Salandria-Schotz-Douglass material

[Jim DiEugenio]

Charles:

With all due respect, you have to do better than that.

[Charles Drago]

Jim,

On multiple occasions I have proffered my best guess as to the structure of the JFK plot. I would submit that all who would engage in a "howdunit/whodunit/whydunit" exercise are obliged to share their respective conspiracy structure hypotheses prior to attempting to fill in those blanks.

So too must they define their terms.

I should hope that you would be as dissatisfied with Mr. Schotz's "US military intelligence apparatus" construction as you are with my "the lie." For me the former floats in a foggy middle distance absent context and specifics. For me it is a blatant -- if unintentional -- misidentification of Facilitators as Sponsors.

Evica has come closest to identifying high ranking Facilitators and Sponsors respectively with his "treasonous cabal of intelligence officers whose masters were above Cold War differences."

Yet again for me, even those who George Michael might have identified as Sponsors have become subservient Facilitators to what now must be capitalized as The Lie that their ancestors created and that they are born and sworn to perpetuate.

The Lie is alive and slouching.

And the Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Illuminati ... you name 'em ... they tremble in their den at its approach.

Thanks,

Charles

[Jim DiEugenio]

Charles:

I have talked to Marty about this so I know specifically what he means. He is talking about a high level CIA/Pentagon plot in which Allen DUlles is the major figure.

This is acceptable to many people today.

When you say something about the Rothschilds, Rockefellers, Illuminati, and then follow that up with a quote form an Oliver Stone movie, I mean I don't know what you mean or who you are specifically referring to. It comes off as both nebulous and pretentious.

Evica gave a lot of weight to the GIbson book Battling Wall Street. Which was a game changer for many. But when you add in "the lie", and the Rothschilds an d Illumanti this confuses things.

[Charles Drago]

Jim,

It is out of the utmost respect for your dedication to truth and justice that I choose to try to explain myself further.

First things first: The quote is bastardized from Patton; in the film's dramatization of a historical event, it is spoken by the Sultan of Morocco as he bestows upon the American general the Order of Ouissam Alaouite in recognition of the latter's taking of Casablanca in just four days. The actual citation was read in French: "Les Lions dans leurs tanières tremblent en le voyant approcher." It translates as, "The lions in their dens tremble at his approach."

On to your other points:

1. I wholly agree that "high level CIA and Pentagon" officers were involved in the JFK conspiracy at the highest Facilitator level. But absent his presentation (to my knowledge) of a cogent conspiracy model, Schotz leaves me to infer that he assigns Sponsor status to this group. Such an elevation is inconsistent with my view of the world in general and the conspiracy in particular. Accordingly, it is wholly unacceptable to me.

2. My "Rockefellers, Rothschilds, Illuminati ... " reference was crafted with poetic license and more than a soupçon of sarcasm. You surely are at liberty to read it as "pretentious," as I am at liberty to assure you that in point of fact it was not made in anything resembling such a spirit. "Nebulous," however, is spot-on.

3. Evica's interest in Gibson's work is undeniable, and to a significant degree it mirrors my own. But if we are to investigate "Wall Street" with the thought that the conspiracy's sponsors are to be found in highest finance, then we must accept that financial power at the level we're looking at is supra-national in nature and scope. I do not absolve "America," but I do conclude that the JFK hit's Sponsors long ago had abandoned nation-centered identification and patriotism. Indeed, patriotism and the xenophobia it generates are but tools used by a powerful minority to keep the Great Unwashed confused and at each others' throats.

4. For me, The Lie is ancient and chameleon-like. During the Cold War it manifested in the East v. West/Capitalism v. Communism construct. Today, as it has been in the distant past, The Lie presents as the so-called Clash of Civilizations. As always it is predicated on and manipulative of biology and psychology: bi-polar systems, false either/or choices ... "You're either with us or with the terrorists."

