Sunday, November 18, 2018

Report from Dallas

DALLAS, TEXAS. The past four days in Dallas were exciting, informative and important as we focus on trying to wrap up the case of the murdered president. Beginning on Thursday at noon at the historic Old Red Courthouse Museum at Dealey Plaza, CAPA - the Citizens Against Political Assassinations presented a full day long program of the "Last Living Witnesses," including four of the physicians who were in the emergency room at Parkland Hospital who tried to save the life of the President.

One of the four doctors, Dr. MacClelland, received CAPA's first "Profiles in Courage" Award for speaking out against the official version of events, and all of the doctors were glad to see each other again, probably for the last time. Some of the doctors complained about how they were intimidated by federal government investigators who ordered them to remain quiet.

All of the doctors gave individual reports on what they recalled of what occurred at Parkland that day.

As Research Coordinator for CAPA who has studied this case since 1969 - nearly a half-century, I was surprised to learn so much that I didn't know before, even though I didn't understand some of the medical and pathological details. All of the Parkland doctors were unanimous, including those who had passed away, in that the throat wound was a wound of entry, not an exit as the single-bullet-theory requires, AND there was a large - baseball sized - exit wound in the back of the president's head.

While this wound to the rear of the head is not seen in the autopsy photos and x-rays at Bathesda, it was also seen and testified to by Secret Service Agent Clint Hill, who is not a silly conspiracy theorist, and Tom Robinson, the Gawler Funeral home employee who arranged the corpse for the funeral, and also patched up a small - entrance wound to the temple scalp at the hairline above the right eye that is not on the autopsy report.

After the Parkland doctors, there was a technician from the Autopsy in Bethesda who was one of the five people in the room where the autopsy took place - the three doctors, him and technician Paul O'Connner, and he too recalls the small, entrance wound to the right temple.

When I asked him why he didn't shave the president's hair so the wounds to the scull could be better seen, a standard operating procedures with gunshot wounds to the head? And he replied that the Kennedy family requested a normal autopsy that would simply determine the cause of death, - a gunshot wound to the head, and not a forensic autopsy, that would create evidence that could be introduced in a court of law as evidence.

There was much discussion of the removal and deposition of the brain, which I will write about in another blogpost later.

All of those witnesses who made presentations at the CAPA event made new and interesting revelations, though there were some technical difficulties with the audio acoustics and live streaming over the internet - mainly because the "Old Red" as the locals call it, is a century old court house that is being renovated, the CAPA event was held in the Renovation Room, where the wifi was iffy and even the electrical outlets didn't all work well. So CAPA will be editing the video of the entire program down to a slick two hour program that will be posted on line at the CAPA-US.org web site ASAP.

I thought I was to be the first speaker at the JFK Lancer conference at the Lorenzo Hotel at 9 am on Friday morning, but when I got there I learned that it didn't start until noon, so I went into the hotel restaurant for breakfast and was invited to sit down with Alan Dale of the Assassination Archives and Research Center in DC, British researcher Sir Malcolm Blunt, who has spent more time in the National Archives than anyone I know, and the esteemed professor, military document analyst Dr. John Newman, who has a black belt in yoga. What a fascinating conversation we had that I wish was recorded.

It was an honor to be the very first speaker at the Lancer conference, and I'm glad I didn't follow Newman, as he would be a hard act to follow, but I did give a basic history of the secrecy of the JFK assassination records, the JFK Act of 1992 and what President Trump did in October 2017, before giving a synopsis of my Top Ten Records that were released under the JFK Act. Then Dr. Newman, attorney Bill Simpich and Malcolm Blunt gave short presentations that they elaborated on later in their own presentations.

The next day Russ Baker also gave a talk on the recently released records and how the Trump redaction process is working, or isn't working.

When I can, I will go over each of the presentations made at Lancer, and the ones I attended at the other conference held at the Doubletree Hotel, including Dick Russell, Robert Groden, Bob Tannenbaum and Dr. Wecht.

As it is now Sunday morning, and my flight home is a few hours away, I have to sign out for now, and my next report will be in much more detail.

As I said in my Lancer presentation, for a number of reasons, I am now more confident than ever that we can wrap this case up to a legal and moral certainly soon - within the next few years - we just have to do it.

And for all of those who started this fight - we have to finish it, and will.

That's it for now, over and out.


Wednesday, November 14, 2018

Dateline Dallas - The Last Hurrah at Dealey Plaza

DALLAS, TEXAS. November 14, 2018. I have the feeling that this is the last time I will visit Dallas, at least for any JFK assassination conferences or programs, although next year, November 22 falls on a Friday, so it would be easy to hold a moment of silence at the Grassy Knoll at 12:30 pm and then proceed to a few days of business - which would include presenting a case for a Texas Court of Inquiry that could exonerate Lee Harvey Oswald for the murder, having a Congressional Briefing on the JFK Act, having official open public hearings on the JFK Act in Congress - and covered live by ESPN, and petitioning for a new Grand Jury investigation of the crimes committed related to the assassination, including destruction of evidence, obstruction of justice and other crimes that can still be prosecuted.

But continually holding annual conferences with researchers and writers promoting their books is not the way to go, though there is a need for that too.

There are some positive developments in the case however, new evidence is being revealed all the time, dozens of original witnesses are still alive to respond to questions, the Democrats have taken over the House of Representatives so the House Oversight Committee is positioned to listen to a Congressional Briefing on the JFK Act and respond with their own official public hearings on the JFK records that could determine how and why so many records have been destroyed, are missing or otherwise kept out of the JFK Collection at the National Archives.

In addition, on a local level, here in Dallas, I learned tonight that a new liberal Democrat has been elected District Attorney, a former judge who advocated treatment of drug addicts instead of incarcerating them, and who has announced his intention to prosecute the former Dallas white female cop who killed a black man in his own apartment, mistaking the apartment for her own. In any case, the new DA seems open to persuasion when it comes to crimes that are of major national media attention - like the assassination of President Kennedy.

The DA at the time of the assassination, Henry Wade, most famous for the Roe vs. Wade case on abortion, was not a bad District Attorney. For one, he maintained the evidence against the many young, black men he prosecuted, many of whom have been exonerated by the DNA evidence Wade maintained.

I once met Henry Wade's son at the bar at the Adolophis Hotel, and invited him and his wife to my COPA conference presentation that advocated a local Dallas special grand jury be impaneled to properly and independently investigate the assassination of President Kennedy and Dallas policeman J.D. Tippit, as grand juries is where evidence in a homicide is supposed to go, according to the law. And they wrote me a letter appreciating my talk.

Now - tomorrow - Thursday, November 15, 2018 - CAPA is holding a one-day symposium "Last Living Witnesses" to the assassination of President Kennedy, that will include some former Parkland doctors and other witnesses, that should be a significant event, leading up to CAPA's plan to present evidence and witnesses before a Texas Court of Inquiry - a legal procedure unique to Texas that could officially exonerate Oswald and force the government to re-open the investigation into who killed the President.

There are also two other conferences, JFK Lancer - at the Lorenzo Hotel, sponsored by Debra Conway and Larry Hancock, that will feature John Newman, Bill Simpich and myself, among others. With Simpich, I will be talking about the importance of the records recently released under the JFK Act, and what is still being withheld.

Judyth Vary Baker, who worked with Oswald at the Riley Coffee Company in New Orleans in the summer of 1963, is also holding a conference at the Doubletree Hotel, that will include Dick Russell and a keynote speech Saturday by CAPA chairman Dr. Cyril Wecht.

Then there's the former COPA members who feel left out by Lancer, who competed with COPA by holding competing conferences for many years, and they don't like JVB either, so they are meeting at the Magnolia Hotel, and just enjoying food, drink and good conversation. They include T. Carter and Marty Bragg, the Batman and Robbin of serious researchers who assisted John Judge in keeping COPA together for many years after others bailed out.

I will be at CAPA at the Old Red Court House at Dealey Plaza all day and early evening on Thursday, and then I will be attending a mixer at the roof top sky line bar at the Marriott Courtyard on Houston Street - one block from the Old Red Court House.

My presentation on the new records with Bill Simpich is scheduled for early Friday morning at Lancer, and I will stay all day, looking forward especially to hear John Newman's talk and get his new book, Part 3 in a series that will be published this month - Countdown To Darkness.

On Saturday I will visit JVB's Doubletree conference to hear Dick Russell and Dr. Wecht, as well as some of the others who have books published by Trinday, whose publisher Kris Milligan will be there as well.

Trinday's new book The Inheritance follows the trail of the JFK memorabilia, records and evidence in the assassination accumulated by Evelyn Lincoln, JFK's personal secretary from the time he was a Congressman until his murder. She sold many of her accumulations to a guy who took it on a mobile museum grand tour, and when he died, what he had was sold at auction, including some top secret documents that weren't even available at the Archives. There's also two trunks of records and evidence that Mrs. Lincoln left with an attorney, who advised the Assassination Records Review Board (AARB) that he had possession of them, but we still don't know what became of them. Now there's the Inheritance, a book that claims to fill us in on what became of it all.

Then there's The Skorzeny Papers, a new book that appears to contain ground breaking information that rests on the records of Nazi commando pioneer Otto Skorzeny, that were purchased by the author at a public auction. The fact that one of the JMWAVE Cuban commandos who were paid by the CIA and trained to kill Castro, met with Skorzeny after the assassination makes this book intriguing.

So there is still a lot going on - fifty five years after the murder of the President, and while many of those involved in the continuing research of that murder are here in Dallas with me, I hope to meet with them, pick their brains and try to fill in the missing blanks.

But I have the feeling that after doing this dozens of times, this is my last visit to Dallas, my last conference in Texas, and the Last Hurrah for JFK assassination research, though I am more confident now than ever that we are close to concluding this investigation, determine exactly what happened at Dealey Plaza, who did what and why they did it - to a legal and moral certainty.

