textfiles-politics/pythonCode/personTestingOutput/taking.xml

<xml><p><ent type='PERSON'>Pat</ent>h: ns-mx!hobbes.physics.uiowa.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!spool.mu.edu!olivea!sgigate!odin!ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com!dave
From: dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (dave "who can do? ratmandu!" ratcliffe)
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.conspiracy.<ent type='PERSON'>jfk</ent>,alt.conspiracy
Subject: Book Intro: "The Taking Of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3"
Summary: we were robbed of our capability of electing a president we wanted
Keywords: our electoral system was taken away from us starting in 1963
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Jun4.223739.17980@odin.corp.sgi.com</info>
Date: 4 Jun 92 22:37:39 GMT
Sender: news@odin.corp.sgi.com (Net News)
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Lines: 244
Xref: ns-mx alt.activism:27137 alt.conspiracy.<ent type='PERSON'>jfk</ent>:1493 alt.conspiracy:15372
Nntp-<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>ing-Host: ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com</p>

<p> This is an introduction to the book "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3,"
by <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, self-published by the author first in 1976,
revised in 1979, and updated in 1985. There will be eleven posts
following this one that will comprise the complete 1985 updated
third edition which I will be sending out with the permission of
the author. From the book's own introduction,</p>

<p> This book is not about assassinations, at least not
solely about assassinations. It is not just another book
about who murdered President <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> or how or why. It is a
book about power, about who really controls <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent>
States policies, especially foreign policies. It is a book
about the process of control through the manipulation of the
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n presidency and the presidential election process.
The objective of the book is to expose the clandestine,
secret, tricky methods and weapons used for this
manipulation, and to reveal the degree to which these have
been hidden from the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n public.
<ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> are only one of many techniques used in
this control process. They have been important only in the
sense that they are the ultimate method used in the control
of the election process. Viewed in this way, an
understanding of what happened to <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> or <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
becomes more important because it leads to a total
understanding of what has happened to our country, and to
us, since 1960. But the important thing to understand is
the control and the power and all of the clandestine methods
put together.</p>

<p> Two men named <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> have been involved in examining the
assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and its ensuing cover-up through the
years. <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, the former district attorney from
<ent type='GPE'>Philadelphia</ent>, and the fearless prosecutor of the <ent type='PERSON'>Yablonski</ent> murderers,
was named on October 4, 1976, by <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>person <ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Downing</ent>, to be
chief counsel of the just-then forming <ent type='ORG'><ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent></ent> on
<ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> was a pioneer in the field of
computers starting in the 1940s. His involvement studying the
photographic evidence in the assassination of President <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> goes
back to 1966:</p>

<p> From the day it happened I was skeptical about what was
being said on the TV and radio with regard to how the
president was killed. But when the "<ent type='ORG'>Warren Report</ent>" was
issued I became non-skeptical and accepted it pretty much as
it was. However, when the 26 volumes became available in
late 1964 and I started reading through them, I became
skeptical again because I could not find confirmation of
most of the so-called facts presented by the "<ent type='ORG'>Warren Report</ent>"
and purported to be backed up by the evidence in the 26
volumes, or any other evidence.
So I started work again, which caused me to need an index
to the 26 volumes. This in turn lead to my contacting
<ent type='PERSON'>Sylvia Meagher</ent> and asking where I could get her index having
discovered that she had created and published one that the
<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> hadn't seen fit to provide. She told me
where I could get it and suggested we have lunch. This was
in early November, 1966. She asked, "Why don't you do some
real research?" and I said, "like what?" and she responded
"how about the photographic evidence? A couple of people
have started work on it but haven't finished." I asked her
who and she said "<ent type='PERSON'>Harold Weisberg</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Ray Marcus</ent>." I
contacted both men and that's more or less how I stuck my
foot in the quicksand.
At the time the 26 volumes became available there were
only 8000 copies printed for the whole country. The time I
managed to get hold of one of these sets of all 26 volumes
was when I had moved to <ent type='ORG'>the University Club</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>New York City</ent>
and they had a complete set donated to <ent type='ORG'>the University Club</ent>
by non other than <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> J. McCloy. So I was using <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> J.
McCloy's personal copies for the beginnings of my research.
Now, the most important thing initially that happened in
finding the photos was discovering a number of photographs-
-films and still photos--that showed the sixth floor window
empty with nobody in it. This is what originally convinced
me that we had a different sort of conspiracy going than one
involving <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>, because if he wasn't in the
window--and nobody was in the window--then what happened?
Who fired the shots? And where from?
Confirming that the films and photographs I was looking
at were taken at the critical time the shots were fired, or
immediately before or after that, involved a lot of work:
work with plat maps, other photos, and other materials. I
got hold of a map made by the surveyor for Dealey Plaza (I
believe his name was <ent type='PERSON'>Clarence West</ent>) which was drawn to
scale, and <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Cutler</ent></ent> helped me draw onto it all of the
various things that happened including all the vehicles that
were moving through. And I managed to lay a set of films
end-to-end starting with one rounding the turn onto <ent type='GPE'>Houston</ent>
Street all the way through Dealey Plaza so I could track any
vehicle that was in view eighteenth-of-a-second by
eighteenth-of-a-second (<ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film speed) all the way
through Dealey Plaza. This enabled me to determine where
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> was at all times and where anybody else was that
showed up in any of the photos--particularly moving
pictures--at times <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> was at spot so-and-so or spot
such-and-such.
By doing this, with some triangulation, I was able to pin
down the exact timing of two particular sets of photos: a
film--the <ent type='ORG'>Hughes</ent> film--the last frame of which shows the
sixth floor window empty and ends 5.7 seconds ahead of the
first shot--the first shot being fired/tied down at frame
189 of the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film; and two photos taken after the
shots were fired by <ent type='PERSON'>Dillard</ent> and, believe it or not, an
intelligence man from <ent type='ORG'>Navy</ent> intelligence named <ent type='PERSON'>Powell</ent>.
Powell's and Dillard's photos were taken almost at the same
time, 3.5 seconds after the fatal and last shot (Z-313).
So that total time span is less than 17 seconds--if you
add up the 5.7 seconds after the end of the <ent type='ORG'>Hughes</ent> film,
plus the 6-plus seconds while the shots were being fired,
plus the 3.5 seconds before <ent type='PERSON'>Dillard</ent> and Powell's photos were
taken--of blank, non-coverage of that window and there's no
way <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> could have gotten into the window, aimed, fired
three shots, and gotten out of the window so you that
couldn't see him in 17 seconds.
But anyway there was another film taken by <ent type='PERSON'>Beverly Oliver</ent>
otherwise known as the Babushka lady that was confiscated by
News <ent type='GPE'>Orleans</ent> <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> agent Regis <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, and a still photograph
taken by <ent type='PERSON'>Norman Similas</ent>, confiscated by <ent type='ORG'>the Royal</ent> Canadian
Mounted Police from "<ent type='ORG'>Liberty</ent>" magazine (which was going to
publish the photo), who then turned the photo and its
negative over to the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>. I interviewed <ent type='GPE'>Similas</ent> and the
"<ent type='ORG'>Liberty</ent>" magazine editor both of whom told me they had
carefully examined the photograph and had seen no one in the
photograph appearing in the eastern-most sixth floor window,
which I calculated had been taken about half-way into the
17-second interval.
I made two attempts soon after the Freedom of Information
Act "viewing room" in the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> office in <ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>, D.C. was
created, to request to see the <ent type='GPE'>Similas</ent> photograph and
<ent type='PERSON'>Beverly Oliver</ent> film, but each time the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> person assigned
to me was not able to find these photograhs. But the
testimony of the people involved was good enough for me to
conclude that there was nobody in that window ever.
Once I got to that point I started looking for other
evidence that would show where the shots did come from and I
started finding all kinds of evidence of shots from the
grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>, and from the <ent type='ORG'>Dal Tex</ent> building, and from the
roof or the seventh floor of the western end of the
depository building--both photographs as well as witness
testimony--and that lead me to decide that this was a
powerful conspiracy which had involved at least four gunmen
firing shots. This then lead me to decide that I should
pursue the whole pattern of conspiracy including,
eventually, the <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent> assassination, the <ent type='PERSON'>Bobby</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> assassination and the <ent type='PERSON'>George Wallace</ent> attempt. And
that led to the book.
Through all of this, I just know I never would have
concluded that it was a powerful and well-planned conspiracy
if I had not determined that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> wasn't in that window--
nobody was in that window. That was the first key.
There's one other thing I'd like to point out. The title
of the book has more than just simple significance and it
shows up in all the chapters that link all these
assassinations and their cover-ups. Namely, our country has
been taken from us. Us being the citizens of <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent>
States as of 1963, and any time after that, by robbing us of
our capability of electing a president we wanted for at
least three, and more likely four, elections. One way of
taking the country away, is to control the elections and
that's really, at least part of the essence of the book.
It's close to what <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent> proposed in his original
bill. He wanted the <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> to look into all four of the
major assassinations--the fourth being the attempted
assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>George Wallace</ent>--and find the links between
and among them, and the cover-ups, and particularly the
links between the intelligence agencies and the cover-ups
that he was sure were involved in all of them. And if we
had had a committee which had done that, well then, we'd
have been a lot further along than we are 13 years later.</p>

<p> -- phone interview with the author, June 3, 1992</p>

<p> The assassination of President <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> was the most
photographed murder in history. Approximately 75 photographers took
a total of approximately 510 photographs, either before or during or
within an hour after the events in Dealey Plaza, and either there or
nearby or related to those events. The word "photograph" in this
context includes both still photos and movie sequences. The number
of frames in a movie sequence ranges from about 10 to about 500; and
in the count of 510 photographs, given above, the 10 to 500 frames of
a single movie sequence are counted just as *one* photograph. The
total number of frames is over 25000.
<ent type='ORG'>The <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> examined 26 photographs, about 5 percent of
the 510. The <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> examined about 50 photographs, or about 10 percent.
The most famous of all the photographs is the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film, which
had over 480 frames.
Many of the photographs were taken by professional photographers.
About 30 of the photographers were professionals who worked for
newspapers, television networks, and photographic agencies.
<ent type='ORG'>The <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> did not interview a single one of the
professional photographers, nor did <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> see any
complete, uncropped copies of their photographs.
Fifteen of these professionals were actually in the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
motorcade, no further than 6 car lengths behind the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> car.
Five of these photographers were television network cameramen. The
<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> looked at none of their photographs.
[.....]
Because the professionals used movie cameras of professional
quality, their films are exceedingly revealing and valuable as
primary evidence. <ent type='ORG'>The <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> looked at none of these
films.
During the past several years, I have collected copies of over 200
of these photographs, and I have looked at and taken notes of another
200 of these photographs, without obtaining copies of them. Some of
the remaining 100 have either not been found or have been locked up
or destroyed by the owners, who are fearful of the information they
show. Or they have been locked up by the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>, who have either placed
them in files inaccessible to the public or possibly have destroyed
them.</p>

<p> from, "The Assassination of President <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>:
<ent type='ORG'>The Application</ent> of Computers to the Photographic
Evidence" <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, "Computers and
Automation," May, 1970, p. 34.</p>

<p> for those interested, i have created a raw <ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>Script version of this
complete book which can simply be lp'd to a <ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>Script laser printer
for "prettified" hardcopy output. the combined size of the two
<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>Script files comprising the book is 1055954 bytes (1007753 and
48201 bytes for the main portion and appendix respectively).</p>

<p>--
daveus rattus </p>

<p> yer friendly neighborhood ratman</p>

<p> KOYAANISQATSI</p>

<p> ko.yaa.nis.qatsi (from <ent type='EVENT'>the Hopi Language</ent>) n. 1. crazy life. 2. life
in turmoil. 3. life out of balance. 4. life disintegrating.
5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.
<ent type='PERSON'>Pat</ent>h: ns-mx!uunet!olivea!sgigate!odin!ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com!dave
From: dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (dave "who can do? ratmandu!" ratcliffe)
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.<ent type='PERSON'>jfk</ent>
Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (1/11)
Summary: we were robbed of our capability of electing a president we wanted
Keywords: part 1 of 11: beginning thru chapter 3
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Jun5.142954.8850@odin.corp.sgi.com</info>
Date: 5 Jun 92 14:29:54 GMT
Sender: news@odin.corp.sgi.com (Net News)
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Lines: 1113
Xref: ns-mx alt.activism:27177 alt.conspiracy:15386 alt.conspiracy.<ent type='PERSON'>jfk</ent>:1506
Nntp-<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>ing-Host: ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com</p>

<p> THE TAKING OF AMERICA, 1-2-3</p>

<p> by <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>
Reprinted here with permission of the author. Permission to distribute
this book is freely given so long as no modification of the text is done.</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> 1976
Limited First Edition 1976
Revised Second Edition 1979
Updated Third Edition 1985</p>

<p> About the Author</p>

<p> Publisher's Word</p>

<p> Introduction</p>

<p> 1. The Overview and the 1976 <ent type='ORG'>Elect</ent>ion</p>

<p> 2. <ent type='ORG'>The <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent></p>

<p> 3. You Can Fool <ent type='ORG'>the People</ent></p>

<p> 4. How It All Began--The U-2 and <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs</p>

<p> 5. The Assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent></p>

<p> 6. The <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> of <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and
Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>Lyndon</ent> B. <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son's Withdrawal in 1968</p>

<p> 7. <ent type='ORG'>The Control</ent> of the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>s--Threats &amp; Chappaquiddick</p>

<p> 8. 1972--Muskie, <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>McGovern</ent></p>

<p> 9. <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> of the Media--1967 to 1976</p>

<p> 10. <ent type='ORG'>Techniques and Weapons</ent> and 100 Dead Conspirators
and Witnesses</p>

<p> 11. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> - The Pardon and the Tapes</p>

<p> 12. <ent type='ORG'>The Second Line</ent> of Defense and Cover-Ups in 1975-1976</p>

<p> 13. The 1976 <ent type='ORG'>Elect</ent>ion and Conspiracy Fever</p>

<p> 14. <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>the People</ent></p>

<p> 15. The Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>, The <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent>
Community and The News Media</p>

<p> 16. 1984 Here We Come--</p>

<p> 17. The Final Cover-Up: How The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent>led
The <ent type='ORG'><ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent></ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent></p>

<p> Appendix</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> About the Author</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> is a pioneer in the field of electronic
computers and a leading <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n authority on <ent type='ORG'>Elect</ent>ronic Funds
Transfer Systems (<ent type='ORG'>EFTS</ent>). Receiving his <ent type='ORG'>BSEE degreee</ent> from Purdue
University in 1942, his computing career began when he was
employed as an engineer for the computer group at <ent type='PERSON'>Northrup</ent>
Aircraft. He co-founded <ent type='ORG'>the Computer Research Corporation</ent> of
<ent type='GPE'>Hawthorne</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>California</ent> in 1950, and by 1953, serving as Vice
President of Sales, the company had sold more computers than any
competitor. In 1960, he became <ent type='ORG'>the Director</ent> of Computer Systems
Consulting for Touche, <ent type='PERSON'>Ross</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Bailey</ent>, and Smart. He became a
partner in that company in 1963, and started its Advanced Business
Systems <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> in 1964 where he stayed until 1968. In 1968 he
established <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> Research and Consulting for Computer
Information Systems Consultation. He is currently also Consultant
to <ent type='ORG'>the President</ent>'s <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>EFTS</ent> and full time consultant to
<ent type='ORG'>Battelle Memorial Institute</ent> of <ent type='GPE'>Frankfurt</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Germany</ent>.
In 1966, Mr. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> commenced an intensive program of research
into the photographic evidence associated with the assassination of
<ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>. He served a year as photographic expert advisor in
the investigations conducted by <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans District</ent> Attorney Jim
<ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> and had amassed and analyzed a majority of the known
evidence on film by 1968 when he co-founded <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> to
Investigate <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>. He served with <ent type='ORG'>CTIA</ent> as an active
researcher, board member and Secretary from 1968 to 1974.
Following numerous radio and television appearances and
extensive lecture tours of <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States and <ent type='GPE'>Canada</ent> (where
slides and films were used to demonstrate the basic evidence of
conspiracy), he began, in 1974, working toward a <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>ional
investigation of all four major political assassinations and the
cover-ups and links among these interrelated events. He was an
advisor to Representative <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> B. Gonzales (D-<ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent>) on <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>
Resolution 203 which proposed the appointment of a committee to
investigate the circumstances surrounding the deaths of <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>RFK</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent> and the attempt upon the life of Presidential
Candidate <ent type='PERSON'>George Wallace</ent>. He served as a consultant to <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent>
A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and G. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent></ent>, the first and second General
Counsels of the <ent type='ORG'><ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent></ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>, and
served through the end of <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>'s existence.
He is author of "<ent type='ORG'>Electronic Business Systems</ent>" (<ent type='ORG'>Ronald Press</ent>)
1962, "<ent type='ORG'>Information Utilities</ent>" (<ent type='ORG'>Prentice Hall</ent>) 1969, and a
celebrated series of articles which appeared in "Computers &amp;
Automation" Magazine beginning in 1970. He is also co-author with
<ent type='PERSON'>Dick Russell</ent> of "In Search of the Assassins" which is scheduled for
publication by <ent type='ORG'>the Dial Press</ent> in 1977.
The materials presented in this book are drawn from an analysis
of the photographic evidence, personal knowledge and records of the
<ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> investigation, research files of <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> to
Investigate <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>ional <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>s.</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> Introduction</p>