Further, when I identify The Lie as the true Sponsor of the JFK conspiracy, I can't help but think of the Terminator film series (how's that for a step back from pretention!): Skynet became conscious.

And so the lie became The Lie -- a universal governing structure so entrenched and virtually omnipotent that not even its most powerful Facilitators can fight it.
_____________________

Again, I would ask all committed JFK researchers to share with our community their respective conspiracy models. To do so would be to limit the "confusion" that you, Jim, properly condemn.

Charles

[Vasilios Vazakas]

I believe most of the respected researchers do not wish to name the sponsors to avoid falling in the trap of being ridiculed and becoming pray of the true sponsors. So they are reluctant to call them by name and they stick to the facilitators level. After all the good work they have done we can say that at the facilitators level we have: Allen Dulles, James Jesus Angleton, Curtis LeMay and others from the Pentagon, C.D. Jackson, Henry and Clare Luce, LBJ possibly during the cover up, Helms, Phillips E.H Hunt and Lucien Conein and the Paines. I am not convinced that Lansdale and Wlliam Harvey were involved in it.
The Lansky syndicate and Ruby were responsible for killing Oswald either because they were part of the plot or because they wanted to silence him regarding anti-Castro assassination plots.
I would name H.L.Hunt, Jim Braden, Lawrence Myers and the Mafia Cabana meeting as false sponsors, i don't think the shooters were members of the Mafia or Cuban exiles, but i would agree with Charles on the far east connection, Laos and Vietnam.
The best books regarding the true sponsors are Donald Gibson's "Battling Wall Street and The Kennedy assassination cover-up".
When we are talking about supra-national sponsors my mind would go to people like the Rockefellers, the Rothschilds, the Oppenheimers etc., but it will be a guess no concrete evidence to back it up.

[Charles Drago]

Thank you, Vasilios, for what to me is a well-reasoned response/argument. I'll comment now on specific elements of your work.

I believe most of the respected researchers do not wish to name the sponsors to avoid falling in the trap of being ridiculed and becoming pray of the true sponsors.

I'm not ready to share this conclusion. I think the overwhelming majority of researchers have named Sponsors -- but the overwhelming minority have shared their conspiracy models. It is difficult for one to differentiate among Mechanics, Facilitators, and Sponsors if one does not work from a conspiracy model that incorporates those categories.

And while I am aware of researchers who have died under -- for the lack of a more precise term -- suspicious circumstances, I think it's just as likely that, if they were hit, the goals were to A) lend false significance to their work and thus mislead the rest of us, and B) to induce what is commonly referred to as a "chilling effect" on the rest of us.

[W]e can say that at the facilitators level we have: Allen Dulles, James Jesus Angleton, Curtis LeMay and others from the Pentagon, C.D. Jackson, Henry and Clare Luce, LBJ possibly during the cover up, Helms, Phillips E.H Hunt and Lucien Conein and the Paines. I am not convinced that Lansdale and Wlliam Harvey were involved in it.

General agreement here. But please keep in mind that the Facilitator level is A) sub-divided, and B) the fertile ground from which False Sponsors are harvested.

As for Lansdale and Harvey, for me the jury remains out. If forced to make a decision, I'd vote for inclusion at the Facilitator level. But don't forget, then as now, American intelligence agencies were factionalized along ideological lines. These people were quite capable of eating their own, and EGL and WKH were ideally suited to be cast in melodramatic Facilitator roles.

The Lansky syndicate and Ruby were responsible for killing Oswald either because they were part of the plot or because they wanted to silence him regarding anti-Castro assassination plots.

Or Ruby was sent in by Facilitators unrelated to Lansky so as to implicate Lansky in particular and OC in general as False Sponsors.

I would name H.L.Hunt, Jim Braden, Lawrence Myers and the Mafia Cabana meeting as false sponsors[.]

Be careful here. Hunt clearly has had bestowed upon him Sponsor status. I'm not ready either to absolve or indict him for such a role. But Braden, Myers, and other you reference never have been identified as Sponsors.

