Bill Kelly's Review of Freaky Fred's "I Was a Teenage Conspiracy Freak"

Bill Kelly’s Review of Freaky Fred’s “I Was a Teenage JFK Conspiracy Freak”

Okay, I finally forked out $4 for Fred Litwin’s pulp paperback on Kindle and it was a waste of good money I could have spent on a beer.

I usually learn something conspiratorial from most every anti-conspiratorial book I read and the only thing I learned from this book is that there is no real difference between silly conspiracy theorists and lone nutters like Litwin. They are all True Believers in the Eric Hoffer mold who compile all of the known facts to support their position and ignore the rest, and really know nothing.

For me, regardless of the role of the accused assassin - sixth floor sniper or fall guy, it doesn't matter once you understand that whatever you believe happened at Dealey Plaza, it was a covert intelligence operation that was designed to deceive and protect those actually responsible. 

Peter Dale Scott once said that a third type of independent researcher was emerging – one who reads all the books and records, someone who keeps an open mind, who doesn’t support a final position until all the facts are in and one who tries to answer the outstanding questions.

When Peter said that I thought of Paul Hoch, who with Scott edited an early anthology on The Assassinations that sets a real tone for real inquiry, and it was Litwin’s reference to Hoch as one of the persons who taught him how to evaluate evidence – cough, cough.

Even as I write this, Peter Dale Scott posted on Mary Ferrell some new ONI records that Hoch had acquired decades ago. Office of Naval Intelligence

After discussing Litwin’s endorsement of Hoch with Dr. Gary Aguliar in Dallas, I later learned that Aguilar confronted Hoch about it at the San Francisco researcher’s summit last December, and there was some animosity in the air. 

This book is more about Paul Hoch than it is about the assassination of the President, as Litwin is trying to pull Hoch away from his vaunted status as one of the best independent researchers into the Lone Nut sewer that is occupied by Litwin, John McAdams, Gerald Posner, Max Holland and others of their stripe. And while Hoch may not be embarrassed or insulted as I am by this, he is not being pulled by his arm and hair kicking and screaming either.

Litwin quotes Hoch at a 1993 JFK conference in Chicago as saying, “The specific items of Dealey Plaza conspiracy evidence have tended to get weaker over the years. This has been a surprise, naturally underappreciated – especially by newer buffs and non-technical buffs.” 

I guess this is suppose to mean that as we peal away at the silly conspiracy theories, we come to the same realization that Litwin has - Oswald killed JFK alone. But that's not the logical conclusion - the silly conspiracy theories get weaker as we examine the evidence closer, but the official conclusion that Oswald acted alone - is no longer tenable, so one of the conspiracy theories must be correct. 

For Hoch's entire presentation: 
JFKcountercoup: Paul Hoch on Assassination Research 1993

Litwin: “The JFK assassination has become a metaphor for politics. You can tell lies; you can spin incredibly ridiculous stories, you can make outlandish claims that are grounded in complete falsehoods; and there will still be people who believe and quote your every word. But, truth matters, Lee Harvey Oswald killed JFK.1. There was no conspiracy. End of story.”

But it’s not the end of story, and the biggest incredibly ridiculous story is that Oswald killed JFK, something that can and should be dealt with and then put aside as Oswald was the rabbit who was let loose for those who thought they were following the assassin, when in fact he was what he said he was - the Patsy, set up as the fall guy in a crime he didn't commit. 

Oh, there is a footnote there – footnote #1, that I will get back to later, but in looking for the facts and evidence Litwin has for Oswald being JFK’s killer is contained in just one paragraph. In fact Oswald is not even the focus of this book – it is Litwin’s narrow minded too proud conservative viewpoint and rants against silly conspiracy theorists and liberal media.

While praising Hoch, Litwin manages to depreciate the fine work of Josiah Thompson – Ian Griggs -- Vincent Salandria – Harold Weisberg – Sylvia Meagher – Maggie Field – Shirley Martin – Raymond Marcus – Penn Jones, Jr. – Mark Lane – Thomas Buchanan -  M.S. Arnoni – Dick Gregory, Robert Groden, Mort Sahl, Bertrand Russell, Ralph Schoenman, and Jefferson Morley – all of whom made some important contribution to JFK research, whereas Litwin has made none.

Litwin would have us believe that we can just go back in time to what was only known in 1964 and ignore all of what we have learned in the fifty some years since then, and while he can ignore it all, we can’t.

Litwin writes: “The authors of the Warren Report were honourable (Brit spelling ok by me) men who conducted an honest investigation and reached the right answer.…The evidence led them to the only possible conclusion – that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin. And the evidence was overwhelming…”.

