The Chicago Plot: A Hypothesis

[Vasilios Vazakas]

i do apologize for this Charles, it was my fault. should i a start a new thread and copy the messages there?

[Charles Drago]

Apology unnecessary.

Start a new thread, and feel free to shape it as you see fit.

I have no problems with your contributions and the valuable insights they contain; my only objection is that they are misplaced here.

Charles

[Jim DiEugenio]

This is a new PDF of the famous Edwin Black article that stared it all. If oen reads it thoroughly I don' t know how one can say it was a rehearsal.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/49710299/The-C...o-Kill-JFK

BTW,that the HSCA and Lamar Waldron buried this essay is a damn disgrace.

[Charles Drago]

This is a new PDF of the famous Edwin Black article that stared it all. If oen reads it thoroughly I don' t know how one can say it was a rehearsal.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/49710299/The-C...o-Kill-JFK

BTW,that the HSCA and Lamar Waldron buried this essay is a damn disgrace.

Jim,

Just so we're clear: I never argued that the Chicago "plot" was a "rehearsal" for anything.

I do argue that, like most intel ops, Chicago had two purposes: Stir cognitive dissonance pre- and post-Dallas as part of the doppelganger gambit, and serve as the red herring to which any leaks of its superficial mirror image in Dallas could be attributed -- thus leading to ultimately fatal security stand-downs, including JFK noting that there was nothing to fear in Texas because "the Secret Service has taken care of it."

"It" being Chicago.

Given the scores of doppelganger iterations that permeate the meta-plot, how could there not be a "double" of the plot itself?

If I'm not mistaken, you enjoy a working and perhaps even cordial relationship with Abraham Bolden. Do you think you might ask him to comment on my thesis?

If you wish, I can offer a fully fleshed out version for his/your review.

Many thanks,

CD

[Jim DiEugenio]

Charles, I really wish you would reread Black's excellent article.

When you do something like put the word plot in quotes, then you are saying that it was some kind of fake out. Which I really don't think you can do, not with all the material that Black unearthed--and this is many years later.

Now Bill Kelly has done some really good work to update this--linking it to Homer Echeverria. I used to discard the Echeverria story--but that is before i read Black's fine essay. If Bill is right about this then you literally have every piece in place for an assassination plot: the Cuban exiles, the Mob, and the CIA. You have the assassins there, plus the patsy, and the perfect site. A guy code named "Lee" stopped it all.

Now you say that somehow the replica aspect was meant to somehow confuse Dallas. But how? CHicago was covered up almost immediately. The Oswald warning about Dallas--through the Walter telex, is completely separated from his call to the FBI about Chicago. And to assume that somehow JFK was referring to CHicago when he used the word 'it", I mean talk about a stretch! I mean what is the evidence for that?

I urge you and everyone else to reread this piece.

[Albert Doyle]

To me the question comes down to whether the sniper rifles were left out on the bed deliberately or not. I'd like to say there's a noticeable difference in the protection of the shooters between Chicago and Dallas where the Dallas operation was run much more tightly - making it more likely Chicago was a false plan. However it appears the Dallas plot was also run pretty loosely with rifles seen all over and men seen in windows. What this comes down to is Dallas having a much more receptive right-wing police department.

What strikes me the most from Black's article is how Thomas Arthur Vallee didn't seem to be that tight an operator when interviewed in Houston. What jumps out at me there is if Vallee was a deep operator he never would have made such a foolish mistake as allowing Black to walk in and interview him. This makes it MUCH more likely Vallee was being set-up as a patsy and manipulated at a deep level. This is very important towards the Dallas plot because it has direct affect on Lee Harvey Oswald and his status. The fact Vallee is so obviously manipulatable by authorities and willing to participate in the covert activities Black suggested tells you a lot. It tells you he was used and was a sought-out and willing patsy like Oswald.

It's interesting to see that in 1975 Black hadn't fully developed that Groth and Shurla were CIA liaison Chicago police officers deliberately put on the case.

I'm going to venture Chicago was a real plot with Dallas as a back-up. Charles makes the mistake of calling people to consider the multi-faceted dimensions and complexity of CIA plots but then not considering himself that Chicago could have been a contingent plan and real just in case Oswald got caught. Hedging their bets in advance so to speak. What Charles fails to consider is that the Chicago plot could have been both a real and faked plot at the same time. Those men think like gods, don't make the mistake of failing to realize they act like them too.