Stay tuned.










Tuesday, November 13, 2018

The Psych War Operation that Failed to Blame Castro

JOHN NEWMAN  -  October 26, 2017 – The Same Old Canard.

“As I predicted six months ago, we are up against a full court press by the Castro-killed-Kennedy psych-warfare frame op cooked up by the true perpetrators behind the president’s murder.”

“And, now, beginning with Shenon (prompted by Arlen Specter) in 2012, followed by other famous amazing experts like FOX’s O’Rilley, MSNBC’s Matthews, and UVA’s Sabato, it has been regurgitated again.”
“If that wasn’t enough, we are being fed that old canard again today by hundreds of news items written by youngsters whose entire perspective and information about the assassination has taken place in just the last two weeks.”

“They say: ‘What? You don’t think Castro was involved?’ As if we are the lunatics.”

“LBJ’s steamrolling of Chief Just Warren to force him to head the commission and rubber stamp the Oswald-did-it-alone FBI cover-up was done at the ‘Top Secret’ level to prevent a world-wide nuclear holocaust and the deaths of 40 million Americans. Decades ago, we were able to listen to the tape recording of LBJ boasting to Senator Russell about how he pulled it off, and watch Warren on Washington Public TV (WETA) confirm the story.”

THE COVERT CRACK IN THE DEALEY PLAZA OPRATION - The Black Prop Op that Failed – 

Exposing JFK’s Killers

Black Propaganda Operations at Dealey Plaza

Even at this late date we still may not be able to say with certainty who killed President Kennedy, but it can be demonstrated how he was killed.

It can still be determined if the assassination of JFK was the work of a deranged lone nut, as the official record contends, or was a very sophisticated covert intelligence operation that utilized black propaganda and disinformation, framed a patsy and permitted those responsible for the crime to get away with murder, as such covert operations are designed to do.

Since all of the evidence that implicates Lee Harvey Oswald as the accused assassin is questionable and would have never been admitted into a court of law, and he was murdered while in police custody, a strong case can be made that he was framed as a patsy, as he himself claimed.

Even if Oswald was the lone sniper who killed the president, wounded governor John Connally, and killed Dallas policeman as an assassin and spree killer, his criminal personality profile fits the Covert Operational Personality (COP) that indicates his motive was political and not psychological, that he was operating as part of a covert intelligence network on a standard need-to-know basis and was a pawn in a much bigger game. A game that utilized psychological operations.


If what happened at Dealey Plaza is viewed, as Bill Simpich suggests, not as the spontaneous work of a lone nut, but as well planned and successfully executed covert intelligence operation, it all begins to make sense and comes into a clear and understandable focus.  The murder of the president was not the result of a plot so much as it was a plan – a very detailed and executed plan that was prepared in advance by perpetrators within the government itself and continues today to shield those responsible. As an intelligence “operation” it was a “Coup d’etat” that is still in effect and continues to shield those responsible, even though most of them are dead.

It is not the perpetrators who are now being shielded by the government today, but the MO – the Modus Operandi that they utilized that is being kept secret, because it is the way they continue to manipulate events today.   

[ Maj. Gen. Llewellyn .W. Atcherley and the Modus Operatndi System in Crime Detection http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2010/10/modus-operandi.html?m=1 ]

While the Dealey Plaza operation was successful in killing the president and shielding those responsible from justice, it failed to sell its cover story – that Fidel Castro was behind the operational conspiracy, a failure that led the FBI, the Warren Commission and other branches of government to adopt, as Peter Dale Scott classifies it as the “Phase Two” lone-nut scenario as a plausible alternative to the truth.

Professors Peter Dale Scott and John Newman and attorney Dan Hardway have all recently called attention to the significance of what Scott calls the “managed Oswald stories,” – the “Phase One” black propaganda and disinformation campaign to blame what happened at Dealey Plaza on Fidel Castro – a clearly defined intelligence operation that continues today.

Because that part of the operational plan – the original cover story failed,  it provides a window into the intelligence network responsible for the assassination because those involved in promoting the black propaganda disinformation campaign that Castro was behind the Dealey Plaza operation were certainly close to those who actually carried out the operation.

This is a subject that others have also written about – Mathew Smith wrote a book “The Second Plot” dedicated to the subject, but I will limit the discussion at first to only to what Scott, Newman and Hardway have had to say on the subject, and how it gives new leads and direction to future inquires.

As we have learned from the study of planets, it is often not as you see them, but more as you see their reflections as viewed as blinking eclipses that tell you they are there, just as we can see the reality of what happened at Dealey Plaza as a reflection in Alices’s “Looking Glass” and what happens when you descend into the rabbit’s hole of intentionally deceptive covert intelligence operations, especially those that are successful.

                     TWO CONSPIRACIES – The Murder and the Cover-Up

            There are two documented conspiracies associated with the assassination of President Kennedy – the first was the arrangement of his murders, while the second concerns the cover-up and thwarting of justice. The second conspiracy continues today, so it should concern us all.

            The evidence in both cases is in the form of fingerprints – as Senator Richard Schweiker (R. Pa) put it - the distinct fingerprints of intelligence techniques at work. Evidence of the first conspiracy comes in the form of foreknowledge - individuals who had knowledge of the assassination before it occurred and expressed this knowledge to others.


            Sun Tzu, the fifth century Chinese philosopher and author of the classic manual “The Art of War” said that foreknowledge “cannot be elicited by spirits or obtained by magic” but rather can only be acquired from an operational network of spies. “Foreknowledge,” he said, “is the reason the enlightened prince and the wise general conquer the enemy whenever they move.”

Such foreknowledge is obtained by what Sun Tzu called the “Divine Skein,” a skein being a net, like a fisherman’s net that pulls in information, a network of spies, - an intelligence network.

            Proof of the second conspiracy – evidence of the cover-story stems from the fact that very distinct and identifiable black propaganda operations were utilized before the assassination, and continue to operate today to maintain security and protect those responsible for the first conspiracy. This very distinct, descriptive and deceptive black propaganda disinformation operation attempts, but fails to blame the Dealey Plaza operation on Fidel Castro of Cuba.

            Because this aspect of the assassination of President failed, it provides a window of opportunity for those who recognize it, to see into the operation, and narrow the suspects to those actually responsible.

            That people had foreknowledge of the assassination before it occurred and black propaganda operations were conducted in concert with the murder. are clearly established facts that would not exist at all if the murder was the work of a lone nut case, and indicates that the assassination was carried out by trained covert intelligence operatives and not by a lone wolf or the Mafia. This does not preclude however, members of organized crime or crazy people from being involved in the operation.

            That Fidel Castro was behind the assassination is clearly defined disinformation and part of the deception plan - the pre-prepared “cover story” that shields those actually responsible for the President’s murder. Over a dozen incidents, most if not all of which can be traced back to the same source, attempt to portray the assassination as the work of Castro or his G2. 


            Tracing the deceptive disinformation back to its source should also give us the source of the operation that resulted in what happened at Dealey Plaza. Since disinformation, propaganda and psychological warfare operations utilize explicit techniques, they can be identified, isolated and studied as to their content, intention and source, and thus provide a window into the nest of the responsible network.

                                                       BLACK PROP OPS     

             According to Ladislas Farago “Black Propaganda is a fundamental intelligence operation…because it never identifies its real source and pretends to originate within or close to the enemy.”

            Paul Linebarger, a professor at the School for Advanced International Studies at John Hopkins University, also taught the black arts of propaganda and psychological warfare operations at his Washington D.C. home. Every Friday evening student spys would take round-a-bout means to unobtrusively get to his house where they learned the secret techniques of propaganda and deception.

Not a subject found in the curriculum of most colleges, the textbook is rare, Linebarger’s “Psychological Warfare – International Propaganda and Communications” (Arno Press, 1948, 1952, 1972, Duell, Sloan and Pearce, N.Y.) is a still used by today’s psychological warriors.

            One of his students, Joseph Burkholder Smith (“Portrait of a Cold Warrior.” G. Putnam/s Sons, N.Y., 1976), relates how Linebarger explained that Black Propaganda is “carefully labeled to be acts of the enemy.” According to Linebarger, “Psychological warfare, in the broad sense, consists of the application of parts of the science called psychology to the conduct of war; psychological warfare comprises the use of propaganda against the enemy, together with such military operational measures as may supplement the propaganda. Propaganda may be described in turn, as organized persuasion by non-violent means. War itself may be considered to be, among other things, a violent form of persuasion. War is waged against the minds, not the bodies of the enemy.”

            The term propaganda stems from the name of the department of the Vatican which had the duty of propagating the faith. Specifically defined, propaganda consists of   “the planned use of any form of public or mass produced communication designed to affect the minds and emotions of a given group for a specific public purpose, whether military, economic or political. Military propaganda consists of the planned use of any form of communications designed to affect the minds and emotions of a given enemy, neutral or friendly foreign group for a specific strategic or tactical purpose.”

            Note that if the communication is not planned, it cannot be called propaganda, and that if does not originate from an intelligence agency or service, it is not disinformation.

            Linebarger developed the STASM formula for spot analysis, in which propaganda can be distinguished by the consideration of five elements – 1) Source, 2) Time, 3) Audience, 4) Subject, 5) Mission. According to Linebarger, this formula works best in the treatment of monitored materials of which the source is known. First point to note is the character of the source – the true source (who really got it out?), the ostensible source (whose name is signed to it?); also the first use source (who used it the first time?) and the second source (who claims merely to be using it as a quotation?).