<p> This book is not about assassinations, at least not solely about
assassinations. It is not just another book about who murdered
President <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> or how or why. It is a book about power, about
who really controls <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States policies, especially foreign
policies. It is a book about the process of control through the
manipulation of the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n presidency and the presidential
election process. The objective of the book is to expose the
clandestine, secret, tricky methods and weapons used for this
manipulation, and to reveal the degree to which these have been
hidden from the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n public.
<ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> are only one of many techniques used in this
control process. They have been important only in the sense that
they are the ultimate method used in the control of the election
process. Viewed in this way, an understanding of what happened to
<ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> or <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> becomes more important because it leads to a
total understanding of what has happened to our country, and to us,
since 1960. But the important thing to understand is the control
and the power and all of the clandestine methods put together.
Much of the information in the book has been published before in
the magazines "<ent type='ORG'>Computer and Automation</ent>" and "<ent type='ORG'>People and the Pursuit</ent>
of <ent type='ORG'>Truth</ent>," both edited and published by Edmund C. <ent type='GPE'>Berkeley</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Newton</ent>ville, Mass. The material on assassination and other events
covered is based on evidence collected by the author individually
or through <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> to Investigate <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>. References
to documentation of this evidence are given throughout the book.
I am indebted to the following people for assistance in the
research work involved and the preparation of the book itself:
Special thanks go to <ent type='PERSON'>Mary Ferrell</ent> who typed the original of the
book.
<ent type='PERSON'>Jerry Policoff</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Mark Lane</ent>, Ed <ent type='GPE'>Berkeley</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Cutler</ent></ent>, Jim
<ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Bill Turner</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Wayne</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Chastain</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Bob Richter</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Gary Shaw</ent>,
Fletcher Prouty, <ent type='ORG'>Rush Harp</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Jones Harris</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Bob Saltzman</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Penn Jones</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Larry Harris</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Sylvia Meagher</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ray Marcus</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Harold Weisberg</ent>, Hal
Dorland, <ent type='PERSON'>Paris Flammonde</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Tink Thompson</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Bob Katz</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Joachim Joesten</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Peter Downay</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Harry Irwin</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Dick Billings</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Lesar</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Fred Newcomb</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Lillian Castellano</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Dick Russell</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Tris Coffin</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Mae Brussell</ent>, Bill
Barry, <ent type='PERSON'>Gary Roberts</ent> and most of all to my wife <ent type='PERSON'>Gloria</ent> whose hard
work and infinite patience made it all possible.
The book is dedicated to Representative <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> B. <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> for
his singular courage in standing against the forces of evil.</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent></p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>Hartsdale</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>
July 4, 1976</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> Publisher's Word</p>

<p> We published "The Taking Of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent> 1 2 3" during the winter of
1976-77. It was typed under the guns in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent>, and offset
printed in <ent type='GPE'>Woodstock</ent>, N.Y. A few weeks later--five hundred copies
in all, 24 of which were fired off to the two <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>s
involved in the investigation of the assassinations. Our elation
with this 'coup-de-truth' evaporated as we saw the committee
destroyed at the starting line.
The following summer, while motoring across our sadly taken
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, I experienced a tremendous synchroneity of events which
lead to my discovering <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent>'s secret team of
murderer's and their patsies. This knowledge caused me to come out
in the open even further and place a sign on route 28 enroute to
<ent type='GPE'>Woodstock</ent>. "Who Killed J.F.K., R.F.K., M.L.K., M.J.K.?" in
reflecting letters on a blood-red field. The <ent type='ORG'>Modjeska Sign</ent> Studios
estimated 1.2 million sightings per month. And we then watched the
committee suppress and muddle the evidence while chanting the
Katydid like cry, of the tremendous big lie--<ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> did it, <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>
did it, <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> did it, did it, did it.
So we are bringing our knowledge up to date with the closing of
the new "<ent type='ORG'>Warren Report</ent>" which now, due to The Witness They Could
Not Kill (the sound tape that proved conclusively that more than
one gun was involved in the president's assassination), at last
admits conspiracy. Where do we go from here? We reach out now for
a courageous commercial publisher to spread these truths that we
hold self-evident out to our duped, betrayed, and steadily lied-to
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>ns.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>Rush Harp</ent>
Barbara Black</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> THE TAKING OF AMERICA, 1-2-3</p>

<p> Chapter 1
The Overview and the the 1976 <ent type='ORG'>Elect</ent>ion</p>

<p> The taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent> has been both a simple and a very complex
process. It has not been the result of a coup d'etat, although
some aspects of the process resemble a coup. It has not been a
process similar to the dictatorship takeovers in <ent type='GPE'>Germany</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Italy</ent> and
other fascist regimes. It has not been a process like the
<ent type='NORP'>Communist</ent> "uprisings" in <ent type='GPE'>Russia</ent>, Hungary and other <ent type='NORP'>Eastern</ent> European
countries.
The taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent> has been a process unique in the history
of the world. The one feature that makes it unique is that what
was once the greatest democracy in the world has been taken over by
a power control group without the knowledge of most of the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n
people, their <ent type='ORG'>congress</ent>ional representatives, or the rest of the
world.
The group has taken <ent type='GPE'>America</ent> in this fashion because manipulation
of the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n presidency and the presidential electoral procedure
is enough to control <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>. Two fiendishly clever stratagems
were used to keep the fact that control had been seized from being
obvious to the people. The first of these was control of the
established media in the dissemination of both true (blocking) and
false (flooding) information. The second was the use of
clandestine and secret weapons and techniques developed during
<ent type='EVENT'>World War Two</ent> and perfected during the <ent type='NORP'>Korean</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>Viet Nam</ent> wars.
These techniques are so new and unusual as to be unbelievable to
most citizens. Thus, the incredibility of such weapons as
hypnosis, brainwashing and "programming" of patsies as assassins
became a psychological tool in the bag of techniques of the power
control group. The average <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n has shrugged off the
possibility of the takeover with the belief that, "That's not
possible here."
The use of such weapons, coupled with a tremendous campaign
through the controlled media that both whitewashes any signs of
conspiracies and spreads disinformation throughout the country, has
successfully blocked any serious or official attempts to get at the
truth. Unofficial investigators, private researchers, and even
<ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>ional representatives have been ridiculed and completely
blocked by both <ent type='ORG'>the power control group</ent> and their media allies.
To take over a real democracy without letting the people know it
has been taken over is a fantastic achievement. A list of the
accomplishments of <ent type='ORG'>the power control group</ent> illustrates the point.
Since 1963, they have:</p>

<p> 1. Assassinated <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>;</p>

<p> 2. <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent>led <ent type='PERSON'>Lyndon</ent> B. <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son as president;</p>

<p> 3. Forced <ent type='ORG'>LBJ</ent> out of the presidency;</p>

<p> 4. <ent type='PERSON'>Assassinated Robert</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, assuring Nixon's
election in 1968;</p>

<p> 5. Assassinated Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent>;</p>

<p> 6. <ent type='ORG'>Eliminate</ent>d <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> as a contender in the 1972
elections by framing him at Chappaquiddick and
threatening his children;</p>

<p> 7. Stopped <ent type='PERSON'>George Wallace</ent>'s campaign, assuring Nixon's
election in 1972;</p>

<p> 8. Knocked <ent type='PERSON'>Edmund Muskie</ent> out of the 1972 election campaign
by using dirty tricks;</p>

<p> 9. Covered up all of the above;</p>

<p> 10. <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent>led the 15 major news media organizations;</p>

<p> 11. Made Gerald <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> vice president and then president;</p>

<p> 12. Insured continuity of the cover-ups by forcing <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> to
pardon <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>;</p>

<p> 13. Murdered about 100 witnesses and participants in the
three assassinations and one attempted assassination;</p>

<p> 14. Blocked efforts by private citizens and organizations
to reveal the take-over; discredited, ruined or
infiltrated these individuals or groups; murdered or
were accomplices to the murders of the operating
assassins;</p>

<p> 15. Blocked efforts by members of the Senate and <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> to
initiate investigations of the assassinations and
attempted to whitewash, ridicule or eliminate these
efforts (their influence and infiltration has been
particularly effective in the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> and in
the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Rules <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>);</p>

<p> 16. <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent>led the presidential election procedure since
1964 by eliminating the candidates who might expose the
truth and insuring the election or appointment of
candidates already committed to covering up the truth
about the take-over.</p>

<p> The question for 1976 was: Could <ent type='ORG'>the power control group</ent>
continue the take-over during that year's elections? Would they be
successful in blocking efforts to expose the take-over by <ent type='ORG'>congress</ent>?
Would they be able to fool the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n public again, control the
media, and eliminate the contenders for the presidency in 1976 who
might have threatened their secure position? The answer to these
questions was "Yes."
The candidates on the scene during the 1976 primaries fell into
three categories according to the control group's point of view.
Category 1 included candidates that would continue the cover-up of
the take-over. Gerald <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> led this group with Ronald Reagan not
far behind him. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent>son</ent> was a probable ally because of his
backing of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>, an important organization in the cover-ups and
the takeover. Category 2 included those candidates who would
probably try to expose the take-over and <ent type='ORG'>the power control group</ent> if
elected. <ent type='PERSON'>Morris Udall</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Fred Harris</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>George Wallace</ent> fell into
this category. The third category included candidates whose
intentions were not clear, or unknown at the time. <ent type='PERSON'>Jimmy Carter</ent>,
Franck <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Hubert Humphrey</ent> remained in this group, and
Sergeant Shriver and <ent type='ORG'>Birch Bayh</ent> were also in this category before
they dropped out of the race.
Efforts would have been made to eliminate Udall, Harris or
<ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> if any one of them was nominated at the <ent type='NORP'>Democratic</ent>
convention. <ent type='PERSON'>Carter</ent> must certainly have been put to some kind of
loyalty test before being permitted to continue as the <ent type='NORP'>Democratic</ent>
nominee. Reagan and <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> were, no doubt, already "safe" candidates
for the control group because of their demonstrated cover-up
performances.
<ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> had cooperated fully in at least four ways. He was on the
<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> and played a leading role in the cover-up. He
wrote the cover-up book "Portrait of the Assassin." He pardoned
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and protected the <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> tapes. And he formed the <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>, appointing <ent type='PERSON'>David Belin</ent> as head of the staff to continue
the cover-up of the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> conspiracy.
Reagan had cooperated in at least three ways. He protected
important witnesses from extradition from <ent type='GPE'>California</ent> between 1967
and 1969 for testimony before the grand jury in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> and at
the trial of <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent>. He assisted <ent type='PERSON'>Evelle Younger</ent>, then district
attorney in <ent type='GPE'>Los Angeles</ent> and later <ent type='GPE'>California</ent> state attorney
general, in covering up the assassination conspiracy in the <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> case. And he has consistently supported the foreign and
domestic clandestine activities of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and other
intelligence agencies both nationally and in <ent type='GPE'>California</ent>.
A later chapter will describe just how the <ent type='NORP'>Democratic</ent> candidate
may be eliminated and when. <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>man <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> B. <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> from San
Antonio, <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent>, who introduced <ent type='ORG'>House Resolution</ent> 204 to reopen the
two <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> assassination cases, the Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> case and the George
<ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> shooting, took a public position on the possibility that
the 1976 election was controlled. <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> said "If we find the
answers--the truth--to the questions I have raised (about the
assassinations of <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>RFK</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>MLK</ent> and the <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> attempt), as well
as those many others have raised, will the truth make us free?
Yes, it will, for the truth will make us free to pursue democracy-
-our system of government--through the ballot box, and we will not
be subject to government by bullets. The truth will enable us to
prevent such a series of events from happening again. Some of the
supporters of the investigation have written to me recently of
their hope that the investigation will get underway right away
(March 1976) because they are concerned that there is great danger
in store for the <ent type='NORP'>Democratic</ent> nominee for <ent type='ORG'>the President</ent>, whoever he
turns out to be. I hope very much that these fears do not turn out
to have a basis in fact."</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> Chapter 2
<ent type='ORG'>The <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent></p>

<p> Just who and what is <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent>? Some have said
it's the military industrial complex. Some prefer to put the blame
on the <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent>s and <ent type='ORG'>the Council</ent> on Foreign Relation. Others
have talked about control shifting from the "<ent type='ORG'>Yankees</ent>" to the
"<ent type='ORG'>Cowboys</ent>" and back again. The term "The <ent type='ORG'>Cabal</ent>," first used in an
obscure paper by an unknown author in 1968,[1] described a high
level conspiracy group that planned, financed and carried out the
assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>. The word <ent type='ORG'>Cabal</ent> has been used
since then by some authors and researchers and applied to all of
the major domestic assassinations.
The idea of a <ent type='ORG'>Cabal</ent> raises more questions than it answers. Who
is in the <ent type='ORG'>Cabal</ent>? Was the same <ent type='ORG'>Cabal</ent> behind the planning and
financing of all five (Chappaquiddick being the fifth) major
eliminations? Or are there several interlocking <ent type='ORG'>Cabal</ent>s? What
about the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>s? Were they part of
the <ent type='ORG'>Cabal</ent>? Which <ent type='ORG'>Cabal</ent> controls and infiltrated the media and
organized the disinformation that poured forth in 1975 and 1976?
Was <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> a <ent type='ORG'>Cabal</ent> member? Was <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>? How about <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son and
<ent type='PERSON'>Kissinger</ent>? Has one <ent type='ORG'>Cabal</ent> commanded the executions of the 100
witnesses and lower level participants?
The mistake made by researchers in postulating higher level
groups is that they simplify a very complex situation. To draw a
distinct line between those involved in an overt conspiracy to
assassinate a leader and those involved afterward in covering up
the first group's actions is a mistake. The cover-ups are far more
important than the original assassinations. Each assassination or
attempted assassination, or other form of elimination of a leader,
is only part of a greater whole. The 16 accomplishments of the
power control group listed in Chapter 1, plus those now taking
place and those scheduled for the future, should be considered as a
continuum. The control group membership may contain individuals in
various categories, some of whom planned assassinations, some of
whom knew about the assassinations, and some of whom did not know
about assassinations in advance. Some may have been on the firing
line but have had nothing to do with the cover-ups. Some of them
are victims of later eliminations. Somewhere in the power control
group's hierarchy is a sub-group or perhaps several sub-groups that
have been responsible for the attempted assassinations of
presidential candidates, earlier assassins, witnesses, and earlier
middle-to-higher level members in <ent type='ORG'>the power control group</ent>. These
sub-groups might be thought of as intelligence-style task forces or
mini-<ent type='ORG'>Cabal</ent>s. There is little question that many of the individuals
in these task forces are from organized crime and from the
intelligence community, or both. They have had access to
intelligence techniques and weapons that have frequently been used
in the the elimination process.
A second mistake made by some researchers is to assume that the
Cabal's shape remains static through time. Evidence shows that the
<ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> has been a living organism that both shrinks
and grows as a function of time. The shrinkages take place through
eliminations and a few natural deaths. The growth takes place for
several reasons. It is necessary to use new techniques and new
people for the group's activities as time passes in order to
continue effective control of the media and to continue to fool the
people and <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>. It's also necessary to bring new high level
people into the group from time to time. Candidates for president
acceptable to the group must be sworn in and must agree to continue
the cover-ups. New media lackeys or new special committees or
commissions are also needed. Once in a while an individual
blackmails his way in. Some come in on a de facto basis.
(Protectors of the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>s and their children fall into this
category.)
The very nature of the cover-up procedure has made it necessary
to expose at least some of the truth to vice presidents and vice
presidential candidates, in addition to presidents <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son, <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>,
and <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>. Each vice president elected or appointed since 1963 has
had to know the truth about the cover-ups in the event he became
president (<ent type='PERSON'>Humphrey</ent> under <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son, <ent type='PERSON'>Agnew</ent> under <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, and then <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>
and <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent>). <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> was the most important of these since he
had to agree to pardon <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and to protect the tapes.
The heads of the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>, selected trusted second-level men,
and the deputy director of plans (<ent type='ORG'>DDP</ent>) in the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> have all had to
know some of the truth. The members of the 40 group and their
successors who presumably know all intelligence secrets of the
country are, no doubt, brought into this "inner circle" of
knowledgeable people.
<ent type='ORG'>The <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>ers were split. <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Dulles</ent> McCloy and
<ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> all knew the truth; <ent type='PERSON'>Cooper</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Bogg</ent>s and <ent type='PERSON'>Russell</ent> did not. The
<ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> was also split. <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> certainly knows
and so does Ford's man on that <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>David Belin</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Kissinger</ent>
must have known the truth; so must have the officers in the
<ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> of Defense. Then there are the <ent type='ORG'>Secret Team</ent> members,
planted in the various media organizations, who know the truth. A
later chapter will describe who they are and how they lead the
media cover-up and disinformation mill.
This living organism view of <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> can best be
constructed and proven by starting with the cover-up efforts and
the control of the media, as opposed to examining the conspiracies
to assassinate each leader. It is much easier to show how Gerald
<ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>, for example, led the cover-up in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> conspiracy than it
is to determine who the members of <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> were who
planned and financed the assassination.
It is difficult to show evidence of higher level participation
in the assassinations of <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> and in the
attempted assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>George Wallace</ent>. It is not difficult to
prove that many high level individuals conspired to cover-up the
conspiracies in each of the three cases. It is not difficult to
prove that they helped frame at least one of the patsies (<ent type='PERSON'>James</ent>
Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent>).
Much of the content of this book will show evidence of the
cover-ups and discuss the actions that are still taking place that
protect <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent>. Only summary information is
included on the original conspiracies, except where there is a lack
of published data.</p>