I don't think the shooters were members of the Mafia or Cuban exiles, but i would agree with Charles on the far east connection, Laos and Vietnam.

For the record: While I agree that the shooters given the responsibility to make the kill were the best hunters of humans on the planet AND that individuals linked to OC and the Cuban exile community have been falsely accused of participating on the Mechanic level, I'm not prepared to indict the Pakse Base team as the actual shooters. That being noted, I reiterate that an entity of the sort epitomized by the Pakse team is most likely to have done the fatal and non-fatal shooting.

The best books regarding the true sponsors are Donald Gibson's "Battling Wall Street and The Kennedy assassination cover-up".

Perhaps. I'd refer you to The Secret History of the CIA, in which Joseph Trento inadvertantly (my interpretation) provides evidence for supra-national alliances among ostensibly opposing intelligence agencies and officers. While this goes directly to the Facilitator level, it helps sharpen our focus as we grind our way through possible Sponsors. So too does Trento's investigation of John Paisley in Widows direct our attention to these supra-national forces.

When we are talking about supra-national sponsors my mind would go to people like the Rockefellers, the Rothschilds, the Oppenheimers etc., but it will be a guess no concrete evidence to back it up.

Try Thy Will Be Done: Nelson Rockefeller, Evangelism, And the Conquest of the Amazon in the Age of Oil by Gerard Colby with Charlotte Dennet. It will provide great insight into the Rockefeller caste.

[Vasilios Vazakas]

Thank you, Vasilios, for what to me is a well-reasoned response/argument. I'll comment now on specific elements of your work.

[W]e can say that at the facilitators level we have: Allen Dulles, James Jesus Angleton, Curtis LeMay and others from the Pentagon, C.D. Jackson, Henry and Clare Luce, LBJ possibly during the cover up, Helms, Phillips E.H Hunt and Lucien Conein and the Paines. I am not convinced that Lansdale and Wlliam Harvey were involved in it.

General agreement here. But please keep in mind that the Facilitator level is A) sub-divided, and B) the fertile ground from which False Sponsors are harvested.

As for Lansdale and Harvey, for me the jury remains out. If forced to make a decision, I'd vote for inclusion at the Facilitator level. But don't forget, then as now, American intelligence agencies were factionalized along ideological lines. These people were quite capable of eating their own, and EGL and WKH were ideally suited to be cast in melodramatic Facilitator roles.
Lansdale was a Kennedy favourite, their personal choice to lead Mongoose and their personal choice to be appointed Ambassador to Vietnam. Initially Lansdale was against the Vietnam war and he was in conflict with Maxwell Taylor and LeMay. I wonder if a false implication in the Dealey Plaza events was a way to force him to change attitude.
William Harvey hated the Kennedys but he was out of the scene in Rome. He definitely met with Rosselli under the QJWIN, ZRRIFLE operation in an effort to assassinate Castro and Helms knew. Angleton learned of his meetings with Rosselli so it would have been easy to blame him since the Mexico charade with Kostikov would have indicated a ZRRIFLE operation to blame it on the Russians and also lead to Corsicans. Harvey was never a member of the elite and he disliked the Yale types.
I have not mentioned Morales just because Lamar Waldron names him as his major suspect and this and only this makes me wonder.

The Lansky syndicate and Ruby were responsible for killing Oswald either because they were part of the plot or because they wanted to silence him regarding anti-Castro assassination plots.

Or Ruby was sent in by Facilitators unrelated to Lansky so as to implicate Lansky in particular and OC in general as False Sponsors.