Are you ready for the overwhelming evidence?  Here goes: “For instance, on the morning of the assassination, Oswald left his wedding ring and $170 for his wife Marina on the bedroom dresser, and he brought a long bulky package to work. His rifle was stored in Ruth Paine’s garage (where his wife was staying) and when the FBI visited after the assassination, lo and behold, the rifle was gone.”

And lo and behold, “After the assassination, he was the only warehouseman missing…..One expert concluded that one of the four bullets recovered from Tippit’s body matched the revolve found in Oswald’s possession when he was arrested, another expert said they all ‘could have been’ fired from his gun; the expended cartridge cases matched Oswald’s gun to the exclusion of all other weapons. The rifle found on the sixth floor of the Book Depository was bought by Oswald; fibers found on the rifle matched Oswald’s shirt, although they could have come from another identical shirt; two bullet fragments found in the limousine and the cartridge cases found in the sniper’s nest matched his rifle ‘to the exclusion of all other weapons’; Oswald’ right palm print was found on the rifle barrel,; and his fingerprints were found on the bag used to carry the rifle to work…..Faced with this massive amount of incriminating evidence, the critics could only chip away at the margins….”

And the margins lead to the heart of the matter. 

Defense Attorney Bill Simpich could destroy each and every one of this "evidence" in just a few minutes in court, but lo and behold, the evidence never made it to a court of law because the principal suspect was killed while in police custody. 

The thing that I just don't get is why these Lone Nutters - to a man - all say Lee Harvey Oswald was the assassin who killed the President all alone, but he's always portrayed as a disenchanted, wife beating loner and idiot who couldn't hold a job, instead of being a great marksman and the world's greatest assassin, as he would have to be if he actually did the dirty deed. 

As Litwin puts it, “When I told most people that there was no conspiracy and that just about every issue could be easily explained, they just smiled.”  And that’s because most people know better, and with good reason. There are many good reasons why most - 80% of the people don't believe Oswald alone was responsible for the assassination. 

Okay Fred, easily explain where the bullets came from – the bullets from the rifle and the pistol? Explain where the rifle strap – from an air force officer’s sidearm hostler came from? Explain how the rifle got into the Texas School Book Depository since B. W. Fraser and his sister both said the package was too small to be a rifle. Explain why the brown paper wrapping paper wasn’t photographed at the scene where it was found? Tell us who was seen on the sixth floor with a rifle when Oswald was on the first floor shortly after noon? Tell us who was seen in the six floor window five minutes after the shooting when Oswald was positively on the second floor? Tell us who was the man in the white shirt (Oswald wore brown) in the sixth floor window with a rifle with a very distinguishing bald spot on the top of his head, a trait not shared by Oswald? Tell us who was practicing at the rifle range, calling attention to himself by shooting the wrong targets – a person the Warren Commission said was not Oswald. Tell us who was impersonating Oswald at a dozen – not one or two – but a dozen locations? Tell us why none of the four people on the stairs failed to see Oswald descend the steps? Tell us how Roy Truly failed to see Oswald go through the second floor lunchroom door where Marion Baker saw him a few second later? It’s because Oswald wasn’t on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting, did not descend those steps or go through that door. He entered the lunchroom from the secretary’s office, the same way he left.

Now we can get to Footnote #1 -

“1.We will never know exactly why Oswald killed Kennedy. Jean Davison, author of Oswald’s Game, offers a persuasive explanation. Oswald most probably read the New Orleans Times-Picayune story of September 9, 1963 in which it was reported that Fidel Castro said that if US leaders ‘are aiding terrorist plans to eliminate Cuban leaders, they themselves will not be safe.’ Oswald had made attempts to infiltrate pro-Castro groups in New Orleans and he might have been aware of plots against Castro. In late November 1963, it was announced that Kennedy’s motorcade route would pass right in front of the building in which he worked. Strictly by chance, Oswald was able to strike a blow for the revolution.”

For the complete story read the article: timespicayune.JPG (510×799)

JFKCountercoup2: Harker's Complete Original Report

We will never know exactly why Oswald killed Kennedy because he didn’t. But we can come to know how and why JFK was killed by following this lead, and can thank Jean Davison for turning us on to it. 

The story Oswald “probably” read was written by the AP correspondent in Havana Daniel Harker, who quoted Castro in an interview at the Brazilian embassy the day after Dr. Orlando Cubella (AMLASH) met with a CIA case officer in Brazil. The CIA case officer was encouraging Cubella to kill Castro, and another case officer met with Cu bella in Paris at the very moment of the assassination. It wasn’t strictly by chance that Cubella also owned an apartment in Veradero beach where the JMWAVE Pathfinders were to use as a staging area to shoot Castro in the head with a high powered rifle as he rode past in an open jeep.