<p>____________________</p>

<p> [1] "Nomenclature of an Assassination <ent type='ORG'>Cabal</ent>", Torbett, 1968 (Copeland
Document)</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> Chapter 3
You Can Fool <ent type='ORG'>the People</ent></p>

<p> One of the questions always asked by the beginning student of
America's political assassinations is, "How is it possible that all
of this could be happening in our country without our knowing about
it?" The "It couldn't happen here" belief has been extended to,
"It couldn't happen here without our knowing about it." This is
usually buttressed by such arguments as, "The <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>s would have
done something about it, if it were true", or "Such a giant
conspiracy would have been exposed by someone within the
conspiratorial group", or "The news media would have found out
about it and told all of us by now."
The fact that it is possible to fool a majority of the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n
people for a long period of time and to cover-up a high level
conspiracy involving many, many individuals, can easily be
demonstrated by using <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> as an example. In fact, some
published articles[1] show that the entire truth about <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>
has yet to be revealed.
We do know now about the cover-up of the original crimes in
<ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> and the cover-up of the cover-up. We tend to forget the
attitude of the majority of the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people, the <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> and
the media, toward <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and the <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> administration during
the period between the June 1972 <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> break-in and the
November 1972 election and beyond into 1973. Long before <ent type='PERSON'>Woodward</ent>
and <ent type='PERSON'>Bernstein</ent> and others began the <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> expose, a few
researchers were calling the <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> conspiracies to the
attention of a small portion of the public.[2] It was not until
late 1973 that the research done by these researchers and their
hypotheses about high-level conspiracies were proven correct and
were generally accepted. How did it happen that for more than a
year a majority of the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people were not only fooled by Mr.
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and his friends, but also re-elected him? Some of the same
ingredients present in that situation were like those used in the
taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>. We can all learn a lot by observing what they
were.
What follows is a reproduction of an article by the author.
(Because the article was written in l972, some of the material in
it is now obsolete. However, it is reproduced here without changes
to illustrate the situation and attitudes of the pre-<ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>
revelation era.) It was originally written during the <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>
cover-up era (late 1972), after <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was re-elected and before
<ent type='PERSON'>Bernstein</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Woodward</ent> were noticed by anyone. It should be noted
that even in 1976, Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> still had his vehement supporters who
were blind to the ingredients required to fool the people.</p>

<p> You Can Fool <ent type='ORG'>the People</ent></p>

<p> You can fool all of the people some of the time
You can fool some of the people all of the time
But you can't fool all of the people all of the time.
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Abraham</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Lincoln</ent></ent>, 1864</p>

<p> The decade of 1963 to 1973 in <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> State of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>
will go down in history for many things. In the long run
it will be known through the world as the period which
demonstrated that it is possible to fool most of the
people all of the time.
<ent type='PERSON'>Adolph Hitler</ent> didn't fool very many people. He cowed
them, frightened them, and killed them. But most <ent type='NORP'>Germans</ent>
knew what was happening even though they chose to do
nothing about it until it was too late.
The exercise of power to control what happens and to
restrict liberties is much more difficult in a <ent type='NORP'>Democracy</ent>
or a Republic. <ent type='GPE'>The United</ent> States is always held up as the
model case in which the guaranteed election of the
president every four years and the two-party system, will
prevent the country from being run by dictators. The
people are represented by the <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> and also elect the
President.
A person or a group planning a coup d'etat in the U.S.
would have a completely different job on their hands than
<ent type='GPE'>Germany</ent> in the 1930's, <ent type='LOC'>South</ent> <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n or <ent type='NORP'>African</ent> countries
in the twentieth century, or <ent type='GPE'>France</ent> in the 1890's or
<ent type='GPE'>Russia</ent> in 1918.
It would be necessary to fool a majority of the
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people into believing that they were well
represented, and that a democracy still existed, while at
the same time the coup group were in reality changing the
country to suit their own tastes.
It is the contention of the writer that this is exactly
what has happened over a period of time following World
War II. The methods used to fool the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people,
certainly since 1963 and to some extent also since the end
of <ent type='EVENT'>World War</ent> I, have varied slightly as administrations
changed. The main thrust however has been a constant
erosion of civil rights, and a swing of government away
from the best interests of the people and toward big
companies, banks, the military and rich individuals and
families. The trend was slowed down only briefly between
1960 and 1963 when <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> attempted to alter the
situation. He was assassinated because he did so.
To fool the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people is not easy. It requires
immense capabilities, tricky, secret methods, hidden
resources, great wealth and the equivalent of brainwashing
or mind control on a grand scale. Yet that type of
resource is precisely what has accomplished the deed. It
is probable that, like <ent type='GPE'>Germany</ent>, the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people will
awaken to what has been happening to them and to who has
been doing it. It is also very likely, now that the <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>
administration has been restored for four more years, that
by 1976 it will be too late, in spite of <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>.
George McGovern's speech on <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Television</ent>, the evening
of October 25, 1972, was a warning for those citizens who
were awake, that "it can happen here." It's happening
here, was his basic message. Yet, unlike <ent type='GPE'>Germany</ent>, the
people were silent, and fooled. They didn't believe him
when he said, "Your liberties are being removed, one by
one." <ent type='ORG'>The Supreme Court</ent> by 1976 will be so packed with
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> appointees that we will never get our liberties
back. <ent type='PERSON'>McGovern</ent> covered most of the areas in which the
people have been fooled. The major area he didn't cover
was that of assassination. This tool represents only the
end of the spectrum of techniques used by those in control
to remain in control. It has been used four times very
effectively, on both <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>s, on <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent>, and
in the attempt on <ent type='PERSON'>George Wallace</ent>. In the case of <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent>,
crippling was sufficient to change the political outcome
in 1972.</p>

<p> More important than the use of assassinations has been the
ability to fool the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people into believing there were four
lone madmen involved--and no conspiracies. The techniques involved
in fooling people are more complex and subtle than those involved
in the crime itself. In the <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> case, the original crime was
the use of every trick and technique necessary to re-elect <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>.
The people had to be fooled into believing that <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
had nothing to do with <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> and the broader plan of which it
was part.
That the fooling part turned out to be so easy is due to a long
series of conditioning steps taken with the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n news media and
the people over the preceding years. The <ent type='ORG'>Pentagon Papers</ent> case
reveals how the people were fooled by several (successive <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>)
administrations over a long period of time. Efforts against
<ent type='PERSON'>Ellsberg</ent> and the press continued in order to prevent further decay
of the fooling process.
How is it possible in the 20th century <ent type='GPE'>USA</ent>--with TV and high
levels of communication, with freedom of the press, freedom of
speech--to fool most of the people all of the time? Here is how it
is done. Five ingredients are required.</p>

<p> INGREDIENT 1. A <ent type='GPE'>PATRIOTIC</ent> ISSUE. A fundamental issue
permeating nearly all conditions of life in the U.S. is needed,
around which the rest of the fooling can be constructed. The
perfect issue since 1947 has been "The <ent type='ORG'>Red Menace</ent>," or "Communism"
or "The Radical <ent type='NORP'>Communist</ent> Left Conspiracy." No one is more adept
at using this issue than <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>.
The people, to be fooled, have to really believe in the issue,
from the heart, from the gut. In a democracy this is the most
essential ingredient. In the U.S. many, many people believe it.
Some believe it because they have never heard or read anything
other than "The <ent type='NORP'>Communist</ent>s are going to take over." Others believe
it because they or their parents or relatives came from Europe and
"know what it's like to live under Naziism or Communism." (They
don't distinguish.)
Some believe because they are religious, and somehow religion is
always linked to anti-communism. Others aren't sure, but they
think "radical" groups might be <ent type='NORP'>Communist</ent> controlled. The flag
waving, the national anthem, the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n Legion, our prisoners of
war, the draft of the past--all of these symbols are linked to the
one big issue of "Communism."
There can be several sub-issues of lesser significance than the
fundamental issue. Some of these might be related to the main
issue. Others may be unrelated. Some are used to appeal to
certain segments of the population. They can be carefully
exploited and added together with the main issue in a way which
enhances it. Some are useful with low-intelligence-level people.
Others appeal to bigots. Some are fearful issues which people
would rather avoid. Others hit the individual right in his
pocketbook or his security.
If played one against the other, very carefully, many of these
sub-issues can be blamed on Communism. <ent type='PERSON'>Archie Bunker</ent>, of the TV
series, "All In The Family", was not exaggerating when he blamed
his white niece's dancing with a black neighbor boy on "a <ent type='NORP'>Communist</ent>
plot."
Examples of sub-issues used by those controlling <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>
administration to fool the people include:</p>

<p> The black-white issue
The busing issue
The young radical issue
The law and order issue
The national security issue
The old-fashioned <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n work ethic versus
poverty and welfare issue</p>

<p> INGREDIENT 2. REACHING THE M<ent type='GPE'>IND</ent>S OF THE <ent type='GPE'>PEOPLE</ent>. To fool a
majority of the people all of the time it is necessary to reach
into their minds over a relatively long period of time. Make an
analysis of what you, the reader, believe today or disbelieve,
along with the mental condition you are in when you enter a polling
booth, or write a letter to your <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>man. After some thought
list all of the ways in which information might reach you today.
You will list all of the environmental factors, self images,
motivations, ego factors and acquired beliefs that make you do what
you do, and make you think what you think.
You will realize that your heritage, your schooling, your life's
experience, and the present bombardment of information have an
impact on how you vote. If your father and grandfather before you
were strong <ent type='NORP'>Republicans</ent> or <ent type='NORP'>Democrats</ent>, you may well vote the same
"pull one lever" way. You might close your mind to any messages of
imminent disaster, and think, "I'm better off not knowing and just
voting straight <ent type='NORP'>Republican</ent>." (In 1972)
You might have strong faith in the "<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n way of life" and
pay no attention to the people who go around claiming that <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> were all murdered by
elements of an invisible government to keep the U.S. on the
military, wealthy, conservative track.
You might ignore solid evidence regarding <ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey Osward</ent>'s,
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent></ent>'s or <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent></ent>'s actions and instead rely on a
long-term, well engineered faith that something like that "couldn't
happen here."
Go back in time to 1935, if you are over 50, or go back to 1945,
if you are over 40, or back to 1955, if you are over 30. Examine
your general overall attitudes, beliefs and prejudices as developed
over that period of time between then and now. You will discover
that your political beliefs about the U.S., the Presidency, foreign
policy, wage and price controls, and your own economic conditions,
etc., have been strongly influenced by the various news media.</p>

<p> INGREDIENT 3. CONTROLLING THE NEWS MEDIA. In Chapter 9, the
author proves that it has been possible for a very small group of
people in power to control or fool nearly all of the major news
media in the U.S. about the assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and
subsequent investigations conducted by groups other than the
sources of power (<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Secret Service</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>,
Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>the President</ent>).
According to polls taken between 1963 and 1970, 50% to 80% of
the public at one time or another during this period believed there
was a conspiracy. Nevertheless, the major news media took the
opposite position. A poll conducted today would, no doubt, show
about one-half of the people believing there was no conspiracy.
How did this happen? Is it conceivable that the power sources of
two succeeding administrations (<ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son and <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>) fooled or
controlled the news media to that extent?
The problem is not so difficult as it seems. Only sixteen media
organizations are involved. These sixteen provide each of us with
nearly all of the news we either read, see or hear. It is only
necessary to control the sixteen men at the very top and that is
exactly what happened. The proof contained in Chapter 9 contains
specific facts about what happened inside of eleven of the sixteen
organizations.
Some of them maintained an editorial position oriented toward
the possibility of conspiracy for several years. The last ones to
convert because of high level command decisions (at the *owner*
level--not the editorial level) did not do so until 1969, 5 1/2
years after the assassination. Several of the eleven conducted
their own independent investigations and discovered conspiracy
evidence sufficient to take that stand. Among these were <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>,
<ent type='ORG'>Life Magazine</ent>, and "The <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times."</p>

<p> The sixteen media organizations are:</p>

<p> 1. <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>-TV and Radio
2. <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>-TV and Radio
3. <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>-TV and Radio
4. Associated <ent type='ORG'>Press</ent>
5. <ent type='ORG'>United Press</ent> International
6. Time-Life
7. McGraw Hill - Business Week
8. Newsweek
9. U.S. News and World Report
10. <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times and their news service
11. <ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Post</ent> and their news service
12. Metromedia News Network TV and Radio
13. <ent type='ORG'>Westinghouse</ent> Radio News Network
14. Capital City Broadcasting Radio Network
15. <ent type='PERSON'>North</ent> <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n Newspaper <ent type='ORG'>Alliance</ent>
16. Gannett News Service</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent>ling the news media to that extent in order to fool the
people is an extreme act. It is a last resort in an extremely
serious situation. Such a situation arose when it became obvious
to those in power that <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent> was going to expose the truth
about the assassination in court. He had to be destroyed, and he
was, by fooling the news media as well as the people.
<ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> of the press by the power group slipped a little with
the <ent type='ORG'>Pentagon Papers</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>Mylai</ent> episode, the <ent type='ORG'>Green Berets</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>
use of spying, and the <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> caper. But effective control over
the fooling of the people nevertheless remains. With <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>,
people fooling shifted from controlling the news media, which
suddenly awakened a little too late, to the control of the the
legal system.</p>

