passed on to the French. Mr. Papich was given a copy of CSCI-3/776,742 previously furnished the Bureau and CSDB-3/655,207 together with a photograph of Captain SOUETRE."
According to Corsi, Souetre was also attached to the OAS, or Organization de l’Armée Secrétée, a right-wing extremist group opposed to French President Charles de Gaulle that engaged in acts of terrorism and assassination and opposed France’s policy to grant the African nation of Algeria independence from French rule.
The CIA, naturally, never shared this information with the Warren Commission. Even if it had, Allen Dulles, the de facto head of the Commission and a man with direct ties with the accused assassin, would have certainly squelched it.
According to Courthouse News Service, Corley ruled "...that the CIA's description of its final search for records lacked enough detail for Bothwell to challenge the search's adequacy - or for her to rule in the CIA's favor." Corley wrote, "'While the declaration by CIA litigation chief Martha Lutz provides sufficient detail regarding CIA FOIA procedures and the rationale behind searching the National Clandestine Service and Directorate of Support, the description of the CIA's final search lacks the detail 'necessary to afford Bothwell an opportunity to challenge the adequacy of the search,'" Corley wrote. "It does not name the databases searched by the NCS and DS, nor does it provide a scheme of the database systems or any details of the final search strategy other than the use of names. This lack of clarity is compounded by some of the inconsistencies and ambiguities that Bothwell identifies in Lutz's description of the search results, as discussed below, and precludes the court from granting summary judgment in the CIA's favor.'"
Unfortunately Corley, perhaps due to a severe lack of knowledge of the case, has exempted Souetre's files from the suit. Who was Souetre? He was a French-Corsican hit man who was in Dallas on the day JFK was murdered. His whereabouts, definitive identity, and actions that day have been cloaked in mystery since. However, a recently published work by author Jerome Corsi has uncovered valuable information about Souetre, alias Michael Mertz, alias Michael Roux. I wrote about this in a previous blog, and I reprint the information here:
According to author Jerome Corsi, a hit man connected with the SDECE, the French equivalent of the CIA, could have been the assassin who fired the shot that killed President Kennedy. In response to a 1976 Freedom of Information Act request, the CIA released documents 632–796 confirming that Jean Souetre, a.k.a. Michel Roux, a.k.a. Michel Mertz--a world-renowned Corsican hit man with a long and successful history as an assassin and with ties to the French Connection drug trade stretching from Southeast Asia to the U.S--was in Dallas on November 22, 1963. He was a gun for hire who sold his skills to intelligence agencies around the world, including the CIA. A memo, dated April 1, 1964, was discovered among the released documents and it reads as follows:
"Jean SOUETRE aka Michel Roux aka Michel Mertz--On March 5, Dr. Papich [an intelligence source] advised that the French had hit the Legal Attaché in Paris and also the SDECE man had queried the Bureau in New York City concerning subject stating that he had been expelled from the U.S. at Fort Worth or Dallas 48 hours after the assassination. He was in Fort Worth on the morning of 22 November and in Dallas in the afternoon. The French believe that he was expelled to either Mexico or Canada. In January he received mail from a dentist named Alderman living at 5803 Birmingham, Houston, Texas. Subject is believed to be identical with a Captain who is a deserter from the French Army and an activist in the OAS. The French are concerned because of de Gaulle’s planned visit to Mexico. They would like to know the reason for his expulsion from the U.S. and his destination. Bureau files are negative and they are checking in Texas and with the INS [U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service]. They would like a check of our files with indications of what may be passed on to the French. Mr. Papich was given a copy of CSCI-3/776,742 previously furnished the Bureau and CSDB-3/655,207 together with a photograph of Captain SOUETRE."
According to Corsi, Souetre was also attached to the OAS, or Organization de l’Armée Secrétée, a right-wing extremist group opposed to French President Charles de Gaulle that engaged in acts of terrorism and assassination and opposed France’s policy to grant the African nation of Algeria independence from French rule.
The CIA, naturally, never shared this information with the Warren Commission. Even if it had, Allen Dulles, the de facto head of the Commission and a man with direct ties with the accused assassin, would have certainly squelched it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