A lot of researchers accuse Rosselli. If we accept this he will lead us back to the Lansky syndicate. Lansky is also connected to the Far east and Vietnam due to his involvement in the drug triangle, his laundering banks in Miami and the Bahamas and their connections to Paul Helliwell. We also have Ruby's meetings and phone calls with McWillie and Al Gruber.[/FONT]


Be careful here. Hunt clearly has had bestowed upon him Sponsor status. I'm not ready either to absolve or indict him for such a role. But Braden, Myers, and other you reference never have been identified as Sponsors.
My mistake. Braden, Myers and Ruby have been named as part of the facilitator/mechanics model. It seems stupid for all these people to be involved in the assassination, meet the night before at the Cabana hotel, having Ruby and Braden visit Hunt offices, Braden to be arrested at the crime scene and then implicate H.L.Hunt. It seems too simple too easy too gullible.

The best books regarding the true sponsors are Donald Gibson's "Battling Wall Street and The Kennedy assassination cover-up".

Perhaps. I'd refer you to The Secret History of the CIA, in which Joseph Trento inadvertantly (my interpretation) provides evidence for supra-national alliances among ostensibly opposing intelligence agencies and officers. While this goes directly to the Facilitator level, it helps sharpen our focus as we grind our way through possible Sponsors. So too does Trento's investigation of John Paisley in Widows direct our attention to these supra-national forces.
I ll buy the book in the future.[/FONT]

When we are talking about supra-national sponsors my mind would go to people like the Rockefellers, the Rothschilds, the Oppenheimers etc., but it will be a guess no concrete evidence to back it up.

Try Thy Will Be Done: Nelson Rockefeller, Evangelism, And the Conquest of the Amazon in the Age of Oil by Gerard Colby with Charlotte Dennet. It will provide great insight into the Rockefeller caste.

I am sure the Rockefeller interests in Latin American were similar to their interests in South East Asia regarding oil, minerals and other resources.

[Charles Drago]

Again, you present valuable insights. I'll respond to your in-red material.

Lansdale was a Kennedy favourite, their personal choice to lead Mongoose and their personal choice to be appointed Ambassador to Vietnam. Initially Lansdale was against the Vietnam war and he was in conflict with Maxwell Taylor and LeMay. I wonder if a false implication in the Dealey Plaza events was a way to force him to change attitude.

Understand, Vasilios, that often the fatal blow is struck from the closest range.

Ask Julius Caesar.

To the extent of my ability to know and judge, there is not a shard of evidence to support the hypothesis that an effort to change Lansdale's "attitude" on Vietnam was one of the assassination operation's objectives. But there is a chance -- slight, but nonetheless real -- that Lansdale was set up as a false Facilitator for any number of reasons. Such a possibility, I'd submit, is new to my thinking, and I thank you for suggesting it. It's a tough sell, but I'll listen to the pitch.

William Harvey hated the Kennedys but he was out of the scene in Rome. He definitely met with Rosselli under the QJWIN, ZRRIFLE operation in an effort to assassinate Castro and Helms knew. Angleton learned of his meetings with Rosselli so it would have been easy to blame him since the Mexico charade with Kostikov would have indicated a ZRRIFLE operation to blame it on the Russians and also lead to Corsicans. Harvey was never a member of the elite and he disliked the Yale types.

Harvey's Rome posting was not sufficient to keep him "out of the scene." See Noel Twyman's Bloody Treason, among other sources, for research on Harvey's whereabouts during critical pre-assassination periods. You may be shocked. Besides which, a European address provided cover. And it facilitated access to Continent-based Facilitators and/or Mechanics -- real and/or false. Finally, remember that all roads lead to Rome.

A false lead to Corsicans, by the way, might have been concocted and/or managed by a Harvey knowingly involved in the conspiracy.

As for Harvey being disaffected by the Ivy Leaguers, I'd remind you that, in some instances, the enemy of my enemy becomes my friend.

I must again commend you for challenging some of the JFK research community's most widely held conclusions. Could Harvey, like Lansdale, have been patsyed? Absolutely. Were they? I think not, but you can bet that I'll be challenging my own conclusions regarding their culpability in the assassination.

I have not mentioned Morales just because Lamar Waldron names him as his major suspect and this and only this makes me wonder.