            It is soon evident that the mere attribution of source is a job of high magnitude. A systematic breakdown of the STASM formula produces the following analysis outline: applicable to any single propaganda item, civil or military, in war or peace, spoken, visual or printed. There are five kinds of propaganda: Defense – maintains an accepted form of social action; Offensive – interrupts social action not desired; Conversionary – change allegiance; Divisive – split apart enemy components; Consolidation – insure compliance of occupied civilians; Counterpropaganda – refutes. Security is designed to deep useful information from reaching the enemy, while propaganda operations are designed to get information to him.

            According to Smith, “Linebarger’s two leading operational heroes whose activities formed the basis for lessons he wished us to learn and whose examples he thought we should follow were Lt. Col. Edward G. Lansdale and E. Howard Hunt,” who had what Linebarger called “black minds.”

            Besides his own textbook, Linebarger used another book in his classes, - “The Big Con” by David W. Maurer (Pocket Books, N.Y., 1949), which is the book that was used as the basis for the screenplay of the movie “The Sting.”


Maurer, a Kentucky linguistics professor, began to study the unique slang of confidence men, but developed that interest into a unique analysis of the Big Con confidence games that proliferated during the early part of the last century. That book, “gives ideas on how to recruit agents, how to handle them and how to get rid of them peacefully when they’re no use to you any longer.”  What the con-artists called “blowing off the Mark.”
As Linebarger concluded, “Believe me, that last one is the toughest job of all,” as David A. Phillips learned with Antonio Vecina, because even though the mark has been taken, they enjoyed the play and want to do it again, much like Veciana wanted to re-establish his association with “Maurice Bishop,” rather than blowing his cover.

            As Maurer writes: “The big time confidence games are in reality, only carefully rehearsed plays in which every member of the cast EXCEPT THE MARK knows his part perfectly.”

            According to Linebarger, “Propaganda is directed to the subtle niceties of thought by which people maintain their personal orientation in an unstable interpersonal world. Propaganda must use the language of the mother, the schoolteacher, the lover, the bully, the policeman, the actor, the ecclesiastic, the buddy, the newspaperman, all of them in turn. And propaganda analysis, in weighing and evaluating propaganda, must be even more discriminating whether the propaganda is apt to hit its mark or not.”

            Those who pre-planned the Dealey Plaza operation to kill President Kennedy assumed that the assassination would be considered a conspiracy and intentionally deflected the attention of the law enforcement and public opinion using black propaganda techniques to implicate a Fidel Castro and Communists in the operation, and shield the identity of the actual sponsors.

                       PETER DALE SCOTT – The Deeper Truth Still Not Revealed

Peter Dale Scott in Deep Politics 3 [excerpted in the CAPA Newsletter Vol. 1 #1] writes about what he calls the “Managed Oswald Stories.”

“In the days after the murders in Dallas,” Scott writes, “ the U.S. was flooded with dubious stories, most of them swiftly discredited, linking Oswald to either a Cuban or Soviet conspiracy. Those which most preoccupied the FBI and CIA all came out of Mexico. These stories exhibited certain common characteristics.

1. They all came from either directly from an intelligence source, or from someone in the hands of an intelligence agency. Nearly always the agency involved was the Mexican DFS or secret police. The DFS, along with the Nicaraguan intelligence service, which was also a source, were under CIA tutelage.”

“2 The Stories changed over time, to support either a pro-conspiratorial hypothesis (‘Phase One’) or a rebuttal of this (“’Phase Two’).”

“3. The Warren Commission was led to believe that the ‘Phase One’ stories were without basis. In fact a number of unresolved anomalies suggest that behind them was some deeper truth, still not revealed.”

“4. As noted the two main sources, Silvia Duran and Gilberto Alvarado, gave varying stories while detained by the DFS. Of the two, Duran was actually tortured, and Alvarado reportedly threatened with torture... In retrospect, these stories should not have been taken seriously. In fact the CIA was able to rely on them, not as a source of truth, but as a source of coercive influence over the rest of the government. It will help us to understand what was going on if we refer to the stories, not as 'information' or even as 'allegations,' but as MANAGED STORIES. To say this leaves open the question of who were the ultimate managers – the DFS, U.S. Officers in Mexico, or higher authorities in Washington.”

“The full history is complex and confused, with many unanswered questions. But nearly all of these managed stories, along with others outside Mexico.....resolve into this simple pattern of a Phase One/Phase Two evolution. To this day both 'Phase-One' and 'Phase-Two' versions are trotted out from time to time. These control public perceptions of the Kennedy assassination seize the debate from genuine critics who have less access to the media.”

“I do wish to argue that these managed stories, fleeting and insubstantial though they are, were of central importance in determining the outcome of the Kennedy assassination investigation. In succeeding years, furthermore, the discredited ‘Phase-One’ stories have been revived to manipulate public opinion, even after the CIA and FBI had agreed on a ‘Phase-Two’ interpretation of Oswald's movements in Mexico City. In 2013, for example, the discredited Garro story of the twist party was revived in a mainstream book by Philip Shenon. [Philip Shenon, A Cruel and Shocking Act: The Secret History of the Kennedy Assassination (New York: Henry Hold and Company, 2013), 496-98 etc.].”

“David Phillips is the one man who seems to cover all aspects of the CIA - Oswald operation and cover-up in 1963. David Phillips even had one friend, Gordon McLendon, in common with Jack Ruby. McLendon, a sometimes intelligence officer and Dallas owner of radio stations, had known Phillips since both men were in their teens. (The two men would in the 1970s join in forming the Association of Former Intelligence Officers.). McLendon was close to two other wealthy men in Dallas who have attracted the attention of JFK researchers, Clint Murchison and Bedford Wynne. What is not yet known is why McLendon, whom Ruby described as one of his six closest friends, embarked on a trip to Mexico after the assassination.”

As Peter Dale Scott says: "The full history is complex and confused, with many unanswered questions. But nearly all of these managed stories, along with others outside Mexico.....resolve into this simple pattern of a Phase One/Phase Two evolution."

The “Phase One” cover story – that Oswald was part of a conspiracy involving Fidel Castro, was an integral part of the Dealey Plaza Operation, a deception to protect those actually responsible.

But as it was put into place – with David Atlee Phillip’s media asset Joseph Goulden egging on Assistant Dallas District Attorney William Alexander to charge Oswald with “furthering a communist conspiracy,” LBJ himself pulled the plug from this one. From his VP office in the Executive Office Building (EOB), LBJ called the Texas State Attorney General and Dallas DA Henry Wade and ordered them not to charge Oswald with conspiracy, or it could lead to World War III – the same reason he gave Earl Warren to serve on the cover-up Commission. From that time on, what was planned as an obvious conspiracy – with more than one gunman in a “military style ambush” instigated by Castro became the “Phase Two” cover-story of Oswald as a deranged, lone gunman.

For more on the details of the conversion from “Phase One” to the adoption of the “Phase Two” cover story see “The Tipping Point.”

[  http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2012/06/tipping-point.html ]

As Peter Dale Scott adds: "I do wish to argue that these managed stories, fleeting and insubstantial though they are, were of central importance in determining the outcome of the Kennedy assassination investigation. In succeeding years, furthermore, the discredited 'Phase-One' stories have been revived to manipulate public opinion, even after the CIA and FBI had agreed on a 'Phase-Two' interpretation of Oswald's movements in Mexico City. In 2013, for example, the discredited Garro story of the twist party was revived in a mainstream book by Philip Shenon."

"To this day both 'Phase-One' and 'Phase-Two' versions are trotted out from time to time. These control public perceptions of the Kennedy assassination seize the debate from genuine critics who have less access to the media."udden and surprising trip with his family to Mexico City in the fall of 1963. …”

“Those of us who genuinely wish to see overt, rational forces prevail in the world must reject a superficial and spurious defense of our institutions. The ideal embraced by our society, that it be based on truth and openness, is not a cynical cliché, but a real condition for our institutional health. The pursuit of leads hinted at in this essay may seem frustratingly difficult, esoteric, and above all slow. But to abandon this pursuit is to break faith with the American dream of enlightenment itself.”

"To abandon this pursuit is to break faith with the American dream of enlightenment itself."

                            JOHN NEWMAN – Where Angels Tread Lightly

John Newman in Where Angels Tread Lightly [Excerpted in the CAPA Newsletter Vol. 1 #1] writes, “In this investigation…we are attempting to look inside a very dark box. The people involved in the design of the plot, even if they were only a few, were very sophisticated in propaganda and deception operations.”
Newman continues: “In his book, The Craft of Intelligence [Allen W. Dulles, Craft of Intelligence: America’s Legendary Spy Master on the Fundamentals of Intelligence Gathering for a Free World (Guilford, Connecticut: The Lyons Press, 2006), p. 147.], former Director of Central Intelligence Allen Dulles wrote about the ‘collateral effect’ of a successful deception operation. Dulles often used the term ‘black operation,’ which is similar to the term used in this volume, ‘dark operation.’”

“Dulles explained the ‘collateral effect’ this way: once a single piece’ of the enemy’s deception has succeeded in its purpose, then almost anything that happens can be taken as one of his tricks. The point that Dulles was driving at was this: ‘Often the very fear of deception has blinded an opponent to the real value of the information which accidents or intelligence operations have placed in his hands.’ …It is worthwhile pondering how Dulles’ point might apply to the Kennedy assassination. As stated in the Introduction to this work, in this case a very significant “single piece” of deception succeeded in its purpose….”

“The plot to assassinate President Kennedy was designed to deceive both people in the government and the public at large. A convincing trail of evidence was established to make it appear that the Kennedy brothers’ plan to overthrow Castro had been turned around and used against them by Fidel himself, resulting in the assassination of President Kennedy. “

Newman writes: “We should heed Dulles’ advice and not fear that almost everything’ is a successful deception operation. We should, as Dulles advises us, realize that accidents in intelligence operations happen. Such accidents have occurred in this case too. They have placed important clues into our hands.”
“There is an unstated corollary principal in the game of deception that Allen Dulles was kind enough to give us. Once a ‘single piece’ of a black operation has been compromised, the entire fabric of that operation can potentially unravel.”