<p> INGREDIENT 4. CONTROLLING THE LEGAL SYSTEM. Perhaps the most
important long-range ingredient in fooling the people of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent> is
the control and influence over the legal system. The U.S. in the
post-war era has reached the stage where, in case of doubt on a
major issue, the people will wait to see how it is resolved by the
courts. The <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people in general have always had tremendous
faith in their own legal system.
With the exception of the <ent type='LOC'>South</ent> taking issue with the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
court over black rights, the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people tend to believe that
<ent type='ORG'>the Supreme Court</ent> will eventually right any wrongs. The faith goes
much further than adjudication of crimes or disputes. People have
come to rely on the legal system to tell them where the truth lies
on a major issue when two sides differ completely on the facts.
They believe that the adversary procedure and the perjury penalty
system will ferret out the truth.
Thus, to fool the people, and make them believe lies, it is
essential to control the legal system. The <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son
administrations and <ent type='ORG'>the Invisible Government</ent> lying underneath or
off to one side of both administrations became very adept at
controlling the legal system. It can be done, and has been done in
several ways. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, of course, loaded <ent type='ORG'>the Supreme Court</ent>. That is
important. The complete control of the Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> and the
<ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> is also obvious. Not so obvious is the need to control Federal
judges throughout the land. <ent type='ORG'>Truth</ent> might leak out in a trial at a
local level, so U.S. courts in each area must be controlled.
The Federal grand jury scheme worked out by <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> Mardian is a beautiful way to guide, direct and control the
legal system. It more than proved its worth in fooling the people
in cases involving classified documents, <ent type='ORG'>the Black Panthers</ent> and
other situations where the truth had to be obscured.
<ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> over the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n Bar Association and individual lawyers
and district attorneys is another method used. And finally, it is
often useful to control local and state police, either individually
or in groups.
The exercise of control is important. It may be desirable to
suppress truth in a court situation during a trial or hearings.
The judge can do this very effectively. It may also be desirable
to delay a trial or a hearing in which the truth might be exposed.
Judges and lawyers can do this quite easily. It may be desirable
to entirely shut off a trial or an appeal where truth could be
exposed. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was able to do this to perfection.
Lies and fake cases may be presented as truth in court while
truth is attacked as being falsehood. This technique has been very
successful.
All of this takes both money and power. Judges and lawyers,
must either be paid a lot of money, or frightened about their
career and health. The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> conduits used for espionage financing
have been used extensively in controlling the legal system. <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent>
has been used to control lower courts and local police or district
attorneys from the highest source of power in <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, the
invisible government.
A few examples will suffice to demonstrate how the legal system
is used to fool the people.
The 1972 election demonstrated that two-thirds of the people
either did not associate Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> with the <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> affair and
the Chapin-<ent type='PERSON'>Segretti</ent> sabotage project, or else they didn't know
about it or didn't care.
Surely, you say, a traditional <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n patriot would not vote
for a man who did all of the things the <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> 7 and Chapin-<ent type='PERSON'>Segretti</ent> and company did. But wait! The situation as of January
1973 had not yet reached the courts. Except for <ent type='PERSON'>Bernard Barker</ent>'s
conviction for falsely using his notary public seal to stamp a
check from <ent type='PERSON'>Kenneth Dahlberg</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent>, no court actions had taken
place.
Wasn't that lucky for the <ent type='NORP'>Republicans</ent>, you say. It wasn't luck.
The <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> arrests took place in June 1972. By successfully
delaying a whole series of trials and court actions, Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>,
through control of the courts, kept the truth away from the people
until after the election on November 7. Perhaps some of the people
who voted for him had doubts, but if court cases had been conducted
before November 7, and conducted fairly by uncontrolled judges, the
truth would have been exposed in all of its glory.
Now that he had a powerful mandate from the people, it was
likely that other forms of control would be used to continue
fooling the people about <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>. Some of these were covered in
the prior chapters. Executive privilege has been used to a major
extent.
<ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> was actually defended and <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>, in effect, was put
on trial, through <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> money and <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> lawyers. Garrison's attempts
to bring <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> to trial for perjury were successfully blocked by
Federal courts and judges.
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent></ent>'s trial for the murder of <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> was
controlled by the <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> administration in order to hide the truth
from the people. The case involved controlling the judge at the
trial, the district attorney, the lawyers for <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent>, the Los
Angeles police, the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>, and some of the officials of the state of
<ent type='GPE'>California</ent>. The control exercised has continued to prevent <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent>
from receiving a new trial based on new evidence of what happened
in the assassination.</p>

<p> THE FIVE BIG <ent type='EVENT'>EVENTS</ent>. The five events since <ent type='EVENT'>World War</ent> II about
which <ent type='ORG'>the power control group</ent> must continue to fool the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n
people about are the assassinations of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
and <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent>; the attempted assassination of George
<ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent>; and the <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> episode. (In 1973, the truth about
Chappaquiddick and its importance, together with the threats
against <ent type='PERSON'>Jackie</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, Ethel <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and all of the
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> children, had not been exposed. Chappaquiddick is the
sixth big event.)
All other things this group has done since 1947 fade into
insignificance compared to these five. The reason is that the
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people may accept such things as the <ent type='GPE'>Pueblo</ent> incident, the
Gulf of Tonkin fake, the <ent type='ORG'>Mylai</ent> incident, the <ent type='ORG'>Pentagon Papers</ent>, the
Kent State killings, the frame-ups of <ent type='ORG'>the Black Panthers</ent> and their
murders, and even the whole <ent type='GPE'>Viet Nam</ent> war, but they would rise up in
wrath if the truth about any one or all of those five events were
exposed.
Thus, Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Hanson</ent> for <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent>, Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Fensterwald</ent> for <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent></ent>,
Mr. Lawrence O'Brien and the <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> suit--anyone opposing the
findings of <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> with national prominence and
success--and anyone who begins to pry too much into George
Wallace's brush with death will be opposed with all the power those
in control can muster. Each will be dealt with if he comes too
close, just as <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent> was dealt with by both the <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son and
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> administrations. <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> managed to beat out the <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>-controlled Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> in his own trial in September 1973.
The jury in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> found him innocent in spite of the fact
that the prosecuting attorney, the judge, the key witness, Pershing
Gervais, and the news media were all controlled by <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent>. By late 1973 it was becoming a little more difficult to
fool the people.</p>

<p> INGREDIENT 5. PAID COLUMNISTS OR LACKEYS. <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> of the news
media includes controlling or hiring selected columnists, newsmen,
commentators, and lackeys. Sometimes these people are called
"spokesmen for the administration." Many of them are supposedly
independent. Their importance in the process of fooling the people
has increased as the number of independent news media organizations
has decreased and the number of organizations relying on
syndicated, national columnists or commentators has increased.
The <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> administration managed to corral a great many more of
these types than did the administrations of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son, <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, or
<ent type='PERSON'>Eisenhower</ent>. In the newspaper field, there were four to five times
as many columnists writing "fool the people" type news for <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> as
against <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Alsop</ent> was at one extreme. More subtle were writers
like C.L. Sulzberger in the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times" and <ent type='PERSON'>Gary Wills</ent> in
various conservative papers. On radio, the <ent type='ORG'>Westinghouse</ent> network
used four commentators who appeared to be liberal at first glance,
but who adhered to the party line when the time came to get at the
truth about the five key events mentioned earlier. These four were
<ent type='PERSON'>Peter Lisagor</ent>, Rod McCleish, <ent type='PERSON'>Simeon Booker</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Irwin Cannon</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>William Safire</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Evans</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Novak</ent>, Mary <ent type='PERSON'>McCarthy</ent>, and occasionally
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Anderson</ent></ent> also fall into the "fool the people" column. The
impact of these columnists on the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people has not really
been measured. Alsop's and <ent type='PERSON'>Evans</ent> and Novak's columns appear in
<ent type='NORP'>Republican</ent> and right-wing newspapers all across the U.S. The
election poll that indicated over 700 newspapers supported <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>
while fewer than 50 supported <ent type='PERSON'>McGovern</ent> provides some estimate of
how influential these papers and columnists can be. With the
exception of two or three stories by <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Anderson</ent></ent> about <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and plots to assassinate <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent>, none of the evidence about
the truth pertaining to the assassinations has ever appeared in any
of these columns. Yet the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people read these columns more
faithfully than they read the front page.</p>

<p> HOW THE <ent type='GPE'>PEOPLE</ent> HAVE BEEN FOOLED. Now that the ingredients for
fooling the people have been discussed, let's examine the net
results over the past twenty-five years. Between 1957 and 1972,
there was a culmination in the use of these ingredients, many of
which were developed with the end of <ent type='EVENT'>World War</ent> II.
Through a succession of presidencies and political party
administrations from <ent type='PERSON'>Truman</ent> to <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> a mixture of wealthy, military
and espionage individuals developed a power base and used the five
ingredients to fool the people. Except for <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, none of
the presidents tried very hard to resist this power. The book
"Farewell <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>" (by <ent type='PERSON'>James Hepburn</ent>--a pseudonym--<ent type='ORG'>Front</ent>iers
<ent type='ORG'>Press</ent>), which has been reprinted in sections in "Computers and
Automation" (1973) shows clearly what kind of power <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> tried to
resist and how it resulted in his death.
The <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people aren't familiar with this book any more than
they are familiar with a movie made from the book, with the same
title. And as long as the group remains in power, the book and
movie will be banned from <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States, just as "Z" was banned
in <ent type='GPE'>Greece</ent>.
The people of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent> were fooled into believing each of the
following untruths:</p>

<p> Kent State:</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>The National Guard</ent> fired under intense pressure and attack
by a bunch of hoodlums at Kent State University. The
various grand juries have vindicated the <ent type='ORG'>Guard</ent>. There was
no White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> influence involved in the killings, or in
the aftermath.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>Mylai</ent>:</p>

<p> Calley was justified in shooting the civilians at <ent type='ORG'>Mylai</ent>
because those were his orders. You can't tell a "gook"
from a <ent type='GPE'>Viet Cong</ent> and, after all, war is war.</p>

<p> Communism:</p>

<p> The greatest threat to <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n freedom is still a world-wide <ent type='NORP'>Communist</ent> take-over. The domino theory may or may not
be correct, but we must never give up a fight. "Peace
with honor" was essential in <ent type='GPE'>Viet Nam</ent>.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>Pentagon Papers</ent>:</p>

<p> Few people have taken the time to read the <ent type='ORG'>Pentagon Papers</ent>
and have understood their significance. The two-thirds
majority who elected <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> in 1972 may have been puzzled
by the papers or they may not have cared. No doubt, most
of them believed <ent type='PERSON'>Ellsberg</ent> a traitor and worthy of jail.
It is very unlikely they will ever believe they were duped
by <ent type='PERSON'>Truman</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Eisenhower</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son and <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and most
particularly by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and allies in matters pertaining
to <ent type='EVENT'>the cold war and Communism</ent>. The fundamental, gut issue
of the <ent type='NORP'>Communist</ent> conspiracy overrides any other revelation
in this field.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>:</p>

<p> In spite of polls and uneasy feelings, at least half and
perhaps a majority of the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people still believe
that <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent>
were assassinated by <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent></ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent></ent>, respectively, and that the assassination
attempt on <ent type='PERSON'>George Wallace</ent> was solely <ent type='PERSON'>Arthur Bremer</ent>'s
doing. They believe these men acted alone and that they
were madmen. (This statement pertains to the period of
1972-73.)</p>

<p> <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>:</p>

<p> Prior to the election in November 1972, a majority of the
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people believed that <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Maurice Stans</ent> and everyone else of importance in
the White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> had nothing to do with the <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>
affair or the activities of <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>ald <ent type='PERSON'>Segretti</ent></ent> and others
prior to the election. Almost no one believed that the
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> was involved in setting up <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> so as to capture and
control the executive to an even greater degree.</p>

<p> <ent type='NORP'>Democracy</ent> and Freedom:</p>

<p> By the end of 1973 a relatively large percentage of the
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people still did not relate any of the foregoing
incidents or situations to their own individual liberties.
They believed patriotically in <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>; they believed we
still had a democracy; they believed that President
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, with his wise ways and business experience would
pull us out of whatever problems we had. From the time he
nailed <ent type='PERSON'>Alger Hiss</ent> and the day he won the great kitchen
debate with <ent type='NORP'>Kruschev</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was believed to be the leader
who would secure our eventual victory over Communism. The
people refuse to consider the possibility that unknown
forces have seized control over the U.S. for the last
fifteen years and that our liberties and democracy are
fading away.</p>

<p>____________________</p>

<p> [1] "<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent>" -- <ent type='PERSON'>Jeff Gerth</ent>, "<ent type='LOC'>Sundance</ent> Magazine," December
1972. <ent type='PERSON'>Charles Colson</ent> interview, by <ent type='PERSON'>Dick Russell</ent> - "<ent type='ORG'>Argosy Magazine</ent>,"
March 1976</p>

<p> [2] "Why Was <ent type='PERSON'>Martha</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent> Kidnapped?" -- <ent type='PERSON'>Mae Brussell</ent>, "The Realist,"
August 1972</p>

<p> "The June 1972 Raid on <ent type='NORP'>Democratic</ent> Party Headquarters -- Part 1" --
R.E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, "Computers &amp; Automation," August 1972</p>

<p> "<ent type='ORG'>The Raid</ent> on <ent type='NORP'>Democratic</ent> Party Headquarters -- The <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>
Incident -- Part 2", Ibid.</p>

<p>--
daveus rattus </p>

<p> yer friendly neighborhood ratman</p>

<p> KOYAANISQATSI</p>

<p> ko.yaa.nis.qatsi (from <ent type='EVENT'>the Hopi Language</ent>) n. 1. crazy life. 2. life
in turmoil. 3. life out of balance. 4. life disintegrating.
5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.
<ent type='PERSON'>Pat</ent>h: ns-mx!hobbes.physics.uiowa.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!spool.mu.edu!olivea!sgigate!odin!ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com!dave
From: dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (dave "who can do? ratmandu!" ratcliffe)
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.<ent type='PERSON'>jfk</ent>
Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (2/11)
Summary: we were robbed of our capability of electing a president we wanted
Keywords: part 2 of 11: chapter 4 thru chapter 5
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Jun8.134947.25406@odin.corp.sgi.com</info>
Date: 8 Jun 92 13:49:47 GMT
Sender: news@odin.corp.sgi.com (Net News)
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Lines: 969
Xref: ns-mx alt.activism:27281 alt.conspiracy:15429 alt.conspiracy.<ent type='PERSON'>jfk</ent>:1550
Nntp-<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>ing-Host: ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> Chapter 4
How It All Began - The U-2 and <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs</p>

<p> To understand the origins of <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent>, it is
necessary to return to the last years of the <ent type='PERSON'>Eisenhower</ent>
administration and examine what was going on in <ent type='EVENT'>the Cold War</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Eisenhower</ent> had suffered several strokes and a heart attack. He
was partially immobilized, and entrusted a major share of the
coordination of clandestine activities being conducted by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
against the "<ent type='ORG'>Red Menace</ent>" to <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, his vice president.
While <ent type='PERSON'>Ike</ent> was warning against the military-industrial-complex's
domestic influence, and attempting to move toward detente with the
<ent type='NORP'>Soviets</ent> through a summit meeting, he was being sabotaged by the
plans section of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and by <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>.
A part of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> arranged for a U-2 with Gary <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent>s as pilot
to go down over <ent type='GPE'>Russia</ent>, thus giving <ent type='PERSON'>Khrushchev</ent> a chance to expose
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n spying and to cancel the summit meeting. This was one of
the earliest moves of the nucleus of what later evolved into the
<ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent>. In the spring of 1960, with <ent type='PERSON'>Ike</ent> nearly senile
and pressured by <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, he approved the plan for the invasion of
<ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent> and the assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was the chief White
<ent type='ORG'>House</ent> action officer for what later became <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs
invasion.
<ent type='ORG'>The <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> was beginning to organize itself with
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> as part of it. The cold warriors and strong anti-<ent type='NORP'>Communist</ent>
"patriots" in the Plans or Operations part of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> formed the
original nucleus.
Their plan was to make <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> president in 1961 and to launch a
successful takeover of <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> came along to upset the
plan. Not only did he make the takeover impossible but he soon
discovered the evils lurking in the hearts and minds of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
clandestine operators and laid his own plans to destroy them. The
assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> essentially became an act of survival
for some of these individuals.
Many citizens of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent> have forgotten that <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was
Vice President of <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States in 1959 and 1960. As an old
anti-<ent type='NORP'>communist</ent> from the <ent type='PERSON'>Alger Hiss</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Khrushchev</ent> debating days,
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was in the forefront of pressure for <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs invasion
of <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>. What is also forgotten is that <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was largely
responsible for the covert training of <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>n exiles by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> in
preparation for <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs. (He stated this in his book, "Six
Crises".)
NIXON'S LIES--OCTOBER 1960. Mr. Nixon's capacity for truth is
nowhere more clearly demonstrated than by the deliberate lies he
told during the election campaign on national TV on October 21,
1960. He said in his book that the lies were told for a patriotic
reason--to protect the covert operations planned for <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of
Pigs at all costs. The significance of this is that Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>
considers patriotism to be, in part, the protection of plans and
actions of individuals that he considered to be working for the
United States' best interests.
The similarities between the actions of <ent type='ORG'>Everette</ent> Howard Hunt,
Jr., <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> McCord, <ent type='PERSON'>Bernard Barker</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Frank Sturgis</ent>, and others in the
1960 planning for <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs invasion and in the 1972 planning
for the re-election of <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> M. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> are very striking. In both
cases, what the plotters themselves considered to be patriotic,
anti-<ent type='NORP'>Communist</ent> actions were involved. In 1960 the actions were
directed against Fidel <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent>, a man they hated as a <ent type='NORP'>Communist</ent>. In
1972 the actions were directed against Edward <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, Edmund
Muskie and George <ent type='PERSON'>McGovern</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Bernard Barker</ent> stated the group's
collective belief when he said after his arrest that, "We believe
that an election of <ent type='PERSON'>McGovern</ent> would be the beginning of a trend that
would lead to socialism and communism, or whatever you want to call
it."
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> admitted lying to the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people to protect Hunt,
<ent type='PERSON'>Barker</ent>, Sturgis, and McCord in 1960. The likelihood that he lied
to protect them again in 1972 seems to be quite good. There is
some likelihood that he actually hired the same old crew he trusted
from <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs days for the 1972 <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> and other
espionage activities.
Here are the facts:</p>