Kennedy had to be aware of Chicago because he canceled his trip because of it. What is most outstanding about this is Black cracked this thing wide open in 1975. What that tells you is these men have such pervasive evil control of America that you can crack their plots in public and it makes no difference. The litmus test of democracy in this country has come up like Oswald's paraffin test - negative.

[Charles Drago]

Jim,

Your conclusions are fatally flawed.

Charles, I really wish you would reread Black's excellent article.

I have read the entire article at least four times -- not counting skim-throughs in search of specific information. You imply that multiple readings of what we agree is an excellent and even courageous piece of investigative journalism will lead honest, informed, open-minded readers to but single conclusion: yours.

You are wrong.

When you do something like put the word plot in quotes, then you are saying that it was some kind of fake out. Which I really don't think you can do, not with all the material that Black unearthed--and this is many years later.

Can do. Have done.

For me, the material unearthed by Black supports one sound hypothesis only: The Chicago "plot" was intended not to result in the murder of JFK in the Windy City, but rather to provide security -- in the forms of doppelganger-driven cognitive dissonance among pre- and post-Dallas hit investigators and plausible arguments for dismissal of pre-hit Dallas-related intel as Chicago-related intel.

So yes, I write again: the Chicago "plot."

The hypothesis of Chicago as a direct threat breaks down not only because of the downright stupid exposure of the rifles (and the whole bit about following the hitters into an alley REEKS of dramatic disinformation!), but also because of the sheer inefficiency of Vallee as a patsy.

LHO was the "perfect" patsy because of the insulation his deep black history provided -- among other reasons. Vallee was a two-dimensional doppelganger, and no honest post-Chicago assassination investigator possibly could have been convinced to cease and desist based upon Vallee-related national security concerns.

Now Bill Kelly has done some really good work to update this--linking it to Homer Echeverria. I used to discard the Echeverria story--but that is before i read Black's fine essay. If Bill is right about this then you literally have every piece in place for an assassination plot: the Cuban exiles, the Mob, and the CIA. You have the assassins there, plus the patsy, and the perfect site. A guy code named "Lee" stopped it all.

No.

The involvement of Echeverria tells us nothing more or less about the Chicago "plot" than the "presence" of the Mob and the CIA and "a guy code named 'Lee'" tell us: facilitators, witting and/or unwitting/ who mirrored the Dallas facilitators, were thrown into the Chicago mix in order to heighten its similarities to the real deal coming down in Dallas.

Now you say that somehow the replica aspect was meant to somehow confuse Dallas. But how? CHicago was covered up almost immediately. The Oswald warning about Dallas--through the Walter telex, is completely separated from his call to the FBI about Chicago.

You're eliminating interpretations of "Oswald's" calls except the one that supports your hypothesis -- which is of course your right as an advocate for a certain position. I do the same thing in this instance.

And to assume that somehow JFK was referring to CHicago when he used the word 'it", I mean talk about a stretch! I mean what is the evidence for that?

JFK's death in Dallas -- a plot which most assuredly wasn't "taken care of" is strong circumstantial evidence.

I urge you and everyone else to reread this piece.

As I urge you to reread it with my hypothesis and its defenses in mind.

Happy Easter,

CD

[Jim DiEugenio]

How you can say that Vallee was an ineffectual patsy truly escapes me. In one sense, he is even better than Oswald, because he really did have a recurring mental problem to his psyche that Oswald did not. Further, Oswald had his double agent aspect that he could always try to expose as his ace card. Which would have fouled up any trial. Vallee did not.

I don't know what you mean about stupid errors. Are you going to say there were no stupid errors in Dallas? There were many of them. Which is why 1.) Oswald had to be killed 2.) There had to be a WC and 3.) THere were books by Lane, Meagher etc.

I also do not agree about Echeverria being just a "location asset". There is evidence that he was part of an assassination plot. It was in the HSCA and the ARRB declassified some of it. The FBi clearly let him off the hook.

And no I did not "spin" anything about the Oswald warnings. That is the way they happened. Do you have further info that alters that?

