The Chicago Plot: A Hypothesis

[Albert Doyle]

There's some operating realities here that have to be confronted. If Oswald was exposed or killed they would have needed to carry out the operation somehow. Chicago would have suited that purpose no matter how much Dallas was set up as the Big Event.

The answer to all this is once Kennedy was killed, whether in Chicago or Dallas, the Commission would have dominated the evidence either way. The cover-up would have gone ahead whether Kennedy was killed in Chicago or Dallas. And the political rewards like Viet Nam would have also gone ahead just the same as well. Don't let the method distract you from the purpose.

[Charles Drago]

Wrong.

In other words, none of the particulars matter, JFK was being taken off the board in the November time frame, and all the work put into LHO was pointless to begin with: ANWD.

Any nut would do.

Utter balderdash!

[Phil Dragoo]

http://www.trineday.com/paypal_store/pro...nt-med.jpg


The creation of Oswald has been traced by Armstrong to the former's twelfth year.


No less than Angleton made Oswald his special project.


Phillips has been associated with the Mexico City aspect, so vital for the boogeyman that kills 40 million Americans before the first commercial break.


I submit that as the elegant and multidimensional cover linked above demonstrates, Oswald was the specific creation of a magnificent obsession.


The half-inch aluminum rod with its point to heaven and threaded base to hell does not create the lightning, but rather gives the enormous force a path to ground.


So it is with the knee-jerk reaction of the Warren hollow men and all who follow: Posner, Bugliosi, the Church Lady of the Confusatorium et cetera et cetera.


The Chicago balm anesthetized the surface so as to make the sting unexpected.


"The Secret Service has taken care of everything."


Vince Palamara has demonstrated this to be an iron-clad, irony-clad truth.

[Albert Doyle]

I think wise people would see that what I wrote doesn't necessarily conflict with the Chicago being a false diversion theory. You have to think on many levels, with many dimensions, as the plotters did.

The room full of mirrors is a delicate china shop. Take care when entering.

[Charles Drago]

Coming from the bull -- in more ways than one -- this is a side-splitter!

[Steve Franklin]

I speculate the "Lee" teletype was meant to get Oswald to cooperate at the Book Depository thinking he was a super secret important presidential security operative reporting on threats. The fact he had successfully stopped the Chicago plot gave him confidence that he was a genuine important secret service member. At this point Oswald was completely suckered. His importance in relation to the Chicago plot he now thinks he prevented is used to induce him to take orders without question. He then does what he's told at the Depository that day (Or wherever "Lee" was).

"Lee" was a common pseudonym at the time, stemming, I suspect, from William Burroughs' use of "William Lee." I personally received a call from a friend in the mid 60s using the name "William Lee." Burroughs also used a character in his novels called "Inspector J. Lee of the Nova Police." Other Lee pseudonyms may be found doing a search on "Lee pseudonym." They are fairly common and at least some of them derive from good old Robert E Lee of Civil War infamy.

So I really don't think you can draw any conclusions from the use of that particular name.

[Charles Drago]

I speculate the "Lee" teletype was meant to get Oswald to cooperate at the Book Depository thinking he was a super secret important presidential security operative reporting on threats. The fact he had successfully stopped the Chicago plot gave him confidence that he was a genuine important secret service member. At this point Oswald was completely suckered. His importance in relation to the Chicago plot he now thinks he prevented is used to induce him to take orders without question. He then does what he's told at the Depository that day (Or wherever "Lee" was).

"Lee" was a common pseudonym at the time, stemming, I suspect, from William Burroughs' use of "William Lee." I personally received a call from a friend in the mid 60s using the name "William Lee." Burroughs also used a character in his novels called "Inspector J. Lee of the Nova Police." Other Lee pseudonyms may be found doing a search on "Lee pseudonym." They are fairly common and at least some of them derive from good old Robert E Lee of Civil War infamy.

So I really don't think you can draw any conclusions from the use of that particular name.

Agreed.

Although I'm not adverse to the notion that the "Lee" ID was utilized by the planners of the Chicago faux "plot" to further confuse pre- and post-assassination investigators.

And while it is noted by certain spy novelists and pretenders that, upon occasion, a deep cover operative will use his or her true first/Christian name in the chosen nom du guerre so that a chance encounter with an old friend will not result in the cover being blown, in this instance it is more likely that the "Lee" in question -- if real -- was not born with that name.