Your decision to eschew mention of Morales because of your quite on-target suspicion of Waldron's deep agenda would be viewed by those who ghost-wrote, so to speak, Waldron's books as a significant victory.

Remember that truth is the essential ingredient of disinformation. Every claim by the likes of Waldron or Posner must be scrutinized individually; such a process is the key to countering disinformation.

Morales was in it up to is ears.

A lot of researchers accuse Rosselli. If we accept this he will lead us back to the Lansky syndicate. Lansky is also connected to the Far east and Vietnam due to his involvement in the drug triangle, his laundering banks in Miami and the Bahamas and their connections to Paul Helliwell. We also have Ruby's meetings and phone calls with McWillie and Al Gruber.[/FONT]

For more on the Golden Triangle and its deep political implications, see The Great Heroin Coup, by Henrik Kreuger. Tough to find, but worth the effort.

As for Lansky in particular and OC in general: Do you conclude that he/they are Facilitators, Sponsors, and/or patsys?

My mistake. Braden, Myers and Ruby have been named as part of the facilitator/mechanics model. It seems stupid for all these people to be involved in the assassination, meet the night before at the Cabana hotel, having Ruby and Braden visit Hunt offices, Braden to be arrested at the crime scene and then implicate H.L.Hunt. It seems too simple too easy too gullible.

"Stupid ... easy ... gullible?" Hardly. It all worked.

[Phil Dragoo]

Charles


I have Noel Twyman, Bloody Treason, and I've been through it three timesit's like Google Earth: stop, zoom, ponder.


You observed above regarding Harvey:

1. Harvey's Rome posting was not sufficient to keep him "out of the scene." See Noel Twyman's Bloody Treason, among other sources, for research on Harvey's whereabouts during critical pre-assassination periods. You may be shocked. Besides which, a European address provided cover. And it facilitated access to Continent-based Facilitators and/or Mechanics -- real and/or false. Finally, remember that all roads lead to Rome.
   

I just spent an hour chasing the forty-five (45) index references to Harvey, Williammany delicious and inviting, and this pertinent, on page 432:


As reported earlier, while Harvey was presumed to be in Italy,* he surfaced at a meeting in Florida with Johnny Rosselli (Sam Giancana's man and liaison with Santo Trafficante). At that time Rosselli was assigned to the CIA JM/WAVE project as "Colonel Rosselli." Anthony Summers wrote in 1980: "Yet Harvey was still meeting with Rosselli, in the United States, as late as June 1963; and I have learned that he visited anti-Castro camps in Florida, at a time when he was theoretically already in Rome. According to new, unconfirmed information, initial approaches to hire assassins in Europe were made in Romesometime before the recruitment approaches were allegedly made to the Corsican Mafia in Marseilles." 1


*It is not clear that Harvey had gone to Italy before June 1963. The Inspector General's Report states that when Harvey met Rosselli in Washington in June 1963, he had by then closed his home in preparation for leaving the country. It is possible, however, that Harvey had gone to Rome, returned to Washington to close his home, and then gone back to Rome. (Inspector General's Report p. 53)


1 Anthony Summers, Conspiracy, p. 529


~


Twyman on p. 477 in a discussion of models suggests:


Also, if William Harvey were the planning genius of the JFK assassination, he could have been involved only to the extent of providing a conceptual plan, then fading out of the picture.


~


Harvey spent a week in Florida in April (Twyman notes the 23d as the official announcement of JFK's Dallas trip) and called interesting numbers. Table on p. 442 shows the list including Perrine, Florida, suggesting JM/WAVE.


Harvey's expense account on p. 441 shows a 1st class plane ticket from Chicago to MiamiTwyman wonders whether Giancana or a Hoffa associate were involved.


At a point in the narrative a helpful Scelso claims Harvey was a paranoid who could never plan such an operation. Scelso proves to be Whitten a CIA agent who disappears in Garbo-like fashion.