<p> Nixon's Statements in "Six Crises"</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> stated in "Six Crises": "The covert training of
<ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>n exiles by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> was due in substantial part, at least, to
my efforts. This had been adopted as a policy as a result of my
direct support."[1] "President <ent type='PERSON'>Eisenhower</ent> had ordered the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> to
arm and train the exiles in May of 1960. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and his advisors
wanted the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> invasion to take place before the voters went to the
polls on November 8, 1960."[2]
While <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs operation was under the overall <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
direction of <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Allen</ent> <ent type='GPE'>Dulles</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> M. <ent type='PERSON'>Bissell</ent>, Jr. was the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> man
in charge, according to <ent type='PERSON'>Ross</ent> &amp; <ent type='PERSON'>Wise</ent>.[3] <ent type='PERSON'>Charles Cabell</ent>,[4] the
deputy director of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>, and a man with the code name Frank
Bender, were also near the top of the operational planning.[5]</p>

<p> E. Howard Hunt</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>Everette</ent> Howard Hunt, Jr. was in charge of the actual invasion.
He used the code name, "<ent type='PERSON'>Eduardo</ent>." Bernard L. <ent type='PERSON'>Barker</ent>, using the code
name "<ent type='ORG'>Macho</ent>," worked for Hunt in the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> Bay of Pigs planning.
<ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> McCord was an organizer for the invasion and was one of the
highest ranking officials in the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Frank Sturgis</ent>, alias Frank
Fiorini, was also involved in <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs operations. Virgilio
Gonzales was a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agent active in <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs. So was Eugenio
<ent type='PERSON'>Martinez</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Charles Colson</ent> was a former <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> official who knew McCord
and Hunt during <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs period.[6]
Hunt, <ent type='PERSON'>Barker</ent>, McCord, Sturgis, Gonzales, and <ent type='PERSON'>Martinez</ent> were under
indictment for the <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> affair. <ent type='PERSON'>Colson</ent> was Nixon's special
counsel who handled "touchy" political assignments. According to
"Time" magazine, <ent type='PERSON'>Colson</ent> brought all of the others into the re-election committee espionage project at the request of <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>.[7]
In other words, it was basically the same group who worked for
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Bissell</ent> and Co. in 1960 and who worked for <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Colson</ent> and
Co. in 1972. They were all loyal, patriotic, anti-<ent type='NORP'>Communist</ent>, and
anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agents with covert (black) espionage training.
They needed Nixon's protection in 1960 and 1972, and they received
it both times.
Here is how <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> protected them in 1960.[8]</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>-<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> Debates, 1960</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> engaged in a series of national
TV debates during the 1960 campaign. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> was briefed by <ent type='PERSON'>Allen</ent>
<ent type='GPE'>Dulles</ent>, head of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> at Eisenhower's request, on secret <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
activities and international problems on July 23, 1960. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was
not aware of the briefing contents and was not sure whether <ent type='GPE'>Dulles</ent>
told <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> about <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs plans. As it turned out <ent type='GPE'>Dulles</ent>
had not mentioned the plans but had kept his remarks about <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>
rather general.
On October 6, 1960, <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> gave his major speech on <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>. He
said that events might create an opportunity for the U.S. to bring
influence on behalf of the cause of freedom in <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>. He called for
encouraging those liberty-loving <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>ns who were leading the
resistance against <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> became very disturbed about this because he felt <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
was trying to pre-empt a policy which he claimed as his own. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>
ordered <ent type='PERSON'>Fred Seaton</ent>, Secretary of the <ent type='ORG'>Interior</ent>, to call the White
<ent type='ORG'>House</ent> and find out whether <ent type='GPE'>Dulles</ent> had briefed <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> on the <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>n
invasion plans. <ent type='PERSON'>Seaton</ent> talked to General <ent type='PERSON'>Andrew Goodpaster</ent>,
Eisenhower's link to the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>, who told <ent type='PERSON'>Seaton</ent> that <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> did know
about <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs plans.</p>

<p> Attack on <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> by Lying</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> became incensed. He said, "There was only one thing I
could do. The covert operation had to be protected at all costs.
I must not even suggest by implication that the U.S. was rendering
aid to rebel forces in and out of <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>. In fact, I must go to the
other extreme: I must attack the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> proposal to provide such
aid as wrong and irresponsible because it would violate our treaty
commitments."[9]
So <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> M. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> actually went on national TV (<ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>) on
October 21, 1960, knowing we were going to invade <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>, and lied.
During the fourth TV debate, <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> attacked Kennedy's proposal as
dangerously irresponsible and in violation of five treaties between
the U.S. and Latin <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, as well as <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> Nations'
Charter.[10]
On October 22 at <ent type='ORG'>Muhlenberg College</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> really turned on the
fabrication steam. He said, "<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> called for--and get this--the
U.S. Government to support a revolution in <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>, and I say that
this is the most shockingly reckless proposal ever made in our
history by a presidential candidate during a campaign--and I'll
tell you why . . ."
The reason we should have taken with a grain of salt whatever
words <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> uttered about <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>ald <ent type='PERSON'>Segretti</ent></ent>'s espionage
is clearly demonstrated in that October 22, 1960 speech. He
fiercely attacked <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> for advocating a plan that he,
<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, secretly advocated and claimed as his own creation.
He later had the sheer gall to brag about it in his own book as a
very patriotic act.</p>

<p> Protection of Hunt and Co.</p>

<p> How was <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> protecting Hunt and company in 1972? He was using
the Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> and the <ent type='NORP'>Republican</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>men, among
others, to delay and dilute the prosecution of the <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> seven.
He had slowed down, suppressed, and all but stopped six separate
investigations, suits, and trials of the affair. Included were
<ent type='PERSON'>Wright Patman</ent>'s <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Banking <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> investigation, the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>-Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> investigation, a White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> investigation by
<ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Dean</ent>, a <ent type='ORG'>General Accounting Office</ent> investigation, a suit by the
<ent type='NORP'>Democratic</ent> Party, and a trial in criminal court of the seven
invaders. Only two trials or investigations had a chance of
exposing the truth at that time. One of these, a trial of Bernard
<ent type='PERSON'>Barker</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent> was not much help. The other was an
investigation promised by Senator Edward <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and his Senate
subcommittee. It never occurred. The action for impeachment came
much later.
Thus, the stage was set in 1961 for the group of powerful
individuals who had planned <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs to gain revenge on <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> who tried to change the overall direction of the U.S.
battle against Communism. After <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> refused to approve overt U.S.
backing of <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs invasion, various individuals in the
clandestine <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> forces vowed their revenge.
In the spring of 1961, evidence had appeared indicating that
<ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent>, Hunt, Sturgis and <ent type='PERSON'>Barker</ent> tried to have <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassinated in
<ent type='GPE'>Paris</ent>.[11] When the attempt failed, a number of other plots and
sub-plots developed through the next two years. After JFK's
blockade strategy against <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> during the missile crisis in 1962
was implemented, some of the high-level <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and armed forces people
wanted even more to get him out of the White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>. They had
favored a direct invasion or bombing of <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>.
And finally, when <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> found out about the CIA's plans for
another invasion of <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent> in the spring and summer of 1963 and
stopped them, they began in earnest to plan his death.</p>

<p>____________________</p>

<p> [1] "Six Crises," <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> M. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, <ent type='EVENT'>Doubleday</ent>, 1962.</p>

<p> [2] "The Invisible Government," <ent type='PERSON'>Wise</ent> &amp; <ent type='PERSON'>Ross</ent>, Random <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>, 1964.</p>

<p> [3] Ibid.</p>

<p> [4] Brother of <ent type='PERSON'>Earl Cabell</ent>, mayor of <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> when <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> was assassinated.</p>

<p> [5] Ibid.</p>

<p> [6] "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times" articles on <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>, June 18 to July 2, 1972.</p>

<p> [7] "Time" magazine, September 8, 1972.</p>

<p> [8] This episode is related in detail in "The Invisible Government."</p>

<p> [9] "Six Crises".</p>

<p>[10] "The Invisible Government."</p>

<p>[11] "400000 Dollars Pour Abattre <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> a <ent type='GPE'>Paris</ent>," <ent type='PERSON'>Camille Giles</ent>, Julliard
<ent type='ORG'>Press</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Paris</ent> 1973.</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> Chapter 5
The Assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent></p>

<p> The assassination of President <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> can be considered one of
a series of acts by <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> to regain the control
they had lost when <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was defeated in 1960 and <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
threatened their existence. The evidence pointing toward
intelligence involvement and the use of a variety of intelligence
techniques in the assassination is substantial. Until and unless
an investigation is conducted by a group with power and money
equivalent to that of <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent>, with the power to
issue subpoenas and to protect witnesses, it will be very difficult
to draw a completely accurate picture of the conspiracy to
assassinate <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>.
As a substitute, this chapter is a "probable reconstruction"--a
scenario--about who killed <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>. Unlike the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> Report (another scenario), this report does not contain
any physically impossible events, such as those connected with
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> Exhibit 399, the so-called "magic bullet."
This scenario is based on (1) evidence gathered between 1968 and
1975 by <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> to Investigate <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>,
D.C. and (2) evidence gathered between 1962 and 1975 by the author.
The purpose of this scenario is as a starting point for study
and verification by researchers, by <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>ional <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>s, and
by their members and staffs. This should be considered as a
beginning hypothesis and scenario in contrast to the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> scenarios.
The best evidence available indicates the following events
occurred in the summer and fall of 1963 and culminated in the
assassination of President <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>. The basic evidence has
been summarized in various articles published in "Computers and
People" (formerly "<ent type='ORG'>Computers and Automation</ent>") since May 1970.[1]
This can be considered as a guideline scenario which adheres to and
explains all of the known factual evidence.</p>

<p> How It Began</p>

<p> The conspiracy to assassinate <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> began in a series of
discussions held in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> in the summer of 1963. The men in
the discussions were extremely angry that <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> had stopped plans
and preparations for another invasion of <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent> (scheduled for the
latter part of 1963.) One of the instigators was <ent type='PERSON'>David Ferrie</ent>, a
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> contract agent who had been training pilots in <ent type='GPE'>Guatemala</ent> for
the invasion. Meetings held in Ferrie's apartment in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent>
were attended by <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent> and several <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>ns.
Plans for assassinating President <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> developed out of those
early meetings. Others whose support was sought by the group
included <ent type='PERSON'>Guy Banister</ent>, Major L. M. <ent type='GPE'>Bloomfield</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Loran Hall</ent>,
Lawrence Howard, <ent type='PERSON'>Sergio Arcacha Smith</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Carlos Prio Socarras</ent>.</p>

<p> Oswald's Role</p>

<p> During this period in the summer of 1963 <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent> was
working for <ent type='PERSON'>Guy Banister</ent> on some anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> projects and used the
<ent type='NORP'>Communist</ent> cover of the Fair Play for <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>
attended some of the meetings where JFK's assassination was
discussed.
<ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> either approached the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> or they approached him in the
later summer of 1963, and he began to tell the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> about the plans
of the group to assassinate <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> had been a secret
informant for the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> since mid-1962.</p>

<p> <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City</p>

<p> In September, the group moved the scene of their planning to
<ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City. There they solicited the assistance of Guy Gabaldin,
a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agent. Meetings were held in the apartment of Gabaldin,
attended by <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ferrie</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent>, Gabaldin and <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> on at least
three occasions. Others were brought into the conspiracy at this
point. These included <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> Howard Bowen (alias <ent type='PERSON'>Albert Osborne</ent>),
<ent type='PERSON'>Ronald Augustinovich</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Mary Hope</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Emilio Santana</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Harry Dean</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Case <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent>, and "<ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>" (an adventurer who had been
working with <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Santana</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ferrie</ent>, Howard and others on the
<ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>n invasion projects in the <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent> Keys). <ent type='PERSON'>Fred <ent type='PERSON'>Lee</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Crisman</ent></ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Jim Hicks</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Braden</ent> (alias <ent type='PERSON'>Eugene Hale</ent> Brading) were also
recruited at this point.</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>, the <ent type='PERSON'>Patsy</ent></p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> continued to inform on the group to the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>.
In mid-to late September the assassination group decided to make
<ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> the patsy in the murder. They had discussed the need for a
patsy in the earliest meetings in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent>. Billy <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent>, who
resembled <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>, was selected to use Oswald's name and to plant
evidence in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent>, which could later be
used to frame him. In addition, another man under <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> surveillance
in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City also used Oswald's name in a probable attempt to
make it appear that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> was headed for <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>. His name may have
been <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>ny <ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent> Deveraux. His picture appears in the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> Volumes as CE 237.</p>

<p> Financial Support</p>

<p> The team needed financial support for the assassination. They
received it from <ent type='PERSON'>Carlos Prio Socarras</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Miami</ent>, who brought more
than 50 million dollars out of <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>. They also received money from
Banister, and from three <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> millionaires who hated <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>:
Sid <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent>son, <ent type='PERSON'>Clint Murchison</ent>, and Jean DeMenil (of the
Schlumberger Co.). The Murchison-<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent>son contribution also
included soliciting the assistance of high-level men in the <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>
police force. They were powerful members of the <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> Citizens
Council that controlled the city at that time.</p>

<p> Plans for Three Cities</p>

<p> The group in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City planned to assassinate <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Miami</ent>,
<ent type='GPE'>Chicago</ent> or <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>, using different gunmen in each case. The <ent type='GPE'>Miami</ent>
plan failed because <ent type='ORG'>the Secret Service</ent> found out about it in
advance and kept <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> out of the open. The <ent type='GPE'>Chicago</ent> plan backfired
when <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> cancelled his plans to attend the <ent type='ORG'>Army</ent>-<ent type='ORG'>Navy</ent> game at
Soldiers Field in early November. The group set up two
assassination teams for <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>. One was in Dealey Plaza; the
second was near <ent type='ORG'>the International</ent> Trade Mart where JFK's luncheon
speech was to be delivered.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> Support</p>

<p> The best evidence of <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> (Deputy-Director of Plans) involvement
is the fact that the majority of the known participants were
contract agents or direct agents of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>. In <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City, the
meetings were held in the apartment of Guy Gabaldin, a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> (<ent type='ORG'>DDP</ent>)
agent, working for the <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City station chief. Others attending
the meetings who were <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> (<ent type='ORG'>DDP</ent>) contract or direct agents included
<ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>David Ferrie</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Albert Osborne</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Harry Dean</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Case
<ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ronald Augustinovich</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Emilio Santana</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>Fred <ent type='PERSON'>Lee</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Crisman</ent></ent>. It is likely (but not yet provable by direct
evidence) that the group sought and obtained from the acting or
permanent <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> station chief in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent>, assistance or approval to go
ahead with assassination plans. <ent type='PERSON'>Tad Szulc</ent> claims that a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> source
can prove that E. Howard Hunt was acting station chief in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent>
City at the time of the Gabaldin apartment meetings (August and
September 1963). Hunt has denied under oath before the <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> that he was in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent>.
In 1967 <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent> told a group of <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> officials, including
<ent type='PERSON'>Victor Marchetti</ent>, that both <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>David Ferrie</ent> were <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
(<ent type='ORG'>DDP</ent>) contract agents and that <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> had to be given <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> protection
and assistance in his <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> trial. This is a strong
indication that Hunt and <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent> gave "turn of the head" approval to
the <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent>-<ent type='PERSON'>Ferrie</ent> assassination plan as a minimum form of support.</p>

<p> <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent></p>

<p> The assassination group, having failed in <ent type='GPE'>Miami</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>Chicago</ent>,
moved an operational team into <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> during the second week in
November of 1963. <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ferrie</ent>, Gabaldin and other high-level
plotters travelled in other directions, establishing alibis as
planned. On November 22, Gabaldin was in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City, <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> was in
<ent type='GPE'>San Francisco</ent>, and <ent type='PERSON'>Ferrie</ent> was in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent>. The team moving into
<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> included <ent type='PERSON'>Albert Osborne</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Emilio Santana</ent>,
<ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Fred Crisman</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Hicks</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Braden</ent>, and a new recruit
from <ent type='GPE'>Los Angeles</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> Lawrence. There was also a back-up rifle
team of <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>ns to be used at a location near <ent type='ORG'>the International</ent>
Trade Mart in the event something went wrong at Dealey Plaza.</p>