As John Newman recently mentioned on Facebook, with accompanying photos: “March, 1975, Northeast Thailand, on the west side of the Mekong River. I worked at a secret spy base where, among other missions, we were tracking the movements of Viet Cong sapper units in our area. As a collateral duty, I was the grenadier in the lead squad to attack and attempt to neutralize any Viet Cong penetration of our base perimeter fence. Second photo, 1989; My boss, NSA Director General Odom pinning my U.S. Army Legion of Merit award.”

As it turns out, Thomas Powers, as he relates in his book “Intelligence Wars” (New York Review Book, 2004),  met and interviewed General William Odom at a party for CIA covert case officer Haviland  Smith. As the former Army Chief of Staff for Intelligence (ACSI) and director of the National Security Agency (NSA), Powers wondered how Odom – a top echelon brass, knew Smith – the epitome of an operational case officer in the field.

Odom, who at one time was John Newman’s boss, told Powers that, “When I was ACSI I talked to Haviland about Army clan….It’s the endless problem – should the Army be trying to run agents at all?”

Well, since the CIA is prohibited by its charter from operating within the continental USA, it is the Army Intelligence and Army Reserve and National Guard who are called into action during major civil disturbances and natural disasters. It was ASCI and US Army Intelligence units who were at the civil rights riots, the assassination of MLK and anti-Vietnam war demonstrations of the 60s, as well as in Dallas at the time of the assassination.

“Should the Army be trying to run agents at all?” Odom asked Smith, before, “I ask him what makes a good case officer?”

To that, Haviland said, “Did you see that movie with Robert Redford and Paul Newman – the Sting? That’s it – the con!”

Which certifies the fact that Haviland Smith also took Paul Linebarger’s course in psychological warfare and covert operations, and read David Maurer’s book “The Big Con,” the book that was the basis for the movie “The Sting,” that Linebarger had his students read.

And now it is John Newman who has taken the lead in pointing out the black propaganda operation to blame the Dealey Plaza Operation on Castro, as it continues today.

                                                 DAN  HARDWAY


At a conference presentation Dan Hardway said: "If (the 'Oswald, the Pro-Castro Commie' story) was that coordinated, that quick, and as detailed, it would be reasonable to infer that it had been laid on in advance. I set out to identify the sources of these stories that came out immediately after the assassination with detailed information on Oswald and his pro-Castro activities. I started asking for the CIA files on all those sources. I got a lot of them before we lost access, but I did not get them all. That was one of the things I was really pressing on, when I got shut down."

In a deposition in the Morley v. CIA case, former HSCA investigator Dan Hardway made some rather specific allegations that can be followed up and provide what they call “actionable intelligence” that could make a significant breakthrough in the case.

In the Declaration of Dan L. Hardway [05/11/16 Re: Civil Action 03-0254 (RJL) Page 6 – 8], he clearly states that: “During the course of my research I was able…. to review CIA 201 files on individuals who had been sources for stories that appeared in the immediate aftermath of the assassination tying LHO (Lee Harvey Oswald)  to Castro or the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. I was able to establish that most of the sources of these stories were, or had been, agents or assets used at one time or another by David Atlee Phillips…..I had been able to document links between David Phillips and most of the sources of the disinformation that came out immediately after the assassination about Oswald and his pro-Castro proclivities.”

“I confronted Phillips with those in an interview at our offices on August 24, 1978. Phillips …was forced to admit that many of the sources were former assets that he had managed in the late 1950s and early 1960s – but were also assets whom he was personally managing in the fall of 1963. Mr. Phillips was asked, but could not explain why the information that came from anti-Castro groups and individuals pointed to Cuban connections all seemed to come from assets he had handled personally, but acknowledged that was the case.”

“An extension of materials used in preparation for this interview of David Phillips has not been found so far as I know. The memorandum of that interview has not been located in the official records of the HSCA, although a partial copy has been circulated in the JFK assassination research community.”

                                               THE PARTIAL HSCA MEMO

Dan Hardway’s heavily redacted and partially missing Memo of the August 24, 1978 Interview with David Atlee Phillips reads in part:

Phillips, page 18.

“Mr. Phillips said that he did not participate, nor was he aware of, in any campaign after the assassination to spread misinformation about the death of Kennedy. He could not explain why the misinformation that came from the Cuban groups and individuals that tended to point to Castro involvement were predominately from assets that he had handled personally as opposed to ones that had been ran out of the Miami station. He said that he agreed that it was strange that the one piece of evidence that tended to show at least DGI foreknowledge was not pursued by his shop while disinformation from his former assets occupied the attentions of investigators in that area. Mr. Phillips stated that he did not know of any hard evidence that existed in 1963 that pointed to Castro’s involvement.”

“When asked about his relationship with Julio Lobo, he became a bit upset and said he thought he had covered that adequately in his deposition. He says as far as he can recall he met Lobo only one time, perhaps it was even in Madrid and not Havana, he doesn’t recall, and he had no substantial dealings with him.”

“He wanted to know if Veciana’s story about Bishop is still being considered and if any decision about his being Bishop had be(en) conclusively arrived at. He said he doesn’t like living under the fear and tension of possibly being called before the television cameras and having Veciana suddenly stand up and point a finger at him and say that he is Bishop and that he saw him with Oswald.”

“Phillips was told by the interviewers that they had no authority to discuss anything of substance about our investigation to him. He asked that the interviewers seek permission to let him know what was going on. He was told that his request would be brought to high-level attention but that a response of any kind at all could not be assured.”

“Phillips stated that he did not know Paul Bethel very well, but it was not Bethel who introduced him to Lopez-Fresuet.”

Phillips, page 21

“Mr. Phillips said that he had met McClendon (Gordon) once when they were in college. He said that he had not seen him again until September of 1976 when he attended a Retired Intelligence Officers meeting. Later McClendon had called him and reminded him of an incident mentioned in Nightwatch involving a school day’s episode and McClendon told him that he was the man who picked him up in his car. As far as Phillips can recall he never had any contact with McClendon during the intervening years. He never met McClendon at any time during 1963 in Dallas.”

“Phillips stated that he had no familiarity with the Catherwood Foundation or Cummins Catherwood or E. Wharton Shober. He was not specifically familiar with the Foundation’s Cuban Relief operation in Miami. Phillips said that debriefing centers in Miami were under the aegis of the CIA but the Agency only got the product from xxx, they were actually run by another agency. He said that it many have been ran by military intelligence.”



That single piece of the black propaganda at Dealey Plaza that failed and compromises the whole operation is the disinformation campaign to blame the assassination on Fidel Castro  gives us an open window and a crack in the door into the intelligence network responsible for the otherwise successful Dealey Plaza operation. 

List of Psychwar Black Prop Ops

                 The Twist Party - just one of dozens of similar Psychwar Black Ops

The Twist Party story, as related by Shenon, Russo and others, is just one of dozens of similar type stories floated like a balloon to see if they would fly, and none of them did, as every single one has been shown and proven false, and its real origin can be actually determined, and most of them trace back to the CIA or some US intelligence source.

LIST OF PSYCHWAR BLACK PROPAGANDA STORIES AFFILIATED WITH JFK ASSASSINATION

This is not a complete list – merely the top 25 incidents that are capable of being studied closer -

1)    Photographs of Oswald with rifle and pistol and communist magazines that contained articles on anti-Castro Cuban terrorist raids.

2)    Oswald's activities with DRE Cubans in New Orleans in the summer of 1963.

3)    Oswald's visit to Sylvia Odio.

4)    Oswald's visit to the Cuban and Soviet embassies in Mexico City.

5)    Oswald's alleged attendance at a Twist Party in Mexico City.

6)    A pamphlet distributed in the Florida Cuban community in early November 1963  that predicted that “An Act of God” would put a “Texan in the White House.”

7)    Cuban's visit to Parrot Jungle in Miami. [See: Parrot Jungle Incident  
http://jfkcountercoup2.blogspot.com/2013/08/parrot-jungle-incident-jorge-soto.html ]

8)    Two of the last issues President Kennedy delt with before leaving for Texas were the backchannel UN negotiations with Fidel Castro and the discovery of a weapons cache on a Venezuelan beach that appeared to be Cuban support for terrorists in South America.

9)    Seth Kantor, a Scripps-Howard News Service (SHNS) reporter in Dallas during the assassination couldn't understand why his telephone calls from Parkland hospital were being ssealed by the government because “disclosure would reveal confidential source of information.” The source, it turned out, was Hal Hendrix, aka “the Spook,” who fed information on the alleged assassin from Miami.

10)    Joe Goulden egged Dallas Assistent DA Bill Alexander to say that he was going to charge Oswsald with murder “in furtherance of a Communist Conspiracy.”

11)     Dallas PD Special Services Bureau officer Stringfellow sent repot to USAF Strike Command that Cuba may be behind the assassination and “Mary's Box” disappears from DPD.

12)    On the night of the assassination Clare Booth Luce received a telephone call from Julio Fernandez, one of the anti-Castro Cuban commandos she financially supported, who reported to her of Oswald's contacts with the DRE in New Orleans.

13)    In Miami, Dr. Jose Ignorzio, the chief of clinical psychology for the Catholic Welfare Service, contacted the White House to inform the new administration that Oswald had met directlly with Cuban ambassador Armas in Mexico.

14)     In Florida Frank Sturgis is interviewed for the Pamparo Beach Sun Sentinel saying that Oswald had talked with Cuban G2 agents and had been with Cubans in Miami. Donald Freed and Jeff Cohen (in Liberation Magazine) later reported that “Back in Miami a high powered propaganda machine was cranking out stories that Oswald was a Cuban agent.”

