Posts: 830
Threads: 135
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Oct 2010
Quote:he did now say that the WC story does not hang together.
I get the feeling if given the chance Morley would add that he's concerned the WC was rushed, possibly underfunded, and the Warren Commissioners were not given the chance to live up to their fine public reputations. Plus maybe he also has 'unanswered questions' about the whole thing. This is all sadly beating around the bush. The elephant in the room in most mainstream discussion is that the WC was a deliberate lie designed to cover things up, and that JFK was killed by forces that the WC later protected. Hmmph.
All that off my chest I gather that JM lives and works in Washington (i.e he worked at the Washington Post), so there are probably understandable reasons he can't go quite as far in print as some others. We should all corner him in a pub and get some beers into him and get him talking sometime.
I read Talbot's Dulles book in ebook form, thought it was very good. I wish every writer on the assassination would read it and a few of the other updated texts so they're not all starting from scratch when they write their own books.
Posts: 28
Threads: 0
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Feb 2016
Anthony, I could be mistaken but I thought JM is based in Fla? (Hopefully not Mar-A-Lago
)
Look, I agree with your take that Morley is wishy-washy. But I still feel that his book had some merit in some of the documentary evidence he provided concerning Angleton and Oswald. Does he maddeningly frustrate his readers by not taking a firmer stance? Absolutely! But even while trying to have it both ways he still gave me, just a layman, some nuggets of knowledge. That's why I thought his book was worthwhile. And I think his battles in the courts to free up what the powers that be want to keep hidden is commendable. He'd probably never admit it, but I think with one eye he's probably concerned and watching out for his future employment also.
I was trying to be kind. But yes, it would be nice if he grew a pair and came out more forcefully about where the evidence leads him.
Posts: 471
Threads: 4
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Jan 2018
As for my two cents worth about Angleton and the assassination: the most noteworthy mention of a possible role of Angleton in the assassination can be found the the book "Self-Destruct" by Judge Robert Morris.
Writing in 1979, Morris was looking back and putting in perspective all the spy-type events from WWII to 1979. He correctly identified the fact that in 1979 and after, terrorism would become the new bogeyman which would replace anti-Communism as the justfication for US militarism.
Significantly, Morris lists off the AMERICAN SECURITY COUNCIL (ASC) as his pantheon of true patriots of the 1960's. In the list, two names stick out (1) Robert Anderson (Ike's Treasury Secretary) and (2) James Angleton. Angleton is unusual in that there weren't any other CIA people on Morris' list, (as I recall).
In my judgment, in the LBJ phone calls following the assassination, Robert Anderson sticks out as having a proprietary attitude regarding the events of the assassination. In other words, Anderson was talking to LBJ in a tone whereby he was trying to self-aggrandize. To me, he implied that he either knew all about the assassination or even had some very minor role which he was trying to blow up into something important. Of course, very soon after this, Anderson went down in disgrace due to extreme alcoholism and financial misdeeds. So he was a shaky, loose canon.
Thus, because Morris lists Anderson, Angelton and others, it seemed to me that he was covertly giving a nod to those people he knew had supported the assassination in some way. But he was listing only minor supporting characters. Judge Morris obviously couldn't credit major players like Guy Banister, David Ferrie, Clay Shaw, Charles and Earl Cabell, etc. etc.
I realize that this is a very, very weak connection of Angleton to the assassination, but it's the only connection whatever that I have come across relating to Angleton specifically regarding the assassination.
James Lateer
Posts: 2,665
Threads: 378
Likes Received: 3 in 2 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Dec 2010
Are you serious?
What about the Hunt memorandum that Angleton called up Trento about and showed to him in 1978?
Posts: 471
Threads: 4
Likes Received: 0 in 0 posts
Likes Given: 0
Joined: Jan 2018
I wonder if anyone has a link to the actual memo involving Hunt, Trento and Angleton which Mr. Di Eugenio emphasizes? I found a discussion on Spartacus of the lawsuit and a listing of Trentos books, but not the memo itself.
Obviously, Angleton being who he was, he must have been in some position relative to the assassination. At minimun he heard about it in advance. But if his latest biographer has nothing directly involving Angleton in the assassination, then maybe we will have to await the ultimate release of the JFK files to shed light.
The thing I like about the mention of Angleton relative to the American Security Council in the book by Judge Morris (called Self-Destruct) is that Morris was not in the CIA and was mentioning Angleton in his role in the American Security Council. Hence this was private citizen discussing private citizen. I always look for corroboration of material about CIA figures from information OUTSIDE the CIA or the intel community.
James Lateer
