"What Happened to JFK--and Why it Matters Today"

[James H. Fetzer]

Peter wrote that there was "not enough" to back the IDs. The article states
that, "Morley and Talbot investigated this story, interviewing many family
members and associates of these three men, and concluded that the
identifications were mistaken." Those, however, are not the same position.

I am quite sure that Jefferson Morley and David Talbot, the author of the
book, BROTHERS, which I like very much, are honorable men. My point
is that they cannot accurately claim that Ayers and Smith are "mistaken"
unless the have established the identities of those they wrongly identified.

So if Brad and Wayne, for example, were "mistaken", then who were these
three persons? Campbell, Morales, and Joannides "look alikes"? How many
"family members" would implicate them in yet another assassination? In
order to conclude they were mistaken, it would be necessary to have IDed
them. To the best of my knowledge, that is a step that they did not take.

The claim that Gordon Campbell was dead by 1968 is fascinating by itself.
The CIA, of course, specializes in the fabrication of documents, records,
and fake IDs. A reason agents are required to maintain diaries is that it
enables the agency to create false records as alibis for their covert acts.

Bradley Ayers and Wayne Smith knew them personally and identified them
at the Ambassador. Take a look at the footage of them reviewing the tape
and their (very confident) identifications. Surely Brad is not going to be
wrong about a man he knew as well as his case officer, Gordon Campbell.

Facial images, I believe, are as conclusive as fingerprints, absent the use
of plastic surgery or of facial disguises. While "Joannades" appears to be
wearing a wig, I did not notice any signs that they were otherwise seeking
to distort their physical appearance. I think Brad and Wayne got it right!

I also agree with Jack. It is extremely rare for any of us to notice faces
that remind us of Jack Nicholson, Julia Roberts, George Clooney, or any of
a vast number of prominent public personalities with whom we are familiar.
That suggests to me that Charles is (atypically) barking up the wrong tree.

A statistical analysis of the kind he suggests, I believe, properly conducted,
would show that practically none of us looks enough like other persons as to
be mistaken for one another. That requires a special, highly unusual, effort
of the kind that was employed by using Oswald look-alikes in taking out JFK.

I am rather troubled by the apparent willingness to disregard photographic
identifications, such as those in Dealey Plaza. Based upon the evidence we
have available, I believe we have photos of Conein, Lansdale, Robertson,
Morales, Milteer, and several others in the record. I have no real doubt.

The thesis of the ubiquitousness of dopplegangers is a logical possibility, of
course, but our unique genes -- apart from the case of identical twins --
tends to differentiate our phenotypes as a function of our genotypes. And
when was the last time you thought you were dealing with identical twins?

Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2009 20:46:53 -0500 [10/24/2009 08:46:53 PM CST]
From: jfetzer@d.umn.edu
To: "Peter Dale Scott" <pdscottweb@hotmail.com>
Cc: jfetzer@d.umn.edu
Subject: RE: The JFK Assassination: New York Times Acknowledges CIA Deceptions

Peter,

I am looking at this and things are not adding up. For example, Gordon
Campbell, they understand, died on September 19, 1962. But he was Brad's
case officer, whom he obviously would have known well, and Brad served at
JM/WAVE from May 1993 to December 1994, after Campbell had allegedly died.

As for Morales, both Brad and Wayne Smith confirmed that the person in the
film appeared to be Morales. They were both quite definite, in my view,
where Brad tossing in body language (his way of moving) and Wayne Smith,
who appears to have known Morales very well, confirmed the identification.

The photo of the man who may be George Joannades appears to be wearing
a wig. I don't even think it's a close call. I can imagine many reasons
why people would want to deny that these guys were the trio under review,
but I can't think of a single serious reason for Brad or for Wayne to lie.

I am sure you will grant that they MIGHT be the parties we are discussing
and that the question is whether there is enough evidence here to drawn
an affirmative conclusion. I think this disproof is very sloppy, indeed,
and I am dismayed that it is being taken seriously. I am not impressed.

I am impressed, however, that William Colby observed that the CIA owned
every one of significance in the mainstream media. I am sure you think
that Jefferson Morley and David Talbot are impeccable sources. But, if
that's true, how could they have missed the Campbell death contradiction?

I am not happy with this. I think the Smith and Ayers' identifications
are the real deal and that having lots of others deny it is meaningless.
They don't mention (what I take to be) the obvious wig and they haven't
done enough to rule them out. You may forward this to them, if you like.

Jim

Quoting "Peter Dale Scott" <pdscottweb@hotmail.com>:

They are sophisticated journalists and interviewed Ayers along with many
others. The results were mixed but not favorable enough to back the IDs.
It seems clear that the third man Campbell was already dead by 1968.

All this is written up by them somewhere on the Web. And you can hear
a summary of what they found at http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.ph..._Episode_8

Peter