15)    Over the years Sturgis would revise this story to include Oswald and Jack Ruby and Castro
In 1976 Gaeton Fonzi interviewed Sturgis who then said he was reminded of a meeting in Havana two months before the assassination that included Raul Castro, Ramiro Valdez, chief of Cuban Intelligence, Che Guevara and his secretary Tanya, another Cuban officer, an American they called “El Mexicano,” and oh, yea, Jack Ruby.”

16)    In Mexico City David Atlee Phillips promoted to CIA HQ the story of a Nicaraguan intelligence agent code named “D” who claimed to have seen Oswald take money from a red haired Cuban.

17)    After “D” discredited a Mexican journalist reported the same things – having seen Oswald take money from a red haired negro Cuban outside the Cuban embassy.

18)    The first time David Atlee Phillips met with Antonio Veciana after the assassination he tried to get Veciana to contact his brother, a pro-Castro Cuban government official, and try to bribe him into saying that Oswald was affiliated with the Castro Cubans.

19)   According to Shenon, Gerald Ford was the only member of the Warren Commission to express the idea that Castro was behind the assassination.

20)    LBJ privately expresses belief JFK after Castro but Castro got him first.

21)    Former Assistant to Army Secretary Joe Califano expresses belief Castro killed JFK.

22)    Sam Halpern expresses belief that Castro had JFK killed and adds the additional twist that RFK personally ran the CIA ops to kill Castro and Castro retaliated.

23)    1980 Scrips-Howard News Service report that Castro trying to kill Reagan as he did JFK. This is the most detailed and easily traced example of a black prop op. [See: SHNS Report  
http://jfkcountercoup2.blogspot.com/2015/04/castro-plot-to-murder-reagan-black-prop.html ]

24)    Gus Russo wrote two books “Live By the Sword” and “Brothers in Arms” trying to blame the assassination on Castro and contributed to the documentary film by German producer who makes “documentary” that blames Castro for the assassination.

25)    Former CIA officer Brian Lettrel writes a book that attempts to blame Castro for the assassination based on the reports of a defector who claimed Castro had him listen for Air Force One radio transmissions from Texas that day.


 The failure of the Covert Cover Story - both Phase One and Phase Two - provide the strands of loose ends that when pulled, make the whole operation come apart. 


Monday, November 12, 2018

The Dealey Plaza Operation - The Administrative Details

The Dealey Plaza Operation - The Administrative Details (Originally posted in 2005) 

Rather than the act of a lone, deranged gunman, if the assassination of President John F. Kennedy was a conspiracy, then it was more specifically defined as a covert intelligence operation, the purpose of which is to shield the actual perpetrators through deception and disinformation.

As a covert coup, however, and not just a whispered conspiracy, there are code names, strategic and tactical plans, and documented records that reflect the policy, administration, payments, management, training, assignments and tasks necessary t successfully execute such a covert intelligence operation, what I call the Dealey Plaza Operation (DPO).

This historical administrative record shows that the assassination was not the work of a lone-nut nor a renegade CIA-Mafia-Cuban intelligence network, but a well planned, coordinated, integrated and official program – an inside job – coup d’etat by a domestic, anti-Communist network active in the anti-Castro Cuban project, and still active today as it continues to promote the Castro-did it Cover Story.

It is possible to document and detail the official approval of the covert intelligence operations that led to the assassination because a direct relationship can be established between those at the top who requested, approved and directed three specific anti-Castro Cuban maritime operations – the Bayo-Pawley raid (June 8, 1963), the JMWAVE sabotage operations, the Rex mission (Oct. 26-30, 1963), the activities of John Rosselli’s commando team and Clare Booth Luce’s “boys,” which included Julio Fernandez and others in the DRE network that operated in Louisiana and Florida in the summer and fall of 1963.

In records released in batches unrelated to the JFK Act, documents from the National Security Council, Special Operations Group and Cuban Coordinating Committee – Covert Operations in Cuba (CCC-COC) all establish an administrative and paper trail, and set a time-line of related covert events. They list the names of those in the CCC-COC loop who attended the relevant meetings, and detail the types of operations planned and approved by the President and those “disapproved” that were eventually utilized against him.

These documents are complimented by more recently released records under the JFK Act, and posted at MaryFerrell.org - under the Joint Chief of Staff Records. 

The line of power went from the President - and Attorney General (RFK) to the National Security Council (NSC) and Special Group (Augmented by RFK) that approved or disapproved CIA covert operational plans against Cuba. The approved plans went to Task Force W - set up in the basement of CIA HQ, and directed by William Harvey (until October 1962 when he was replaced by Desmond FitzGerald). From there the approved operations went to Ted Shackley at JMWAVE, the University of Miami South Campus, and from there to the anti-Castro Cuban covert commandos, paid and trained by the CIA and military. 

These records also help us identify those who were responsible for carrying them out, and we can follow them from the marching orders approved at these meetings to what we know actually happened at both the sea level off Cuba and in the streets of Dallas.

While many hundreds if not thousands of plots and plans were hatched against Castro and Cuba by the anti-Castro exiles, the CIA and the Mafia, these three naval operations can be directly connected the assassination. Not part of Mongoose, these were part of a specific and different covert action scheme devised and approved in the spring of 1963.

THE KENNEDYS AND CUBA

From documents published in THE KENNEDYS AND CUBA (by Mark J. White, 1999, Ivan R. Dee Publisher, 1332 North Halsted Street, Chicago, Ill. 60622), it is possible to trace the Cuban operations related to the assassination back to their origins in administrative policy.

According to Mark White, “John Kennedy, it can be argued, changed as a president during the final year of his life. The Cuban missile crisis appears to have sobered him, increasing his inclination to make the cold war safer. Examples of this new resolve came in the summer of 1963, with his famous speech at American University, noteworthy for its conciliatory attitude toward the Soviet Union, and signing of the Test Ban Treaty, which limited nuclear testing. A more progressive phase in his civil rights policies in 1963, with the introduction in Congress of a sweeping bill designed to end segregation, can be viewed as the domestic counterpart to this more accommodating thrust in his foreign policy”

As White points out, “…when JFK and his advisors did turn their attention to Castro, their attitude was strikingly and troublingly reminiscent of their pre-missile crisis outlook: they remained determined to use covert means to undermine Castro’s position. In June 1963 JFK gave the go-ahead for a CIA plan to carry out sabotage and other hostile action against Cuba. It was a sort of condensed version of Operation Mongoose. Some of the documents…demonstrate that Russian officials soon learned of the resumption of covert U.S. pressure on Cuba, making this issue a bone of contention between the superpowers in the fall of 1963.”

After setting the covert sabotage actions into motion, these operations were supplemented by a second, ostensibly secret, back-channel diplomatic approach to détente with Cuba. Just as the anti-Castro operations were penetrated by Cuban G2 double-agents, and made known to the Russian leaders, the secret back channel negotiations were made known to the covert saboteurs.

JFK’S United Nations BACKCHANNEL TO CASTRO

“In contrasting to this continuing effort to harass Castro, however,” White writes of the dichotomy, “the Kennedy administration pursued another clandestine strategy in the fall of 1963, this one aimed at generating a dialog with the Cuban leader. William Attwood…kept senior administration officials abreast of his efforts. Had Kennedy not been assassinated, this initiative may conceivably have brought about an accommodation with Castro.”

While Attwood had introduced JFK to Mary Meyer when they were students in prep school, the Cuban side was represented by Carlos Lechuga, the former Cuban ambassador to Mexico who had an affair with Silvia Duran, the Mexican national who worked at the Cuban embassy and dealt with Oswald in his purported attempt to get a visa to Cuba. 

As for RFK, concludes White, “Robert Kennedy, such a conspicuous figure on the Cuban matters in 1961-62, was less prominent in 1963 in shaping administration policy towards Castro. But his role remained significant.”

But it is RFK's support for JMWAVE covert operations against Cuba in 1963 that play the most prominent role in the assassination operation. 

CONTINGENCY PLANS FOR AN ATTACK ON CUBA 

White’s synopsis of a Memorandum for the Record Drafted by Chairman of the JCS (Maxwell) Taylor as “Contingency planning for an attack on Cuba, an important feature of the Kennedy administration’s covert approach towards Castro before the missile crisis, continues in 1963, with JFK’s active involvement.”

A revision of the basic invasion plan for Cuba CINCLANT was reviewed and approved by the JCS on February 26, 1963, with “the most significant change in the basic invasion plan since last October has resulted from our increasing capability to introduce large numbers of troops and heavy equipment into the objective area early in the operation. This capability is being achieved by the reactivation of 11 LSTs…and programmed acquisition of additional C-130 aircraft.”

A February 28, 1963 memo, datelined Washington, reflects a meeting of the JCS with the President, which lasted from 5:30 p.m. to 6:45 p.m., with the following subjects being the principle topics of discussion:
“a. The Cuban Invasion Plan. (1) The Chiefs discussed the time-space factors in the implementation of CINCLANT Operation Plan 312 and 316. 

[1. These were contingency plans for an attack on Cuba, developed before the missile crisis.]…The President was shown why it would take approximately 18 days from decision to D-day from the present troop and ship dispositions. In order to reduce this time to something like 7 days, considerable prepositioning would be required in order to get Army/Marine units to the East Coast and to assemble the necessary cargo shipping. The Chiefs expressed the view that it was unlikely that a period of tension would not proceed a decision to invade Cuba which would allow ample time for preparatory measures; hence, it was undesirable to make permanent changes of station of Army and Marine unites which would upset the present disposition of strategic reserve forces.