Picturing again the condescending Robert Kennedy dirtying his hands to transfer Harvey out of CONUS, then turning to a crusade against the very organized crime principals named in any discussion of the assassination.


Pushing back a tidal wave in order to address a leaking levee. Unspeakable.

[Vasilios Vazakas]

CH: To the extent of my ability to know and judge, there is not a shard of evidence to support the hypothesis that an effort to change Lansdale's "attitude" on Vietnam was one of the assassination operation's objectives.

V: I am not saying that it was an objective of the assassination, rather a by-product with respect to the 3 tramps photo where the man Prouty identified as Lansdale can be seen.

CH: See Noel Twyman's Bloody Treason, among other sources, for research on Harvey's whereabouts during critical pre-assassination periods.

V: Noel Twyman reports that Harvey was in Florida in June 1963 meeting with QJ/WIN for a ZR/RIFLE operation and calling Rosselli by phone. Since ZR/RIFLE and QJ/WIN were operations for assassinating world leaders and Rosselli was involved in Anti-Castro operation to murder the Cuban leader I would suspect that the purpose of his unofficial visit to Florida had to do with a plan to apply his ZR/RIFLE operation with the help of Rosselli to assassinate Castro.
Why leave tracks via an official operation (ZR/RIFLE) if he was planning to kill JFK?
Again the key is Angleton who learned of his meetings with Rosselli, an unofficial meeting that Helms had probably arranged.
In Bloody Treason we read about Ruby's phone calls between May and November. He certainly called various Mafia and Teamsters representatives, and Rosselli. Rosselli was a Las Vegas syndicate man, like Gruber and McWillie were, both Lansky men.
If we follow the same logic, and Ruby was calling Rosselli like Harvey did in order to kill Kennedy, then we conclude that Ruby was involved all along in a plot to kill the President.
We have some evidence to prove it, like Mercer seeing him in a truck at Dealey Plaza, his meetings at the Cabana hotel to mention a few.
We also have some evidence that he was another patsy like Yates' testimony that a man he picked up in his taxi mentioned of killing Kennedy and if he had visited the Carusel club.
The question is, was Ruby involved in a plot to kill Kennedy or he was forced to kill Oswald afterwards for other reasons.

CH: As for Lansky in particular and OC in general: Do you conclude that he/they are Facilitators, Sponsors, and/or patsys?
V: This is a difficult one. If Ruby was involved in a plot to kill JFK and he was calling Rosselli, Gruber and McWillie then we should conclude that Lansky was also involved. If Ruby was not involved then all of them might have been involved with Oswald in Anti-Castro operations unrelated to JFK.
On the other hand The Lansky syndicate and Trafficante had a business interest in South East Asia and specifically the Golden triangle of heroin. They had cooperated with Helliwell and JM/WAVE in laundering drug money, in Lansky casinos and Florida banks.
So in my mind, Lansky was either another patsy, or he was used by the Far-East CIA elements involved in the assignation to launder drug money that were used to facilitate the assassination. It would have been easier and safer than to use H.L.Hunt's money to finance it.

CH: Your decision to eschew mention of Morales because of your quite on-target suspicion of Waldron's deep agenda would be viewed by those who ghost-wrote, so to speak, Waldron's books as a significant victory.

Remember that truth is the essential ingredient of disinformation. Every claim by the likes of Waldron or Posner must be scrutinized individually; such a process is the key to countering disinformation.

Morales was in it up to is ears.

V: It would have been a significant victory for Waldron and his ghost writers if I had accepted that the Mafia and Morales killed JFK, but I don't.
Morales had bragged to his friends while drunk, so this is not an absolute proof that he was a part of the plot. If Morales was involved, what kind of hitmen would he have used? Cuban exiles, or Far East black ops?
Assuming that Lansdale, Morales and Harvey were all involved, would they all be necessary to design and execute the plot?

Regarding H.L.Hunt, I think he was a false sponsor. Where are the Hunts and the Murchisons today?