<p> Where the Teams Stayed</p>

<p> The teams stayed at two locations in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> for two weeks. One
was a rooming house run by a woman named <ent type='PERSON'>Tammie True</ent>. During this
period final preparations for the assassination in Dealey Plaza
were made. These included the collecting of and planting of
evidence used to frame <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>, the recruiting of the <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> police
participants, and the plans for the escape of the team members by
car and by train. The riflemen selected were <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent> in
the Depository Building, <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> Lawrence and <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> on the grassy
<ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>, and <ent type='PERSON'>Emilio Santana</ent> in the <ent type='ORG'>Dal Tex</ent> building. <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Hicks</ent> was
set up as radio coordinator and a man with each of the riflemen had
a two-way radio. They were <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Braden</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Dal Tex</ent>; <ent type='PERSON'>Fred Crisman</ent>,
<ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>; unidentified <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n (tall tramp), <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>; and a man in the
<ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent> Building. Osborne was in overall charge of the <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> teams,
but he did not go to Dealey Plaza. A fifth gunman, known to
researchers as the umbrella man, was stationed on the street with
an umbrella weapon furnished by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>. He was accompanied by
another <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>n acting as a radio man.</p>

<p> Framing <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></p>

<p> The people involved in framing <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> included <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent> (who used
his identity), someone who posed for two pictures holding a rifle,
a photographer who took the pictures and someone who superimposed
Oswald's head on the two negatives. Also, someone who took
Oswald's rifle from his garage and his pistol from his room, taking
several bullets and shells with the pistol, fired three shells and
one bullet through the rifle, and planted the rifle and rifle
shells on the sixth floor of the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent> and a rifle bullet at
<ent type='ORG'>Parkland Hospital</ent>. The pistol shells were given to <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent>
for planting later on. The photographers also planted photos of
<ent type='ORG'>General Walker</ent>'s house and driveway to implicate <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> in the
<ent type='LOC'>Walker</ent> shooting.</p>

<p> <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> Policemen Involved</p>

<p> The policemen involved were J. D. <ent type='PERSON'>Tippit</ent>, who was to drive two
of the assassins, <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent> and his radio man, away in his police
car; <ent type='PERSON'>Bill Alexander</ent>; <ent type='PERSON'>Jerry Hill</ent>; Sergeant <ent type='PERSON'>McDonald</ent>; Lieutenant
<ent type='PERSON'>Montgomery</ent>; Lieutenant <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son; and Lieutenant <ent type='ORG'>Batchelor</ent>, who
escorted <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent></ent> into the jail to murder <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>McDonald</ent> was assigned to kill <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> upon his arrest in the
<ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> Theatre. <ent type='PERSON'>Jerry Hill</ent> was involved in that event as well as in
the planting of evidence against <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> in the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent> Building.
<ent type='PERSON'>Montgomery</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son were involved in planting the paper bag as
evidence against <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Alexander</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Batchelor</ent> were primarily
responsible for making sure that <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent></ent> assassinated <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> and
that he didn't talk about it afterward. <ent type='PERSON'>Alexander</ent> was present on
every occasion when <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent> was questioned or interviewed in the jail,
in spite of Ruby's efforts to have him removed.</p>

<p> Other Persons Involved in Framing <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></p>

<p> Also involved in framing <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> were <ent type='LOC'>Marina</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>; her lawyer,
<ent type='PERSON'>James Martin</ent>; and someone in the <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> police force. She was
talked into three points of false testimony: she said she took the
two fake photos of <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> with a camera she claimed was his. She
fabricated, or was handed, the false story about Oswald's attempt
to shoot <ent type='ORG'>General Walker</ent> and taking two pictures of Walker's house
with the same camera. (<ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> did neither.) She told a false
story about a falling out she and <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> supposedly had and
exaggerated his mean treatment of their children. There are good
indications that these moves were made by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> operatives in the
group who threatened to send <ent type='LOC'>Marina</ent> back to <ent type='GPE'>Russia</ent>. (Marina's
uncle was a high-level officer in the <ent type='ORG'>KGB</ent>.)</p>

<p> Dealey Plaza</p>

<p> On the day of the assassination four men with rifles,
accompanied by their radio men and several other team members,
moved into Dealey Plaza. <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent> and a radio man entered the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent>
Building through the freight entrance and worked their way to the
roof. <ent type='ORG'>Santana</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Braden</ent> went into the <ent type='ORG'>Dal Tex</ent> building through
the freight entrance on <ent type='GPE'>Houston</ent> St. and up a back staircase to the
second floor. Lawrence, <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Crisman</ent> and the tall tramp took
up two positions on the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>. Lawrence was inside the
westernmost cupola after parking his car in the parking lot behind
the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>. <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Crisman</ent> and the tall tramp were near the
fence. <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Hicks</ent> was in the Adolphus Hotel a few blocks away,
testing the two-way radio communication with the four radio men,
until he proceeded to the Plaza and mingled with a large crowd
(near the corner of <ent type='GPE'>Houston</ent> and Elm Streets). The umbrella man
stood near the Stemmons Freeway sign on Elm Street accompanied by
his radio man.
The other team members stationed themselves in the crowd (along
Elm Street). After the shots were fired, they circulated through
the crowd in front of the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent> on Elm Street, on the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>,
and behind the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent> Building, identifying themselves as Secret
Service agents and asking witnesses and officials questions to find
out whether the assassins had been detected. There are clear
photos of one of these men. One other man was at the corner of the
wall on the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>.</p>

<p> The Shots</p>

<p> Upon a visual and oral signal from the man at the wall and upon
a radio command from <ent type='PERSON'>Hicks</ent>, the team fired its first round of
shots. <ent type='ORG'>Crisman</ent> received the command from <ent type='PERSON'>Hicks</ent> and caused <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>
to fire a shot from a position behind the fence on the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>, about
twenty feet west of the corner of the fence. This shot missed.
The umbrella man fired a shot using his small-bore umbrella gun.
When this shot struck <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> in the throat, the dart paralyzed <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> and
later presented by Commander <ent type='PERSON'>Humes</ent> to the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>.[2] The shot was
fired at <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> frame 189: <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> was behind a large oak tree,
hidden from the sixth floor window of the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent> Building. On
command from <ent type='PERSON'>Braden</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Emilio Santana</ent> fired his first shot two
seconds later from the second floor window of the <ent type='ORG'>Dal Tex</ent> building
at Z 225 after <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> came out from behind the sign in Zapruder's
film. The shot struck <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> in the back about 5 3/4" down from the
collar line, penetrated to a depth of about two inches and stopped.
The bullet fell out of JFK's back somewhere in or at the Parkland
Hospital, or perhaps travelled down inside the body of the
President, and was never recovered.
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent> fired his shot from the west end of the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent>
Building upon command from his radio man between Z 230 and Z 237,
after Santana's shot. He used a <ent type='ORG'>Mauser</ent> rifle with no telescopic
sight. While he was aiming at <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>, he fired high and to the right,
hitting <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> Connally in the back. The bullet travelled through
Connally's chest and then entered his left thigh. The bullet fell
out of his thigh in or near <ent type='ORG'>Parkland Hospital</ent> and was never
recovered. Governor Connally's wrist was not hit at that time.
<ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> Lawrence did not fire a shot in the first round because
from his cupola position he did not have a clear shot.
<ent type='PERSON'>Hicks</ent> gave a second radio command for another round of shots as
<ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> passed the Stemmons Freeway sign.
<ent type='PERSON'>Emilio Santana</ent> fired his second shot between Z 265 and Z 275.
The bullet narrowly missed <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>, passed over the top of his head and
over the top of the limousine's windshield. It travelled on to
strike the south curb of Main Street, breaking off a piece of
concrete which flew up and hit <ent type='PERSON'>James Tague</ent>. The bullet either
disintegrated or flew into the area beyond the overpass. It was
not found.
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent> may have fired a second shot which may have
struck <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> in the upper right part of his head at Z 312. That
bullet disintegrated.
Upon command from his radio man, <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> Lawrence fired his first
shot from a pedestal on the west side of the south entrance to the
western cupola on the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>. The shot may have hit
Connally's wrist.
<ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> fired the fatal shot through the trees from his position
behind the fence.
The Lawrence shot or possibly the second <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent> shot produced a
bullet fragment that passed through Connally's right wrist at Z
313. At that time his wrist was elevated and nearly directly in
front of JFK's head, in such a position that Connally's right palm
was facing <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> as the governor fell into his wife's arms. The
fragment entered the front of his wrist and exited from the back.</p>

<p> Oswald's Actions</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent> started November 22, 1963 with the knowledge
that there might be an attempt on JFK's life during the day. He
had reported this possibility to the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> in his informer's role
five days earlier; he undoubtedly thought the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and Secret
Service would be protecting <ent type='ORG'>the President</ent>. His communications with
the assassination team had prepared him to meet with them in the
<ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> Theatre if anything happened that day. There is also a
possibility he received a telephone call immediately after the
shots, telling him to go to the theatre.
He had gone to his and Marina's rooms in <ent type='ORG'>Irving</ent> to pick up
curtain rods for his bare windows in his <ent type='PERSON'>Oak Cliff</ent> room. He
carried the curtain rods in a paper bag on his way to work that
morning with <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Wes</ent>ley <ent type='PERSON'>Frazier</ent></ent>. He worked on the sixth floor of the
<ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent> as well as on the other floors that morning. He helped a crew
of men lay a new floor on the sixth floor, move a large number of
book cartons and school supplies over to the eastern side of the
floor, including some cartons near the southeastern window that
faced Elm Street.
<ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> went to the first floor of the building at approximately
12:15 p.m. and returned to the second floor lunchroom just before
12:30. He was drinking a coke there at 12:31 when Officer <ent type='PERSON'>Baker</ent>
and Mr. Truly, the building manager, encountered him while rushing
up the stairs from the first floor. At the sight of Baker's gun
drawn and seeing the commotion outside, he no doubt realized what
had happened.[3] He immediately left the building via the freight
platform entrance on the northeast side and travelled to his
rooming house via bus and taxi. He picked up his pistol there and
went directly to the <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> Theater where he met two of the
assassination team and was sitting with them in the theatre when
the police arrived. One of these men may have been <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent>.
The <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> police members of the team planned to shoot <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> in
the theatre while arresting him. When he was arrested he did not
realize at first that he had been framed. When this began to
become clear to him on Saturday, November 23, he remained confident
that the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> would get him out of the situation. After all, he
worked for them!</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent></ent></p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent></ent>, in addition to his <ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent> involvements and other
criminal activities, was also running guns to <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent> and carrying
payoff money to other anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> groups on behalf of various <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>-backed projects. His involvement in the assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
appears to have been minor, even though he knew about it in
advance. In his night club <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent> met on several occasions with Clay
<ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>David Ferrie</ent>, and <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent>.
The group decided to assassinate <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> in jail after the police
failed to kill him in the <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> Theatre. <ent type='PERSON'>Alexander</ent> made
arrangements to have <ent type='ORG'>Batchelor</ent> escort <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent> into the jail when it
was known <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> was being moved. They arranged an audible signal
(an auto horn) to let <ent type='ORG'>Batchelor</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent> know when <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> was
coming down an elevator into the garage. They came down an
elevator opposite the one carrying <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> gave <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent> his instructions to shoot <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> through
<ent type='PERSON'>Breck Wall</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> telephoned <ent type='ORG'>Wall</ent> from <ent type='GPE'>San Francisco</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Wall</ent>
called <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent>. He was told it was an official <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>-sponsored act, in
the best interests of <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States, and that he would be out
of jail in a few days after his capture.</p>

<p> Planted Evidence</p>

<p> The planting of the evidence against <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> first began with
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent>, who used Oswald's identity during September and
October, 1963. Next, the faked photographs of <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> were created.
Two of the team members used a camera of their own to take the two
pictures of <ent type='ORG'>General Walker</ent>'s house and the two shots of one of the
men supposedly in Oswald's back yard. They planted the pictures in
Oswald's garage. Next, they stole Oswald's rifle from the garage
prior to November 22, fired several shots from it, and preserved
three shells, one bullet, and several bullet fragments.
They planted the rifle, the three shells, the bullet (399) and
the bullet fragments in the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent>, the hospital and the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
limousine on November 22. They also took Oswald's pistol at some
time prior to November 22, fired several shots from it and saved
the shells. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent>, after shooting policeman <ent type='PERSON'>Tippit</ent>, ran
away in such a manner as to attract attention, throwing the shells
from Oswald's gun into the air as he ran so that witnesses would
see them. (The shells matched Oswald's pistol. None of the
bullets matched.)
All of the work with Oswald's rifle, pistol, and the fake photos
was probably done at the same time. The rifle, pistol and
<ent type='NORP'>Communist</ent> newspapers had to be available together for the backyard
photos. The faking of the photographs, the firing of rifle and
pistol, the retrieval of the shells from rifle and pistol and of
bullet 399 and the bullet fragments from the rifle all required
enough time that the event occurred well in advance of the
assassination .</p>

<p> Escape Plans</p>

<p> As mentioned before, plans were made for the team to escape by
car, train, and airplane. Evidence shows:</p>

<p> 1. A white car was parked straddling a log barrier behind
the western cupola on the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>. It left that
spot one minute after the shots were fired and drove
eastward on the Elm Street extension in front of the
<ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent>.</p>

<p> 2. A white station wagon driving west on Elm Street
stopped at the foot of the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> at 12:40 p.m.,
ten minutes after the shots were fired. It picked up a
man who looked like <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> and drove under the triple
overpass.</p>

<p> 3. A railroad train carrying three "tramps" began to leave
the freight train area west and north of the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent> at
around one o'clock, thirty minutes after the shots.
The train was under the tower control of <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Bowers</ent></ent> and
was stopped by him. The tramps were arrested.</p>

<p> 4. A police car stopped in front of Oswald's rooming house
and honked twice around 1:10 p.m.</p>

<p> 5. Policeman Tippit's patrol car was far out of position
in the <ent type='PERSON'>Oak Cliff</ent> area near <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent> and Oswald's rooming
houses. <ent type='PERSON'>Tippit</ent> was shot by two men, one of whom was
Billy <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent>.</p>

<p> 6. A small airplane was sitting at the Redbird Airport, a
location in the same direction as <ent type='PERSON'>Oak Cliff</ent>, a little
further out from Dealey Plaza. Its engines were
running. It was ready for takeoff at 1 p.m.</p>

<p> 7. <ent type='PERSON'>David Ferrie</ent> went to <ent type='GPE'>Houston</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> on the afternoon of
November 22, driving at high speed through bad
thunderstorms to get there. He was positioned at a pay
telephone at an ice skating rink near the <ent type='GPE'>Houston</ent>
airport, until receiving a phone call there. After
that he returned to <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent>.</p>

<p> Escape Routes</p>

<p> These escape plans were modified after the assassination. It
became unnecessary for any of the Dealey Plaza participants to
escape by airplane. The framing of <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> and the failure of the
<ent type='ORG'>Secret Service</ent> or <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> to detect any of the escaping gunmen or their
assistants permitted these changes. One of the men in the Dealey
Plaza--probably pretending to be a <ent type='ORG'>Secret Service</ent> agent--reported
an "all clear" situation to <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>San Francisco</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> notified
<ent type='PERSON'>Ferrie</ent> that they didn't need an airplane to escape with while
<ent type='PERSON'>Ferrie</ent> was waiting in <ent type='GPE'>Houston</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Ferrie</ent> changed his plans and drove
back to <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent>.
The gunmen who did escape followed these routes: <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> Lawrence
got into his car parked behind the cupola and either drove or was
driven back to his cover job location at the automobile agency. He
left almost immediately afterward and travelled to <ent type='PERSON'>North</ent> Carolina.
<ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> ran back to the freight car area and climbed into one of
the box cars sitting on a siding northwest of the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent>. He was
arrested at 1 p.m. by Officers Harkness, Bass and <ent type='PERSON'>Wise</ent>, but was
released by <ent type='PERSON'>Sheriff Elkins</ent> later in the afternoon. <ent type='ORG'>Santana</ent> walked
out the back entrance of the <ent type='ORG'>Dal Tex</ent> building and may have joined
<ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent> in a white station wagon on Elm Street at 12:40 p.m.
<ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent> left the roof of the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent> via a back stairway, exited from
the freight entrance in the rear of the building, and walked on
<ent type='GPE'>Houston</ent> Street past the Elm Street extension. He walked down the
grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> to Elm Street where he was picked up at 12:40 p.m. by
the white station wagon.
The other Dealey Plaza participants, <ent type='ORG'>Crisman</ent>, a tall tramp,
<ent type='PERSON'>Braden</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Hicks</ent> escaped by various means. <ent type='PERSON'>Braden</ent> was arrested and
released. <ent type='PERSON'>Hicks</ent> drove home. <ent type='ORG'>Crisman</ent> and the tall tramp followed
Frenchy's route into the box cars.</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Tippit</ent> Shooting</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>David Belin</ent> of the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> is fond of
saying, "<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent> killed policeman <ent type='PERSON'>Tippit</ent>. Since the
case against <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> for the <ent type='PERSON'>Tippit</ent> slaying is so strong, it
follows that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> also shot <ent type='ORG'>the President</ent>." The case against
<ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> in the <ent type='PERSON'>Tippit</ent> murder is as weak as the case against him in
the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination. The most important evidence showing that
<ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent> and another one of the assassination team shot <ent type='PERSON'>Tippit</ent> is
the fact that six witnesses, ignored by <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>, saw
two men shoot <ent type='PERSON'>Tippit</ent>. One of them resembled <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>. They ran
away from the scene in opposite directions. <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent> ran toward the
<ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> Theater, throwing the planted shells up in the air so that
witnesses would see and recover them. (This act would convince
most people that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> did not shoot <ent type='PERSON'>Tippit</ent>.) The other assassin
ran in the opposite direction. There is some indication that
<ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent> entered the theater in a manner to draw attention and then
left before the <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> arrest. While the shells recovered were
found to match Oswald's pistol, none of the bullets recovered from
Tippit's body matched.</p>