(2) The President expressed particular interest in the possibility of getting some troops quickly into Cuba in the event of a general uprising. He was told that only the airborne troops could arrive with little delay, that the first Marine elements would require about 7 days before landing. He asked the Chiefs to develop specific plans in anticipation of the need for this kind of quick reaction.”

On April Fools Day, April 1, 1963, the Cuban Coordinating Committee – Covert Operations in Cuba (CCC-COC) met, the subject of an April 3 memo from Gordon Chase of the National Security Council to McGeorge Bundy, the President’s Special Assistant for National Security Affairs. It included a still classified agenda and matters discussed by the Cottrell Committee, which White identifies as “An interdepartmental committee, chaired by Sterling J. Cottrell, in early 1963 to coordinate the administration’s covert and overt Cuban policies.”

Among those in the CCC-COC meeting were Secretary Vance, Joe Califano, Dick Helms, Dez FitzGerald and Bob Hurwitch, who discussed “Ballon Operations Over Havana, a plan that was “well under way,” given favorable winds, that would release balloons containing hundreds of thousands of leaflets designed by the CIA propaganda shop, which “attack Castro’s henchmen and contain cartoons illustrating sabotage techniques.” Another review is scheduled before this is put into operation.

Also on the agenda of this meeting was finding appropriate installations for the “Training of CIA-Sponsored Cuban Exiles on Military Reservations – CIA and the Army,” and “The Russian Language Programs – The Committee decided in favor of instituting three programs (Radio Liberty, Radio Caribe, and an intrusion program…”

In summary, Gordon Chase notes, “In approving the three programs for Special Group considerations, the committee recognized that they will probably be of marginal value only: however, they will cost us very little, financial or otherwise.”

Under agenda item number four, “Sabotage of Cuban Shipping – The Committee…will recommend to the Special Group the incendiaries which would be timed to go off in international waters and the abrasives in the machinery. While the propaganda boost might be nil, they are easier to effect than limpets and could really hurt Castro.”

Then Chase tells McBundy, “The Committee gave the CIA the option of using its own Cubans or of using DRE as a cut-out.”

The DRE are the anti-Castro Cuban Student Revolutionary Directorate, whose members interacted with Oswald before the assassination.

Then the meeting briefly discussed “The Redirection of Cuban Exile Group Operations,” asking themselves the question of “what is an acceptable target?”

In response, “Dick Helms pointed out that although these groups may start out to get a non-Soviet target, once you let them go, you can never really be sure what they will do.”

Let me repeat that: “DICK HELMS POINTED OUT THAT ALTHOUGH THESE GROUPS MAY START OUT TO GET A NON-SOVIET TARGET, ONCE YOU LET THEM GO, YOU CAN NEVER REALLY BE SURE WHAT THEY WILL DO.”

Bob Hurwitch, the memo mentions, “seemed to favor the approach that attacks and sabotage should appear to come from inside rather than outside Cuba.”

Rather incredulously, Chase concludes, “The Committee came to no decision on this one. More thinking is needed.” Indeed.

On the same April 3rd 1963 day Gordon Chase wrote that memo to McGeorge Bundy, RFK met with the Russian ambassador Dobrynin and reported to the President that, “We exchanged pleasantries. He told me that Norman Cousins had asked to see Khrushchev and he had arranged it…Another point that was made was a sharp and bitter criticism about the raids that had taken place against Russian ships (in Cuba).”

It is noted that:  

“[3. On March 26, anti-Castro group L-66 sunk the Baku, a Russian vessel, at the Cuban harbor of Caibarien only a week after another Soviet ship had been attacked in a Cuban port.]”

“These were piratical acts and the United States must take responsibility for them. It isn’t possible,” RFK quoted Dobrynin, “to believe that if we really wanted to stop these raids that we could not do so. They were glad to hear of the steps that are being taken lately but in the last analysis the specific acts, namely, the arrests that we made would be the criteria by which they would judge our sincerity. The Soviet Union questions whether in fact we wish to end these attacks for our criticism of them has been not that they were wrong but they were ineffective. The clear implication was that if the raids had been effective they would have had our approval.”

About a week later, on April 9, 1963, Joseph A. Califano, Special Assistant to the Secretary of the Army wrote a memo to his boss, Cyrus R. Vance, which White describes as, “JFK decides which of the covert operations proposed him would be carried out.”

Under the Subject, “President Action on Special Group Items Concerning Cuba,” Califano checks off the items, beginning with, “1. The President rejected the balloon item on the recommendations of Ed Morrow,” so the project that was “well underway,” was scuttled before it could get off the ground because JFK talked about it with Ed Morrow.

“The President approved the propaganda item (inciting Cubans to harass, attack and sabotage Soviet military personnel in Cuba) provided every precaution is taken to prevent attribution.”

“The President approved the sabotage of cargos on Cuban ships and the crippling of ships (through sand in the gears, etc.); With respect to Russian language broadcasts, the President (a) rejected such broadcasts by exile groups over Radio Caribe in the Domincian Republic,  rejected black intrusion on the use of such broadcasts on Radio Liberty from North Carolina, pending consultation with Lleweellyn Thompson.”

“We have also agreed with CIA that we would spot about 20 inductees now in training at Fort Jackson whom we consider to have the necessary characteristics for CIA operations inside Cuba. These personnel, along with those given jump training under 5 above, would also be used in advance of the introduction of Special Forces, should there be a decision to invade Cuba.”

Sterling J. Cottrell, the Coordinator of Cuban Affairs to the Special Group, wrote a memo on April 18, 1963, which White says, “reviews current covert actions against Castro and poses the question whether these actions should be intensified.”

Under SUBJECT: “Proposed New Covert Policy and Program Toward Cuba,” Cottrell wrote, “A. The following guidelines are being used in our present covert policy towards Cuba: 

1. Producing comprehensive intelligence related to our basic policy objectives….
2. Intensifying covert collection of intelligence within Cuba, especially within the regime. 
3. Supporting the efforts of certain Cuban exiles, who are associated with the original aims of the 26 of July Movement [1. A reference to the original effort to spark a revolution in Cuba when Castro and his cohorts tried to seize the Moncada military barracks in 1953.] and who believe that the Castro regime can be overthrown from within in order that they may: 1) cause a split in the leadership of the retime… create a political base of opposition…
4) The use of a variety of propaganda media to stimulate passive resistance….
5) The placing of incendiary devices and/or explosives with suitable time delay within the hull or cargo to disable or sink Cuban vessels and/or damage their cargos while on the high seas…
6) Introduce abrasives and other damaging material….”

Cottrell then poses the questions, “1) Should the U.S. move beyond the above policy to a program of sabotage, harassment and resistance activities? 2) What kind of effective action can be taken? 3) What capabilities do we possess? 4) What repercussions can we expect?”

In this memo, Cottrell also says, “Surface attacks by maritime assets firing on Cuban ships in Cuban waters. When the maritime asset cannot reach the target, shore based attacks on shipping in port or passing the offshore keys will be undertaken….Considerations: Attack craft from the sea would be manned by Cubans. Shore based attacks by paramilitary trained Cubans firing on ships with recoilless rifles, rocket launchers or 20mm cannon. First sea attack in May and once monthly thereafter. First shore based attack in June. These operations would disrupt coastal commerce. US would probably be blamed. Cuban reprisal measures possible. Soviets likely allege US culpability….Externally mounted hit and run attacks against land targets. Examples: molasses tanker, petroleum storage dumps, naval refueling base, refineries, power plants.”

Under “Considerations,” Cottrell notes, “Operations conducted by Cubans with paramilitary training. High possibilities of complex operations going awry. First attack in April, with one per month thereafter. Effects would be increased exile morale, some economic disruption. Repercussions would include charges of US sponsorship and increased Cuban security force activities…”

Cottrell includes an attachment on the subject of “A Covert Harassment/Sabotage Program against Cuba,” which states, “This paper presents a covert Harassment/Sabotage program targeted against Cuba: including are those sabotage plans which have previously been approved as well as new proposals…Loses in men and equipment with the attendant adverse publicity must be expected. Even without such loses, US attribution would be claimed. When policy and guidelines of the overall sabotage program are established, it will be possible progressively to develop up to a limit additional covert assets and support capabilities. 

However, materially to increase the pace of operations, a period of four to six months is required. Ultimate limiting factors are weather, length of ‘dark of the moon’ period each month and appropriate targets. A source of additional agent personnel is from Cuban personnel trained by the US Military Forces under the recent programs, but released to civilian status….”

That April 29th 1963, RFK and members of the Standing Group of the National Security Council met in Washington at 5pm, but the memo prepared by McGeorge Bundy has yet to be declassified and released, other than its title: “A Sketch of the Cuban Alternatives.”

The same day, JFK sent a memo to Secretary of Defense McNamara, pressing his request for the military to develop contingency plans for Cuba. JFK wrote, “Are we keeping our Cuban contingency invasion plans up to date? I notice that there have been a number of new judgments on the amount of equipment that the Cubans have. I thought last October the number of troops we planned to have available was rather limited and the success of the operation was dependent upon, in large measure, our two airborne divisions getting in and controlling the two airfields. It seems to be that we should strengthen our contingency plans on this operation.”

According to Mark White, “John Kennedy, it can be argued, changed as a president during the final year of his life. The Cuban missile crisis appears to have sobered him, increasing his inclination to make the cold war safer. Examples of this new resolve came in the summer of 1963, with his famous speech at American University, noteworthy for its conciliatory attitude toward the Soviet Union, and signing of the Test Ban Treaty, which limited nuclear testing. A more progressive phase in his civil rights policies in 1963, with the introduction in Congress of a sweeping bill designed to end segregation, can be viewed as the domestic counterpart to this more accommodating thrust in his foreign policy”

Let's not forget about the effects of Kennedy's LSD trips with Mary Meyer that last year of his life. I don't intend this comment in a trivial way. LSD is not an intoxicant so much as a life-changing perspective.
Regardless of any distinction about LSD, President Kennedy was known to be a drug user to the degree that would permit self-honorable people to consider him incapable of embodying a necessarily credible nuclear deterrent. Shanet Clark's thesis of 25th Amendment-type incapacity would apply. JFK may truly have become unable to wage nuclear diplomacy, let alone war.