[Bill Kelly]

Hi,

Sorry I've been MIA for the past month or so, but I will be back in action soon after taking care of some family business.

Thanks to Jim DiEugenio for calling attention to some of my research and I have an article on the Real Dizinformation Agents @ Dealey Plaza for him that I hope to get out soon.

Also, although the Hawaii conference was cancelled, some people were there, and I'd like to hear from anyone who was to learn if anything at all happened.

Thanks,

Bill Kelly
JFKCountercoup.blogspot.com

Charles, I really wish you would reread Black's excellent article.

When you do something like put the word plot in quotes, then you are saying that it was some kind of fake out. Which I really don't think you can do, not with all the material that Black unearthed--and this is many years later.

Now Bill Kelly has done some really good work to update this--linking it to Homer Echeverria. I used to discard the Echeverria story--but that is before i read Black's fine essay. If Bill is right about this then you literally have every piece in place for an assassination plot: the Cuban exiles, the Mob, and the CIA. You have the assassins there, plus the patsy, and the perfect site. A guy code named "Lee" stopped it all.

Now you say that somehow the replica aspect was meant to somehow confuse Dallas. But how? CHicago was covered up almost immediately. The Oswald warning about Dallas--through the Walter telex, is completely separated from his call to the FBI about Chicago. And to assume that somehow JFK was referring to CHicago when he used the word 'it", I mean talk about a stretch! I mean what is the evidence for that?

I urge you and everyone else to reread this piece.

[Charles Drago]

My latest responses in red'

How you can say that Vallee was an ineffectual patsy truly escapes me. In one sense, he is even better than Oswald, because he really did have a recurring mental problem to his psyche that Oswald did not. Further, Oswald had his double agent aspect that he could always try to expose as his ace card. Which would have fouled up any trial. Vallee did not.

In terms of patsy value, Vallee's "nut" defense isn't even in the same sport as LHO's connections to deep political structures. In other words, those very factors that you interpret as LHO's get-out-of-jail-free blackmail cards in the aggregate made him the ideal LN -- a man so deeply enmeshed in the secret world that all would-be honest investigators could be easily convinced to back off and go with the official story unless they wanted to uncover operations that, if made public, could threaten national security.

I don't know what you mean about stupid errors. Are you going to say there were no stupid errors in Dallas? There were many of them. Which is why 1.) Oswald had to be killed 2.) There had to be a WC and 3.) THere were books by Lane, Meagher etc.

[COLOR="red"]Yes, Jim, there were errors in Dallas -- but NONE were fatal to the plot, ALL were managed, and SOME, I submit, were not "errors" at all, but rather provocations staged to confuse and misdirect honest observers and investigators.

And while I respect your hypotheses that the murder of LHO, the creation of the WC, and first generation critics' books were the unavoidable consequences of those "errors," I do not endorse them.

I'm especially distressed by the implication of the latter: Not only would the honorable, brilliant, courageous critics have arisen even after a flawless Dallas operation, they would have been encouraged by assassination sponsors who had two main goals: Kill JFK and MAINTAIN THE PEOPLE'S SENSE OF POWERLESSNESS BORN OF THE (FLAWED) REALIZATION THAT WE CAN NEVER REALLY [B]KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THE POWERS-THAT-BE[/B].[/COLOR]

I also do not agree about Echeverria being just a "location asset". There is evidence that he was part of an assassination plot. It was in the HSCA and the ARRB declassified some of it. The FBi clearly let him off the hook.

But Jim, is it not equally reasonable -- at least -- to conclude that Echeverria may have been duped to believe that Chicago was real, and that, decades later, the confusion would be allowed to continue as part of the larger effort to mislead and misdirect investigators?[/COLOR]

And no I did not "spin" anything about the Oswald warnings. That is the way they happened. Do you have further info that alters that?

[COLOR="red"]Can we be certain that all of "Oswald's" warnings originated with him?

But let's assume that they did. LHO's warnings would have described a plot which. in its superficial contours, described Dallas AND Chicago!

OK, let's continue to assume that LHO was reporting on Dallas -- but once Chicago was intentionally blown, all of those reports could have been written off as pertaining to the foiled Chicago effort. Get it?[/COLOR]