<p> Comments and <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>ional Actions Needed</p>

<p> The above scenario comes much closer to explaining what happened
to <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> than either <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> Report or the
<ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> report. It matches the known evidence from
the two prime sources, <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> files in the National
<ent type='ORG'>Archives</ent>, and the evidence produced by the <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> investigation
(most of which was turned over the <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> to Investigate
<ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>, D.C.).
However, without subpoena power, and with extremely limited
resources, no group of citizens such as <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> or Mark
Lane's Citizens <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> can determine the ultimate truth about
the assassination.
Only a properly constituted <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>ional committee or group
with resources and subpoena power, and with the power and courage
to combat <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> involved in the assassination and
its cover-up, whoever they may be, can reach the truth.
This chapter has been prepared as a guideline for such a
committee, rather than as the ultimate solution.
It should be utilized in conjunction with two other documents
already submitted to the four <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>ional groups interested in
the case. The groups are:</p>

<p> (1) The Senate;</p>

<p> (2) The <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Special <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent>;</p>

<p> (3) <ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Downing</ent>, Representative from <ent type='GPE'>Virginia</ent>, who
introduced <ent type='ORG'>House Resolution</ent> 498 to reopen the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
assassination investigation;</p>

<p> (4) <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent>, Representative from <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent>, who
introduced <ent type='ORG'>House Resolution</ent> 204 to reopen the
assassination inquiries on <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent>, and <ent type='PERSON'>George Wallace</ent>.</p>

<p> The Two Documents</p>

<p> 1. "Recommendations for the Senate and <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Committee's
Investigations of Illegal and Subversive Domestic Activities of
the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>," memorandum by <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> (submitted
to them).
2. "The Assassination of President <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>: the
Involvement of the <ent type='ORG'>Central <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Agency</ent></ent> in the Plans and
the Cover-Up," by <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, in "People and the
Pursuit of <ent type='ORG'>Truth</ent>," May, 1975.</p>

<p> Dramatis Personae</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Bill Alexander</ent> - Assistant to District Attorney Wade, <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>
County.
<ent type='PERSON'>Ronald Augustinovich</ent> - <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agent. Participated in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City
meetings.
Officer Marion <ent type='PERSON'>Baker</ent>-<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> motorcycle police officer entering
<ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> School Book Depository after shots.
<ent type='PERSON'>Guy Banister</ent> - Head of clandestine <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> station in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> -
ran <ent type='ORG'>Banister Detective Agency</ent>. <ent type='ORG'>Front</ent> for anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>n
groups. Former <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> agent and member of <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> police.
Died of "heart attack" June 1964. <ent type='PERSON'>David Ferrie</ent> worked for
him. <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> used his office and address.
Officer <ent type='PERSON'>Billy Bass</ent> - <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> police officer; arrested "tramps" in
Dealey Plaza.
Lt. <ent type='ORG'>Batchelor</ent> - <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> police lieutenant.
<ent type='PERSON'>David Belin</ent> - <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> lawyer.
Major L. M. <ent type='GPE'>Bloomfield</ent> - Resident of <ent type='GPE'>Montreal</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Canada</ent>. Member of
board of Centro Mondiale Commerciale, <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> front-organization
in <ent type='GPE'>Rome</ent>. Visited by <ent type='PERSON'>Ferrie</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> in fall 1963.
<ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> Howard Bowen - <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agent. Alias <ent type='PERSON'>Albert Osborne</ent>. Long
clandestine record. On bus to <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> with <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>.
Participated in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City meetings.
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Bowers</ent></ent> - Railroad tower control operator, Dealey Plaza. Died
in curious accident.
<ent type='PERSON'>Jim Braden</ent> - Alias <ent type='PERSON'>Eugene Hale</ent> Brading. <ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent> hoodlum and <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
contract agent. Acted as radio man in Dealey Plaza.
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> - <ent type='ORG'>Central <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Agency</ent></ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Fred <ent type='PERSON'>Lee</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Crisman</ent></ent> - <ent type='ORG'>OSS</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> domestic agent from <ent type='GPE'>Tacoma</ent>,
<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>. Participated with <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> and others as radio
man in Dealey Plaza.
<ent type='PERSON'>Harry Dean</ent> - <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> operative in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City.
Jean DeMenil - <ent type='GPE'>Louisiana</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> industrialist.
<ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>ny <ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent> Deveraux - <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agent, <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City. May have
impersonated <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent>.
Sheriff <ent type='PERSON'>Harold Elkins</ent> - <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> County Deputy Chief.
<ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> - <ent type='ORG'>Federal Bureau</ent> of Investigation, then headed by J. Edgar
<ent type='PERSON'>Hoover</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>David Ferrie</ent> - Resident of <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> <ent type='NORP'>French</ent> Quarter. Pilot for
<ent type='NORP'>Eastern</ent> Airlines. Bay of Pigs, <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> contractor for pilot
training and clandestine flights. Associate of <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent></ent>; murdered Feb. 1967; death
termed "suicide" by officials.
"<ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>" - Real name(s) not yet determined. <ent type='NORP'>French</ent> Canadian
adventurer. <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> contract agent. Training for second
invasion of <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent> Keys. Knew Howard, Hall,
<ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Hemming</ent>, and <ent type='ORG'>Santana</ent>. Fired shots. Also involved
in <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> assassination.
Guy Gabaldin - Former <ent type='ORG'>OSS</ent> operative and <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agent in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City.
Movie made about his <ent type='EVENT'>World War</ent> II exploits, <ent type='PERSON'>Jeff</ent>rey Hunter
played Gabaldin role. Assassination planning done in his
<ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City apartment.
<ent type='PERSON'>Loran Hall</ent> - Anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> adventurer from southern <ent type='GPE'>California</ent>. One
of three men who visited Sylvia Odio and said <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> would be
assassinated. Close friend of Lawrence Howard, <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent> and other no-name key adventurers. Raising funds for
them in 1963.
Sgt. Harkness - <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> police sergeant.
<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent> - Deputy Director - Plans, <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>, in 1963.
Jerry <ent type='PERSON'>Pat</ent>rick <ent type='ORG'>Hemming</ent> - <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agent and trainer of mercenaries at
no-name key.
<ent type='PERSON'>Jim Hicks</ent> - Radio specialist from <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>. Was radio communications
coordinator in Dealey Plaza. Placed in mental hospital run by
the military.
<ent type='PERSON'>Jerry Hill</ent> - Police sergeant, <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Mary Hope</ent> - Friend of <ent type='ORG'>Augustinovich</ent>. Participated in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City
meetings on the assassination.
Lawrence Howard - Anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> adventurer. No-name key group.
Friend of <ent type='PERSON'>Loran Hall</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent>. Visited Sylvia Odio.
Kept no-name key photo album. Provided <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> with pictures.
E. Howard Hunt - <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agent. Acting station chief <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> clandestine
station in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City in 1963.
Lt. <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son - <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> police lieutenant.
<ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> Lawrence - Resident of <ent type='PERSON'>Wes</ent>t <ent type='GPE'>Virginia</ent> and southern <ent type='GPE'>California</ent>.
Minuteman and adventurer. Fired shots.
<ent type='PERSON'>James Martin</ent> - <ent type='LOC'>Marina</ent> Oswald's business manager.
Sgt. <ent type='PERSON'>McDonald</ent> - Police sergeant, <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>.
Lt. <ent type='PERSON'>Montgomery</ent> - <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> police lieutenant; helped frame <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> .
<ent type='PERSON'>Clint Murchison</ent> - <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> oil millionaire.
<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Case <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent> - <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> operative in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City; testified
before <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>ional <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>s.
<ent type='ORG'>OSS</ent> - Office of Strategic Services.
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent> - <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> resident. <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>
agent and informer. <ent type='PERSON'>Patsy</ent> in assassination.
<ent type='LOC'>Marina</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> - Wife of <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>. Helped to frame her
husband.
Sid <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent>son - <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> oil millionaire.
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent></ent> - <ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent> connections. Anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> contracts. <ent type='ORG'>Owner</ent>
of <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> night club. Recruited to shoot <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Emilio Santana</ent> - <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>n adventurer. Anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent>, in no-name key
group. Was in Dealey Plaza firing shots.
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent> - Mexican-<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n adventurer and hired killer. On
no-name key training for second invasion of <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent> in 1963.
Impersonated <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent> and resembled <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>. Fired
shots in Dealey Plaza. Killed Officer <ent type='PERSON'>Tippit</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> - <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> <ent type='NORP'>French</ent> Quarter resident. Manager
International Trade Mart, <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> contract agent, member board of
directors of <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> organization, Centro Mondiale Commericale.
Murdered in 1974. Living double life as <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Bertrand</ent>, friend
of <ent type='PERSON'>David Ferrie</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Sergio Arcacha Smith</ent> - Anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>n. Devoted to overthrowing
<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent>. <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> contract agent. Close to <ent type='PERSON'>Guy Banister</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ferrie</ent>,
and <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> operations. Fled to <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent>, escaped
<ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> subpoena. Protected by Governor <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> Connally from
extradition.
<ent type='PERSON'>Carlos Prio Socarras</ent> - Former premier of <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>. Violent Anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent>
millionaire. Backed <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>n invasion plans and <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> efforts.
Lived in <ent type='GPE'>Miami</ent> area. Murdered in 1977.
<ent type='PERSON'>James Tague</ent> - Spectator in Dealey Plaza, hit by piece of curbing
thrown up by bullet striking near him.
J. D. <ent type='PERSON'>Tippit</ent> - <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> policeman, shot on November 22, 1963. Co-conspirator in assassination, <ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> functionary.
<ent type='PERSON'>Tammie True</ent> - <ent type='ORG'>Owner</ent> of <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> safe house in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Roy Truly</ent> - Manager of <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> School Book Depository.
<ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent> - <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> School Book Depository Building in Dealey Plaza,
<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>, from which <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> was supposed to have fired shots at
President <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>.
<ent type='ORG'>General Walker</ent> - Right-wing former <ent type='ORG'>Army General</ent>. Resident of
<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>. Supposedly shot at by <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Breck Wall</ent> - Friend of <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent></ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Marvin Wise</ent> - <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> police officer, arrested "tramps" in Dealey
Plaza.</p>

<p>____________________</p>

<p>[1] For a complete listing of articles on political assassinations in the
United States, published in "Computers and People" (formerly
"<ent type='ORG'>Computers and Automation</ent>"), see the issues of "<ent type='ORG'>People and the Pursuit</ent>
of <ent type='ORG'>Truth</ent>," May 1975, p. 6, and June, 1975, p. 5, published by <ent type='GPE'>Berkeley</ent>
Enterprises, Inc., 815 <ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> St., <ent type='PERSON'>Newton</ent>ville, Mass. 02160.</p>

<p>[2] "1978 <ent type='GPE'>Los Angeles</ent> Free <ent type='ORG'>Press</ent>" - Special Report No 1, page 16, copy of
receipt given to Commander <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> J. <ent type='PERSON'>Humes</ent> MC, USN "for <ent type='ORG'>Missile</ent> removed
on this date (Nov. 22, 1963)," signed by Francis X. O'<ent type='PERSON'>Neill</ent>, Jr.,
<ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> W. Sibert, <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> Agents.</p>

<p> Also "<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>mortem," by <ent type='PERSON'>Harold Weisberg</ent>, page 266, the missile receipt.</p>

<p>[3] As mentioned earlier, it is also possible that one of the team called
him from a telephone inside the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent>.</p>