COUP II – The Administrative Details – By William Kelly 

In Washington, on June 8, 1963, an unidentified CIA officer wrote a paper for the Standing Group of the National Security Council on the Subject of “Proposed Covert Policy and Integrated Program of Action Towards Cuba.”

“Submitted herewith is a covert program for Cuba within the CIA’s capabilities. Some parts of the program have already been approved and are being implemented. Being closely inter-related, the total cumulative impact of the courses of action set forth in this program is dependent upon the simultaneous coordinated execution of the individual courses of action.”

“This program,” the officer notes, “is based on the assumption that current U.S. policy does not contemplate outright military intervention in Cuba or a provocation which can be used as a pretext for an invasion of Cuba by United States military forces. It is further assumed that U.S. policy calls for the exertion of maximum pressure by all means available to the U.S. government, short of military intervention…”

In the “Discussion of Components of an Integrated Program,” they mention the collection of covert intelligence, propaganda actions “to stimulate low-risk sabotage and other forms of passive resistance,” and the “exploitation and stimulation of disaffection in the Cuban military.”

As for General sabotage and harassment, “These operations will be conducted either by externally held assets [Note: Presumably a reference to Cuban émigrés] now available or existing external assets or those to be developed. Assets trained and controlled by the CIA will be used as well as selected autonomous exile groups. Initially, the emphasis will be on the use of externally held assets with a shift to internal assets as soon as operational feasible….”

Under “Support of autonomous anti-Castro Cuban groups to supplement and assist in the execution of the above courses of action,” six items are listed. 

“1) It is the keystone of the autonomous operations that they will be executed exclusively by Cuban national motivated by the conviction that the overthrow of the Castro/Communist regime must be accomplished by Cubans both inside and outside Cuba acting in consonance.”
“2) The effort will probably cost many Cuban lives. If this cost in lives becomes unacceptable to the U.S. conscience, autonomous operations can be effectively halted by the withdraw of US support, but once halted, it cannot be resumed.”
“3) All autonomous operations will be mounted from outside the territory of the United States.”
“4) The United States Government must be prepared to deny publicly any participation in these acts no matter how loud or even how accurate may be the reports of US complicity.”
“5) The US presence and direct participation in the operation would be kept to an absolute minimum….
“6) These operations would not be undertaken within a fixed time schedule.”

The very day that the CIA prepared this paper for the Standing Group of the NSC, June 8, 1963, a team of Cubans led by Eddie Bayo and Americans (John Martino, Richard Billings) left Florida aboard William Pawley’s boat the Flying Tiger II, on a mission to the Cuban coast near Baracoa, where Bayo and his men were infiltrated.

William Turner, [in Rearview Mirror, p. 194] reports, “In 1995 ex-Cuban security chief General Fabian Escalante told me that Bayo’s boat was found swamped near Baracoa, but there were no signs of its occupants.”

On June 19, 1963, JFK held a meeting at the White House concerning the “Proposed Covert Policy and Integrated Program of Action towards Cuba.” Present were Higher Authority (JFK), Secretary McNamara, Under Secretary Harriman, Mr. McCone, Mr. McGeorge Bundy, Mr. Thomas Parrott, Mr. Desmond FitzGerald and Air Force Chief of Staff, Gen. W. F. McKee.

According to the report of the meeting, prepared by Desmond FitzGerald, “The program as recommended by the Standing Group of the NSC was presented briefly to Higher Authority who showed a particular interest in proposed external sabotage operations. He was shown charts indicating typical targets for this program and a discussion of the advantages and disadvantages ensued. It is well recognized that there would be failures and a considerable noise level….Mr. Bundy described the integrated nature of the program presented and made the point that, having made a decision to go ahead, we be prepared to give the program a real chance. Mr. Harriman stated that the program would b ‘reviewed weekly’ by the Special Group….”

“Higher Authority,” the report notes, “asked how soon we could get into action with the external sabotage program and was told that we should be able to conduct our first operation in the dark-of-the-moon period in July although he was informed that we would prefer to start the program with some caution selecting softer targets to begin with. Higher Authority said this was a matter of our judgment. Although at one stage in the discussion Higher Authority said that we should move ahead with the program ‘this summer’ it is believed that Mr. Bundy will be able to convince him that this is not a sufficiently long trial period to demonstrate what the program can do.”

Although there is a break in the official records so far released, the Summer of 1963 was extremely active, especially in New Orleans and Florida, where the Cuban émigrés “externally held assets” prepared to be infiltrated to Cuba and CIA backed marine raiders deposited commandos and assassins in Cuba and Russian, Cuban and some neutral ships were attacked at sea.

The covert operations devised and approved by the Standing Committee of the National Security Council, Sterling J. Cottrell and the Special Group, Cuban Coordinating Committee – Covert Operations in Cuba (CCC-COC) and the President, were now operational, and because the Cuban assets were penetrated by the Cubans, the fact that these operations were approved at the highest levels of government was known to the Russian leaders. And it was a card they had to play.

In Washington (on September 10, 1963), Ambassador-at-Large Llewellyn E. Thompson prepared a memo of his conversation with the Russians and JFK’s response. As described by Mark White, the editor The Kennedys and Cuba, “In a secret message to JFK, Khrushchev makes clear that he is aware of the recent resumption of sabotage by the United States against Cuba. He also warns Kennedy that the Soviet Union will respond if Cuba is attacked.”

“Responding to Khrushchev’s September 10 message, JFK tries to change the subject from sabotage against Cuba to Cuban subversion in Latin America.”

Llewellyn notes that the official policy of the US remains the response to the March 26th attack on the Russian ship Baku, “In keeping with the March 30, 1963 declaration by the Department of State and Justice concerning hit and run attacks by Cuban exile groups against targets in Cuba, the law enforcement agencies are taking vigorous measures to assure that the pertinent laws of the United States are observed…”

But they weren’t being observed as far as the CIA backed Cuban raiders were concerned, at least those whose ships were based and docked in Florida.

At the same time that the anti-Castro Cuban raiders were attacking Russian and Cuban ships at sea and depositing commandos and assassins in Cuba, Castro and JFK were involved in a back channel dialog that began in New York City on August 26, 1963 when special US delegate to the UN William Attwood met Seyodou Diallo, the Guinea Ambassador to Havana.

Attwood, a former roommate of JFK at prep school (who introduced him to Mary Pinchot Meyer), and former editor at Look magazine, had previously served as US ambassador to Guinea (March 1961-May 1963) before being posted to the UN. According Attwood’s memo on the meeting, Diallo “went out of his way to tell me that Castro was isolated from contact with neutralist diplomats by his ‘Communist entourage’…Diallo, had finally been able to see Castro alone once and was convinced he was personally receptive to changing courses and getting Cuba on the road to non-alignment…”

As White describes the situation, “By the autumn of 1963 the Kennedy administration was pursuing a two-track policy towards Castro. While sabotage activities against Castro continued, an effort was under way to develop a secret dialog with Castro, with a view to achieving some sort of accommodation between Havana and Washington…”

In the first week of September 1963, Attwood read Lisa Howard’s article “Castro’s Overture” [War/Peace Report, September 1963], which Attwood knew was based on her interview with Castro in April. As summarized by Attwood, “This article stressed Castro’s expressed desire for reaching an accommodation with the United States and a willingness to make substantial concessions to this end.”

Attwood talked personally with Lisa Howard on September 12, “and she echoed Ambassador Diallo’s opinion that there was a rift between Castro and the Guevara-Hart-Alveida group on the question of Cuba’s future course.” That same day Attwood expressed these opinions with Under Secretary of State Harriman in Washington.

In his chronology of the negotiations (written on November 8, 1963), Attwood states:
“On September 23, I met Dr. Lechuga at Miss Howard’s apartment. She has been on good terms with Lechuga since her visit to Castro and invited him for a drink to me(e)t some friends who had been to Cuba. I was just one of those friends. In the course of our conversation, which started with recollections of my own talks with Castro in 1959, I mentioned having read Miss Howard’s article. Lechuga hinted that Castro was indeed in a mood to talk. I told him that in my present position, I would need official authorization to make such a trip, and did not know if it would be forthcoming. However, I said an exchange of views might well be useful and that I would find out and let him know.”

After meeting with RFK in Washington the next day, RFK told Attwood he would pass on the information to McGeorge Bundy.

Attwood then reported, “On September 27, I ran into Lechuga at the United Nations, where he was doing a television interview in the lobby with Miss Howard. I told him that I had discussed our talk in Washington,….meanwhile, he forewarned me that he would be making a ‘hard’ anti-US Speech in the United Nations on October 7,…”

Besides Attwood’s back channel communications with Lechuga, Attwood also got further input from other sources, as he mentions, “On October 18, at dinner at the home of Mrs. Eugene Meyer, I talked with Mr. C. A. Doxiades, a noted Greek architect and town-planner, who had just returned from an architects congress in Havana, where he had talked alone to both Castro and Guevara, among others. He sought me out, as a government official, to say he was convinced Castro would welcome normalization of relations with the United States if he could do so without loosing too much face…”

Two days later, Lisa Howard asked Attwood to make a telephone call to Major Rene Vallejo, a Cuban surgeon who is identified as “Castro’s right hand man and confidant.” Howard explained how Vallejo assisted her in meeting Castro, “and made it plain he opposed the Guevara group.” Attwood and Vallejo then had a number of telephone conversations from Howard’s New York apartment.