As the Microsoft computerized review of the most recently released JFK assassination files concluded, the assassination had something to do with Cuba, and as Jean Davison has called our attention to, the assassination had something to do with the CIA-Mafia plots to kill Castro. And as Carlos Bringuier and others have said, what happened in Dallas was directly connected to the JMWAVE commando raids against Cuba – that Castro was harping about in the story Oswald “probably” read. Those commando raids, BTW are also featured in stories in both of the communist publications that Oswald is seen holding in the backyard photos with the rifle and pistol said to be used to kill JFK and officer Tippit.

Litwin has a whole chapter dedicated to the New Orleans aspects of the assassination but doesn’t even mention Oswald’s arrest with Bringuier and his DRE pals.

The whole chapter is devoted to the charges against Clay Shaw, and Litwin, in his Canadian TV interview falsely says that Garrison indicted Shaw because he was a homosexual.

Garrison didn’t indict Shaw at all. Clay Shaw was indicted by a New Orleans Grand Jury because Shaw was seen in Clinton, Louisiana in the summer of 1963 with David Ferrie and Oswald – the man Litwin says was responsible for the murder of the President.

And Ferrie was considered a suspect, not because he too was gay, but because of his participation in the Houma Bunker raid that obtained guns and explosives that were to be used by anti-Castro Cubans or anti-deGaulists. For more on Houma Bunker raid see: JFKcountercoup: The Houma Bunker Raid Revisted

It should be noted that Litwin himself is gay, and with his gay boyfriend visited Dealey Plaza – the scene of the crime, in 2018, shortly before the publication of this book.

His previous book Conservative Confidential, is apparently about his conversion from being a stupid secretly gay liberal to an newly enlightened openly gay conservative. 

Litwin writes that, “Garrison started to think about the Kennedy assassination was some sort of homosexual plot.”

Then he quotes Paul Hoch: Echoes of Conspiracy – “Garrison apparently failed to weigh the likelihood of a secret but social and non-conspiratorial relationship between Shaw and Ferrie. By refusing to do so – and targeting someone who would not come out of the closet in his own defense – I think Garrison crossed the line into objectively homophobic persecution.”

And Garrison thought enough of Hock to respond to him writing, “Throughout our trial, in everything I have ever written and in every public statement I have ever made – I never once made any reference to Clay Shaw’s alleged homosexuality. What sort of human being is Mr. Hoch that he is impelled to so gratuitiously make such a reference in a newsletter which he widely distributes to the public?”'

Litwin writes: “Muckraker Jack Anderson, partner of syndicated columnist Drew Pearson, also spent some time talking to Garrison. According to Pearson’s March 24, 1967, diary entry, Garrison told Anderson, ‘The CIA definitely had a plot to assassinate Castro and had approached Clay Shaw, a reputable, wealthy homosexual businessman, as a man who could execute the plot. Shaw was part of a homosexual ring, including Ferrie and Ruby in Dallas.”  

Read recently released FBI report on Jack Anderson's diner with Garrison: - JFKCountercoup2: Jack Anderson on Jim Garrison

For more on Litwin's New Orleans escapades he titles Garrison’s Excellent Homosexual Adventure - read what Jim DiEugenio has recently posted at Kennedys and King - Jim Garrison vs. Fred Litwin: The Beat Goes On - Part 2 - Kennedys And King - Jim Garrison vs. Fred Litwin: The Beat Goes On (part 2)

Jack Anderson also failed to publish but told his FBI case officer that after his dinner with Garrison he believed Garrison was on to something. And he certainly was, but it wasn’t the New Orleans bozos who pulled off the Houma Bunker caper who killed JFK in Dallas. That was a very well planned and executed covert intelligence operation the origins of which were the CIA-Mafia plan to kill Castro with a high powered rifle as he drove by in an open jeep – the plan that was redirected to JFK in Dallas.

For more on this see Pathfinder Parts 1-5 JFKcountercoup: PATHFINDER - Parts 1 - 5 The Plan to Kill Castro Redirected to JFK at Dallas

That’s what history will show.

As Litwin makes continued attacks on the truth, advocates of the truth and depreciates what we’ve come to know about the assassination over the past fifty years, I will return to address some of the issues he raises that deserve attention, but for now, I will give him a break.

And I am looking forward to buying, reading and reviewing a book that is worth the price - a book that I know will be a game changer – John Newman’s “Into the Storm,” Volume 3 of his multi-volume history of the Kennedy Assassination from someone who really does know how to evaluate evidence.