As for the "speculation" noted above, it is based on an entirely unsubstantiated and wholly unlikely premise (that the Chicago "plot" was real on a literal level) and otherwise is embarrassingly sophomoric (now the Chicago "plot" was blown to get LHO to obey orders unquestioningly).

This stuff would get laughed out of every pitch meeting in Hollywood -- even with the Farrelly brothers ("There's Something About Oswald").

[Albert Doyle]

Coming from the bull -- in more ways than one -- this is a side-splitter!

The sword cuts both ways and those who insist that there was absolutely no other explanation for Chicago than a set-up ruse for Dallas have to also prove their point by equal standard. They have show that there was no way Oswald's cover would be blown or that he might somehow become incapable of carrying-out his role in Dallas. This thread was understood at one point, before it became an excuse for open hostility and abuse, to be 'hypothetical'. Well then those who boast such a superior position as to be infallible in their suggestion Chicago was absolutely and unquestionably a ruse and no other thing, well they have to show how it was impossible for Oswald to become ineligible. They can't do that because anything was possible. Oswald could have been exposed or even killed prior to Dallas. What would have happened then? Since we are still taking advantage of the invitation to hypothesis referred to by the thread's creator with enthusiasm earlier in the thread, what if Oswald was exposed? What if his double went too far with the commie stuff and got him fired from the Depository? There's a myriad of possibilities that can't be chuckled-off by any serious observer. What if Oswald was taken-out and Vallee's rifles weren't discovered?

To me it's more than obvious that the total corruption displayed by the Warren Commission and Johnson was certainly more than adequate to cover-up any Chicago assassination just as well as any Dallas plot. Sorry, I don't think the point has been answered. That is, that Chicago could have been both a ruse and stand-by alternative AND a real plot if needed. There's nothing to preclude this, no matter how much some may ridicule it.

[Albert Doyle]

"Lee" was a common pseudonym at the time, ...snip... So I really don't think you can draw any conclusions from the use of that particular name.

Well, if we take Judyth Vary Baker seriously the use of "Lee" might take on more verified meaning. It would also explain LHO being in the lunchroom thinking he was on the next assignment.

[Steve Franklin]

I speculate the "Lee" teletype was meant to get Oswald to cooperate at the Book Depository thinking he was a super secret important presidential security operative reporting on threats. The fact he had successfully stopped the Chicago plot gave him confidence that he was a genuine important secret service member. At this point Oswald was completely suckered. His importance in relation to the Chicago plot he now thinks he prevented is used to induce him to take orders without question. He then does what he's told at the Depository that day (Or wherever "Lee" was).

"Lee" was a common pseudonym at the time, stemming, I suspect, from William Burroughs' use of "William Lee." I personally received a call from a friend in the mid 60s using the name "William Lee." Burroughs also used a character in his novels called "Inspector J. Lee of the Nova Police." Other Lee pseudonyms may be found doing a search on "Lee pseudonym." They are fairly common and at least some of them derive from good old Robert E Lee of Civil War infamy.

So I really don't think you can draw any conclusions from the use of that particular name.

Agreed.

Although I'm not adverse to the notion that the "Lee" ID was utilized by the planners of the Chicago faux "plot" to further confuse pre- and post-assassination investigators.

And while it is noted by certain spy novelists and pretenders that, upon occasion, a deep cover operative will use his or her true first/Christian name in the chosen nom du guerre so that a chance encounter with an old friend will not result in the cover being blown, in this instance it is more likely that the "Lee" in question -- if real -- was not born with that name.

As for the "speculation" noted above, it is based on an entirely unsubstantiated and wholly unlikely premise (that the Chicago "plot" was real on a literal level) and otherwise is embarrassingly sophomoric (now the Chicago "plot" was blown to get LHO to obey orders unquestioningly).

This stuff would get laughed out of every pitch meeting in Hollywood -- even with the Farrelly brothers ("There's Something About Oswald").

I'm really not in a position to voice an opinion either way on this matter. My first encounter with the Chicago plot was a recent interview by Len Osanic with Abraham Bolden on Black Op Radio. If I had to pick a place to start research in this matter (a working hypothesis), I would postulate that the agencies involved were running a series of parallel operations in the belief that one or more of them would fail. I am not advocating this position. I am just saying that it's the place to start. Was Chicago amateurish? No doubt. Was it any more amateurish than Dallas? I think not. After all, trying to blame an assassination on someone on the wrong floor of a building is only one of number of absurdities that suggest lack of planning and on-the-fly changes of plans.