On October 21 1963 Gordon Chase, the National Security Council aide to McGeorge Bundy, called Attwood from the White House to be brought up to date, and Attwood concluded that “the ball was in his court.”

That night, the CIA raider ship Rex pulled out of its moorings at West Palm Beach, Florida, not far from President Kennedy’s Florida home, on a mission that would create the considerable noise level that would make the cover of the New York Times.

The Rex was on a mission, according to William Turner (Rearview Mirror – Penmarin Books, CA. 2001, p. 185-186), “a sabotage attack on a shore installation in Pinar del Rio Province,” and deposit a team of commando assassins infiltrators. “It was a CIA operation,” with an all Cuban crew, says Turner. He also reports, “When a mission was scheduled, they received a phone call, then a nondescript CIA van picked them up and took them to the West Palm Beach berth where the Rex was tied up. The dockage fees were paid by a CIA front, Sea Shipping Company, which operated out of a post office box.”

The Captain of the Rex, Alejandro Brooks, received his orders from Gordon Campbell, the director of the CIA’s naval operations. “The men belonged to the Commando Mambises,…the CIA’s elite, the Green Berets of the secret war. They were led by Major Manuel Villafana, a spit-and-polish officer who had commanded the Bay of Pigs air force. Villafana insisted that his men be paid low because he wanted them driven by hate, not money.”

According to Turner, “The Rex was not listed in Jane’s Fighting Ships. It was a World War II subchaser pulled out of the mothball fleet at Green Cove Springs, Florida. Painted a classy dark blue, the 174-foot vessel could cut through the waves at twenty knots. It flew the blue-and-white flag of Nicaragua, whose strongman, General Luis Somoza, had hosted the Bay of Pigs invasion brigade…”

“There were oversized searchlights, elaborate electronics gear that towered amidships, and a large crane on the aft deck capable of raising and lowering twenty-foot speed boats,” wrote Turner. “After the Rex put to sea, its guns were brought up from below decks and secured in their topside mounts: two 40-mm naval cannon, a 57-mm recoilless rifle, and two 20-mm cannon.”

Having interviewed some of the crewmembers, Turner got a full report on what happened. “The target on this mission was the giant Matahambre copper mine near Cape Corriente on the bootheel of Pinar del Rio Province…when the Rex arrived at the landing zone, there was a sense of foreboding: the Cape Corriente light, normally flashing a warning to maritime traffic, was dark….As the vessel came to a stop, two specially designed fiberglass speedboats, called Moppies, slid down the high-speed davits on the afterdeck…They were to link up with two commandos who had infiltrated a week earlier to reconnoiter the target. The answer came back in the wrong code; it was a trap.”

“The commandos fired at the riverbank,” only to be raked by return fire from heavy machine guns. One raft was torn apart by tracer bullets, spilling the dead and dying into the water…Then one of the Moppies was framed in the searchlights of a Russian built P-6 patrol craft: the Rex quartermaster piloting it surrendered….Brooks made a feint toward open sea, then doubled back and hugged the coastline…The move paid off. Minutes later, a pair of Cuban helicopters…dropped flares…..(illuminating)…the 32,500 ton J. Louis, …carrying a cargo of bauxite from Jamaica to Texas. Five Cuban MiGs began strafing….US Navy Phantom jets took off and headed for the scene. But just before arriving, the Phantoms were called back….”
A few days later Fidel Castro appeared on Cuban television and described the Rex, and introduced two of the men missing from the Rex, quartermaster Luis Montera Carranzana and Dr. Clemente Inclan Werner, a Mambasie.

When questioned by the press, White House press secretary said, “We have nothing to say.”

On November 1, 1963, not only the CIA and the Cubans knew the details, but everyone who read the New York Times, who published a photo of the Rex on their front page and reported the ship was registered out of Nicaragua, owned by the Belcher Oil Company of Miami, and leased to the Collins Radio Company International, of Richardson, Texas, for the ostensible purpose of “electronic and oceanographic research.”

Since reporting to Gordon Chase of the NSC on October 21, the day of the Rex mission, William Attwood had progressed further with the back channel negotiations in New York. Attwood later reported, “On October 28, I ran into Lechuga in the UN Delegates Lounge…. I said it was up to him and he could call me if he felt like it. He wrote down my extension.”

On October 31, Halloween, (David Phillips birthday), Vellejo in Cuba called Miss Howard, reporting that Castro, “…would very much like to talk to the US official anytime and appreciated the importance of discretion to all concerned.”

A week after Attwood reported the progress of his negotiations with the Cubans to Bundy and Chase at the White House (on November 5), a meeting was held in Washington, with CIA Director John McCone presenting an update on the situation in Cuba and an evaluation of the sabotage program.

Besides the President, Secretaries McNamara, Rusk, Vance and RFK, General Taylor was there, along with Sec. Gilpatrick, and from the CIA, Helms, FitzGerald and Shackley puts in an appearance.

McCone’s memo reports that he opened the meeting with a brief resume of conditions in Cuba along these lines, “

1) Cuba still belongs to Castro though his grip is weakening, 
2) The military remains essentially loyal to Castro, 
3) the internal security forces and apparatus are effective, 
4) The economy is bad and deteriorating, 
5) The Soviets are continuing a gradual withdraw, 
6) Training of Cubans continues, 
7) The only equipment which has been withdrawn has been the advanced C-band radar for SAM and certain communication equipment…”

“McCone then stated that the program which had been followed for the last several months, having been approved about the first of June [June 19], was integrated and interdependent one part on the other and therefore should be considered as a comprehensive program and not a number of independent actions.”
FitzGerald also made a presentation, a progress report on the six-point covert program proposed by the CIA [on June 8] and endorsed by JFK.

According to the meeting minutes, “Rusk had no problem with infiltration of black teams…However he opposed the hit-and-run sabotage tactics as being unproductive, complicating our relationship with the Soviets and also with our friends and indicated a connection between our sabotage activities and the autobahn problem.” [Note: Berlin]

McCone concludes, “The President asked questions concerning the immediate operations, and the next one on the schedule was approved.”

The same day McCone conducted this meeting, McGeorge Bundy, the President’s Special Assistant for National Security Affairs wrote a memo, described by White as indicating that “JFK was interested in generating a dialog with Castro via intermediaries, though he did not want the talks to commence in Cuba.”

On November 11, Vallejo called Lisa Howard to reiterate the need for security about the back channel talks, and to say, as Attwood later reported, “Castro would go along with any arrangements we might want to make…He emphasized that only Castro and himself would be present at the talks and that no one else – he specifically mentioned Guevara – would be involved. Vallejo also reiterated Castro’s desire for this talk and hoped to hear our answer soon.”

Attwood and Bundy talked again the next day (November 12) and Attwood visited Howard’s apartment on November 13, but when they called Vallejao at home in Cuba, there was no answer, so the sent a telegram.
The following day (November 14) Vallejo called Howard, and set up a phone call for November 18 when, as Attwood reported. “Miss Howard reached Vallejo at home and passed the phone to me. I told him….of our interests in hearing what Castro had in mind….Vallejo…reiterated the invitation to come to Cuba, stressing the fact that security could be guaranteed. I replied that a preliminary meeting was essential to make sure there was something useful to talk about, and asked if he was able to come to New York…” Attwood and Vellejo then talked about setting “an agenda” for a later meeting with Castro. On November 19, Attwood reported this conversation to Gordon Chase.

Even before the assassination the accused assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, was associated with Cubans of the Student Revolutionary Directorate (DRE), whose members included the CIA raider boat crew sponsored by Clare Booth Luce, who previously featured them in Life magazine.

On November 22nd, 1963, John Martino, one of the crewmembers of the June 8, Flying Tiger II mission, expressed foreknowledge and details of the assassination, and previously appeared in Dallas with other anti-Castro Cuban exiles (ie. Odio) who associated with the accused assassin.

Shortly after the assassination, Dallas policeman J.D. Tippit would be killed in Oak Cliff, allegedly by the same man accused of assassinating the President. At the time of Tippit’s murder, the same accused assassin and alleged cop killer would be seen in Oak Cliff in a Plymouth sedan owned by Tippit’s good friend, who worked at Collins Radio, of Richardson, Texas, the company that leased the Rex.

The night of the assassination, Clare Booth Luce received a telephone call from one of the Cuban crewman of the boat she sponsored, Julio Fernandez, who said he had a tape recording of the accused assassin and additional evidence that he was a pro-Castro Communist, continuing the black propaganda operation to blame the assassination on Castro.

The Dealey Plaza operation that resulted in the assassination of the President was directly connected to these three specific covert anti-Castro Cuban maritime missions that became known – the June mission of the Flying Tiger II, the Oct. 21-30 mission of the Rex and the operations of the DRE boat crew sponsored by Clare Booth Luce.

All three of these covert maritime operations that are associated with what happened at Dealey Plaza can be traced back to their administrative origins at the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the DOD (CINCLAT revised), the Cuban Coordinating Committee – Covert Operations in Cuba (CCC-COC), the Cottrell Committee of the Special Group, the Standing Group of the National Security Council and the covert sabotage operations approved by the President.

It is most likely that sometime before November 22 the crewmembers of these operations learned about the Atwood-Lechuga back channel negotiations, which provided motivation for their compliance with the Dealey Plaza operation, the assassination of the President and coup d’etat.


On the day of the assassination, William Attwood recognized the significance of his back channel actions, and wrote a memo detailing what occurred for the record and suspected the complicity of the anti-Castro Cubans when he wrote, “If the CIA did find out what we were doing, this would have trickled down to the lower echelon of activists, and Cuban exiles, and…. I can understand why they would have reacted so violently.”