<p> * * * * * * *
--
daveus rattus </p>

<p> yer friendly neighborhood ratman</p>

<p> KOYAANISQATSI</p>

<p> ko.yaa.nis.qatsi (from <ent type='EVENT'>the Hopi Language</ent>) n. 1. crazy life. 2. life
in turmoil. 3. life out of balance. 4. life disintegrating.
5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.
<ent type='PERSON'>Pat</ent>h: ns-mx!uunet!olivea!sgigate!odin!ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com!dave
From: dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (dave "who can do? ratmandu!" ratcliffe)
Newsgroups: alt.activism,alt.conspiracy,alt.conspiracy.<ent type='PERSON'>jfk</ent>
Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (3/11)
Summary: we were robbed of our capability of electing a president we wanted
Keywords: part 3 of 11: chapter 6 thru chapter 8
<info type="Message-ID"> 1992Jun9.161556.23157@odin.corp.sgi.com</info>
Date: 9 Jun 92 16:15:56 GMT
Sender: news@odin.corp.sgi.com (Net News)
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.
Lines: 632
Xref: ns-mx alt.activism:27381 alt.conspiracy:15473 alt.conspiracy.<ent type='PERSON'>jfk</ent>:1570
Nntp-<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>ing-Host: ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> Chapter 6
The <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> of <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and
Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>Lyndon</ent> B. <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son's Withdrawal in 1968</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>The <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> faced several dangers in 1968. While
President <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son had cooperated fully with their desires in Viet
Nam and in other parts of the world, he had not met their
requirements in other areas. He had gone too far in appeasing the
blacks and had shown some signs of giving in to the young people in
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent> in early 1968. Through threats to expose his role in
covering up the truth about the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination or personal
threats to the safety of his family, the <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> forced his
withdrawal from the 1968 election race. Their plan now was to
install <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> as president at all costs.
<ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> posed real threats to this plan.
Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> was beginning a movement in the direction of a coalition
with Malcom X followers and other black militant groups. He was
speaking out against the <ent type='GPE'>Viet Nam</ent> war. His influence might help
defeat <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> at the polls. So <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> created an
environment in which he could be assassinated by his arch enemies.
The <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and J. <ent type='PERSON'>Edgar Hoover</ent> had become a vital part of the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> by 1968. <ent type='PERSON'>Hoover</ent> had no love for <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> and was
harrassing him in several ways. <ent type='ORG'>The <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent>
undoubtedly let <ent type='PERSON'>Hoover</ent> know that it wouldn't be a bad idea to have
<ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> out of the way before the election campaigns really warmed up.
They also passed the word along to some of the groups who were out
to murder <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> that the crime would probably not be stopped.
Fletcher Prouty has described this approach in some detail.[1] The
net result of these actions was the assassination of Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> by a
group of wealthy white bigots who employed two of the intelligence
community's own expert assassins. One of these men, <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>, had
fired shots at <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>. The other, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Youngblood</ent></ent>, was a soldier of
fortune and <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> contract killer. They recruited <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent></ent> and
set him up as a patsy.
The <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> removed King's protection in <ent type='GPE'>Memphis</ent> and after the
assassination they took the case out of the hands of the local
police to control and suppress the evidence of conspiracy. <ent type='PERSON'>Hoover</ent>
did not know exactly who was going to assassinate <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> or where.
He did not know in advance who the patsy was supposed to be. The
best evidence in support of this is that from April to June 1968
the identity of the patsy was a mystery, first unidentified, then
identified as <ent type='PERSON'>Eric Starvo</ent> Galt, then as <ent type='PERSON'>Raymond Sneyd</ent>, and finally
as <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent></ent>. If <ent type='PERSON'>Hoover</ent> had been in on the plan, Ray's
identity would probably have been revealed immediately. In fact,
the scenario might have been similar to the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case, with <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent>
being killed in a shoot-out.
After <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> was identified and arrested in <ent type='GPE'>London</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Hoover</ent> and the
Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> had to manufacture some evidence to get <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> back
to the U.S. They had no qualms about bribing one witness, <ent type='PERSON'>Charlie</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Stevens</ent>, to do this. They forced him to say he had seen <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent>. Then
a new problem arose. <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> began telling the truth to his lawyer and
a writer, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> Bradford <ent type='ORG'>Huie</ent></ent>. He almost revealed Frenchy's true
identity. <ent type='ORG'>The <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent>, led by J. <ent type='PERSON'>Edgar Hoover</ent>, solved
this problem by getting rid of Ray's lawyer, <ent type='PERSON'>Arthur Hanes</ent>, and they
hired <ent type='PERSON'>Percy Foreman</ent> to keep <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> quiet. They also were forced to
pay off or frighten off author <ent type='ORG'>Huie</ent> who had by then become
convinced <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> was telling him the truth. <ent type='ORG'>Huie</ent> had found several
witnesses who had seen <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> and <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> together.
The group got <ent type='PERSON'>Foreman</ent> to talk <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> into pleading guilty and <ent type='ORG'>Huie</ent>
to retract his conspiracy talk and publish an article and a book
claiming <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> was the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent>. Ever since <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> was put away
for 99 years, the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> have been hard at
work covering up the truth, bribing or influencing judges who have
heard Ray's appeals for a trial, publishing disinformation like
<ent type='PERSON'>Gerold Franck</ent>'s book, "An <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n Assassin," suppressing evidence,
and placing key witnesses in psychiatric wards. It is still going
on. They have killed at least one reporter--<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Lomax</ent></ent>--who was
getting too close to the truth. The local D.A., <ent type='PERSON'>Phil Canale</ent>, was
brought into the conspiracy along with <ent type='PERSON'>Percy Foreman</ent>, Judge Battle,
<ent type='PERSON'>Fred Vinson</ent> (who extradited <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent>, using <ent type='PERSON'>Stevens</ent>' false affidavit),
and local authorities who committed <ent type='PERSON'>Grace</ent> Walden <ent type='PERSON'>Stevens</ent> to a
mental institution because she knew <ent type='PERSON'>Charlie</ent> had been dead drunk and
saw nothing.
The mechanics of the assassination are as follows: <ent type='PERSON'>Youngblood</ent>
and <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> recruited <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Montreal</ent> for smuggling drugs into the
U.S. from <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>Canada</ent>. They recruited him in the
assassination plan in such a way as to make him believe they were
smuggling guns to <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>.
<ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> (<ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> knew him as <ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent>) set up <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> as a patsy by
planting evidence with Ray's prints on it near the fake firing
point. He persuaded <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> to rent a room opposite Dr. King's motel,
to buy a rifle with telescopic sight, and a white <ent type='ORG'>Mustang</ent>, and park
the <ent type='ORG'>Mustang</ent> outside the rooming house to wait for <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> to come
out. <ent type='PERSON'>Youngblood</ent> stationed himself on a grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> beneath the
rooming house where <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> was located. When <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> came out on his
balcony, <ent type='PERSON'>Youngblood</ent> killed him with one shot fired at an upward
angle. <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> ran from his perch overlooking King's balcony. He
made plenty of noise to attract attention, and dropped a bag full
of items with Ray's prints on them in front of an amusement parlor
next door to the rooming house.
<ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> must have had some anxious moments then because <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> had
driven the <ent type='ORG'>Mustang</ent> to a gas station a few blocks away to have a low
tire pumped up. Three witnesses remember his being there. When
<ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> returned, not yet knowing what had happened, <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> told him
to drive away toward the edge of town where <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> got out of the
back seat. <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> drove on to <ent type='GPE'>Atlanta</ent> with the intention of meeting
<ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> there.
Meanwhile, <ent type='PERSON'>Youngblood</ent> mingled with the crowd under King's
balcony and then faded away. A false trail was created by another
member of the team who drove away in a second white <ent type='ORG'>Mustang</ent> and
then created a fake auto chase on the police band radio.
<ent type='PERSON'>Youngblood</ent> was tracked down by various reporters in early 1976 and
began negotiating to tell his story for a very high price.
Meanwhile, judge after judge and court after court keep turning
down <ent type='PERSON'>Bernard Fensterwald</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Cesar</ent>, Ray's new lawyers, who
appealed for a new trial.
All of the information above has been reported with factual
evidence backing it up in several articles, one book, and at Ray's
legal hearing for a new trial in <ent type='GPE'>Memphis</ent> in 1975.[2]
After Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> was eliminated, <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> faced a
much greater threat. <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> began his quest for the
presidency. There was little doubt in the minds of anyone in the
<ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> that <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> would be nominated as <ent type='NORP'>Democratic</ent> candidate at
the convention, and would have a very good chance of defeating
<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>. This would be a near certainty if Eugene <ent type='PERSON'>McCarthy</ent>
decided to drop out and support Senator <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
represented a double threat to the <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> in that he would
undoubtedly expose them after becoming president and seize control.
The plan they adopted was again to create an environment in
which it would be easy for an enemy like the Minutemen or the <ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent>
or certain local hate groups in <ent type='GPE'>California</ent> to assassinate <ent type='PERSON'>RFK</ent> and
get away with it by setting up another patsy. Available at the
time was a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agent planted inside the <ent type='GPE'>Los Angeles</ent> police
department. Strong influence was brought to bear on chief of
police, Ed Davis, to remove all official protection for Senator
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> in the Ambassador Hotel. Arrangements were made for the
Ace <ent type='ORG'>Guard</ent> Service to supply three extreme right wing, militant
guards at the hotel to guard the Senator after his victory speech.
One of these was <ent type='PERSON'>Thane Eugene Cesar</ent>, a known <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> hater and
friend of a group of <ent type='LOC'>South</ent>ern <ent type='GPE'>California</ent> Minutemen. He was also
almost certainly a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> contract agent or "blind" assassin. At the
same time another group was recruited to hypnotize <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent></ent>
and to program him for firing some shots in <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> Kennedy's
direction. Two hypnotists and at least three other people were
involved in the framing of <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Cesar</ent> killed <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> from behind while <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent> was firing
under hypnosis from in front of the Senator. His programmed signal
was given by a girl in a polka dot dress and another young <ent type='NORP'>Arabic</ent>
man with them in the pantry.
After the crime, the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agent (<ent type='PERSON'>Manny Pena</ent>), the
District Attorney's office (<ent type='PERSON'>Evelle Younger</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Joseph Busch</ent>) and
the <ent type='GPE'>Los Angeles</ent> Police <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> (Ed Davis, <ent type='PERSON'>Robert Houghton</ent> and
others), knowing the truth, all teamed up to suppress all other
evidence except that which was aimed at framing <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent>. The <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> has since wielded its influence to keep the <ent type='PERSON'>RFK</ent> case
under wraps. They pushed legislation through the <ent type='GPE'>California</ent>
legislature to lock up the evidence. They put <ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Noguchi</ent>, the
L.A. County Coroner who wouldn't keep quiet about the autopsy
evidence which proved conspiracy, in an insane asylum. They
arranged for the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> report on the assassination to be classified
and locked up. They killed at least one person who knew what had
happened. They controlled the media on the subject, especially the
"<ent type='GPE'>Los Angeles</ent> Times" through its owner, <ent type='PERSON'>Norman Chandler</ent>, and his
friend <ent type='PERSON'>Evelle Younger</ent>, who became <ent type='GPE'>California</ent> State Attorney
General.
After Al Lowenstein, <ent type='PERSON'>Jerry Brown</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Paul Schrade</ent>, Vincent
Bugliosi, <ent type='PERSON'>Robert Vaughn</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Tom Bradley</ent> and others began to try to
expose the truth, the <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> fought back by setting up their own
expert ballistics panel and buying or frightening them into
distorting the evidence proving there were two guns fired. The
<ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> is certainly not through yet. More planted disinformation
can be expected and more bribing of judges and expert witnesses.
There may be more killings. Cesar's life and the lives of the two
hypnotists won't be worth much if they ever start talking.[3]</p>

<p>____________________</p>

<p>[1] "<ent type='ORG'>The Fourth Force</ent>" -- L. Fletcher Prouty -- "Gallery Magazine" --
December, 1975</p>

<p>[2] "Frame Up: The <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent>/<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent></ent> Case" -- Harold
Weisberg -- E.P. Dutton -- 1971</p>

<p> "The Assassination of Reverend <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent>, Jr." -- R.E.
<ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> -- "Computers &amp; Automation," December 1970</p>

<p> "The Assassination of Reverend <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent>, Jr. -- Parts I to
II" -- <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Wayne</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Chastain</ent></ent> -- "Computers &amp; Automation," December 1974.</p>

<p>[3] Most of the above information has been published in a series of
articles and in two books and one movie.</p>

<p> "The Assassination of Senator <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>" -- R.E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> --
"Computers &amp; Automation" -- September 1972 and October 1970</p>

<p> "<ent type='PERSON'>RFK</ent> Must Die" -- <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> Blair Kaiser -- 1970</p>

<p> "The Assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, A Searching Look at the
Conspiracy and Cover-Up 1968-1978" -- <ent type='PERSON'>William Turner</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>
Christian -- 1978</p>

<p> "The Second Gun" -- Documentary Movie -- <ent type='PERSON'>Ted Charach</ent> -- <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n
Films -- <ent type='GPE'>Beverly</ent> Hills</p>

<div> </div>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> Chapter 7
<ent type='ORG'>The Control</ent> of the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>s - Threats &amp; Chappaquiddick</p>

<p> Through the years the most common question of all has been: "If
there was a conspiracy in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination, why didn't <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> find out about it and take some action? And if there was a
conspiracy in the <ent type='PERSON'>RFK</ent> assassination why haven't <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and
Ethel <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> done something about it?" No one except the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>s
know the answers to these questions for sure. However, there are
plenty of clues and some other <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> actions to
provide the answers to us.
First of all, thanks to <ent type='PERSON'>Jackie</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> Onassis' butler in
<ent type='GPE'>Athens</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Greece</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Christain Cafarakis</ent>, we know why <ent type='PERSON'>Jackie</ent> did nothing
after her husband's death. In a book published in 1972, <ent type='PERSON'>Cafarakis</ent>
tells about an investigation <ent type='PERSON'>Jackie</ent> had conducted by a famous New
York City detective agency into the assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> in 1964
and 1965.[1] It was financed by <ent type='PERSON'>Aristotle Onassis</ent> and resulted in
a report in the spring of 1965 telling who the four gunmen were and
who was behind them. <ent type='PERSON'>Jackie</ent> planned to give the report to <ent type='ORG'>LBJ</ent> but
was stopped by a threat from <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> to kill her
and her children. <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Bobby</ent> and other family members knew about
the report and the threat.
The second clue is Chappaquiddick. A careful examination of the
real evidence in this event shows that <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> was framed in
the killing of <ent type='PERSON'>Mary Joe Kopechne</ent> and then his life and his
children's lives threatened if he ever told the truth about what
happened. The facts in the case and the conclusions that can be
drawn from them are contained in a book by <ent type='GPE'>Boston</ent> researcher <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Cutler</ent>.[2]
The third clue is Ted's withdrawal from the presidential race in
November 1975. It is a fact that all of his and Robert's children
were being protected by <ent type='ORG'>the Secret Service</ent> for five days in
November 1975. A threat had been made against the children's lives
unless he officially announced his withdrawal. He made the
announcement and has stuck to it ever since. The <ent type='ORG'>Secret Service</ent>
protection ended the day after he made the announcement.
It does not seem likely that Senator <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> would withdraw from
the race because of a threat from a lone nut or from some obscure
group. He remembers the 1965 threat and Chappaquiddick very well.
He knows about <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> and he knows their enormous
capability. He knows what they did to his brothers. He has no
choice but to hope that somehow, sometime, the <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> will be
exposed. But he dares not let them believe he would ever have
anything to do with it. Publicly he will always have to support
<ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> and continue to state that he will not run
for president. Privately he is forced to ask his closest friends
and his relatives not to get involved with new investigations, and
to help protect his children. Some of them know the truth. Others
do not, and are puzzled by his behavior. They go along with it
under the assumption that he has good and sufficient reasons not to
open the can of worms represented by the conspiracies in his
brother's deaths.
<ent type='ORG'>The <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> faced up to the <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
family problem very early. They used the threat against the
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> children's lives very effectively between 1963 and 1968 to
silence <ent type='PERSON'>Bobby</ent> and the rest of the family and friends who knew the
truth. It was necessary to assassinate <ent type='PERSON'>Bobby</ent> in 1968 because with
the power of the presidency he could have prevented the <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> from
harming the children. When <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent>dy began making moves to run for
president in 1969 for the 1972 election, the <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> decided to put
some real action behind their threats. Killing <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent>dy in 1969 would
have been too much. They selected a new way of eliminating him as
a candidate. They framed him with the death of a young girl, and
threw sexual overtones in for good measure.
Here is what happened according to Cutler's analysis of the
evidence. The <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> hired several men and at least one woman to be
at Chappaquiddick during the weekend of the yacht race and the
planned party on the island. They ambushed <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> and Mary Jo after
they left the cottage and knocked <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> out with blows to his head
and body. They took the unconscious or semi-conscious <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> to
Martha's <ent type='LOC'>Vineyard</ent> and deposited him in his hotel room. Another
group took Mary Jo to the bridge in Ted's car, force fed her with a
knock out potion of alcoholic beverage, placed her in the back
seat, and caused the car to accelerate off the side of the bridge
into the water. They broke the windows on one side of the car to
insure the entry of water; then they watched the car until they
were sure Mary Jo would not escape.
Mary Jo actually regained consciousness and pushed her way to
the top of the car (which was actually the bottom of the car--it
had landed on its roof) and died from asphyxiation. The group with
<ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent>dy revived him early in the morning and let him know he had a
problem. Possibly they told him that Mary Jo had been kidnapped.
They told him his children would be killed if he told anyone what
had happened and that he would hear from them. On Chappaquiddick,
the other group made contact with <ent type='GPE'>Markham</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Gargan</ent>, Ted's cousin
and lawyer. They told both men that Mary Jo was at the bottom of
the river and that <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> would have to make up a story about it, not
revealing the existence of the group. One of the men resembled <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent>
and his voice sounded something like Ted's. <ent type='GPE'>Markham</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Gargan</ent>
were instructed to go the the <ent type='LOC'>Vineyard</ent> on the morning ferry, tell
<ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> where Mary Jo was, and come back to the island to wait for a
phone call at a pay station near the ferry on the Chappaquiddick
side.
The two men did as they were told and <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> found out what had
happened to Mary Jo that morning. The three men returned to the
pay phone and received their instructions to concoct a story about
the "accident" and to report it to the police. The threat against
Ted's children was repeated at that time.
<ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Markham</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Gargan</ent> went right away to police chief Arena's
office on the <ent type='LOC'>Vineyard</ent> where <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> reported the so-called "accident."
Almost at the same time scuba diver <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> Farror was pulling Mary Jo
out of the water, since two boys who had gone fishing earlier that
morning had spotted the car and reported it.
<ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> called together a small coterie of friends and advisors
including family lawyer <ent type='PERSON'>Burke Marshall</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> MacNamara, <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent>
Sorenson, and others. They met on <ent type='LOC'>Squaw Island</ent> near the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
compound at <ent type='LOC'>Hyannisport</ent> for three days. At the end of that time
they had manufactured the story which <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> told on TV, and later at
the inquest. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Cutler</ent></ent> calls the story, "the shroud." Even the
most cursory examination of the story shows it was full of holes
and an impossible explanation of what happened. Ted's claim that
he made the wrong turn down the dirt road toward the bridge by
mistake is an obvious lie. His claim that he swam the channel back
to Martha's <ent type='LOC'>Vineyard</ent> is not believable. His description of how he
got out of the car under water and then dove down to try to rescue
Mary Jo is impossible. <ent type='GPE'>Markham</ent> and Gargan's claims that they kept
diving after Mary Jo are also unbelievable.
The evidence for the <ent type='PERSON'>Cutler</ent> scenario is substantial. It begins
with the marks on the bridge and the position of the car in the
water. The marks show that the car was standing still on the
bridge and then accelerated off the edge, moving at a much higher
speed than <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> claimed. The distance the car travelled in the
air also confirms this. The damage to the car on two sides and on
top plus the damage to the windshield and the rear view mirror
stanchion[3] prove that some of the damage had to have been
inflicted before the car left the bridge.
The blood on the back and on the sleeves of Mary Jo's blouse
proves that a wound was inflicted before she left the bridge.[4]
The alcohol in her bloodstream proves she was drugged, since all
witnesses testified she never drank and did not drink that night.
The fact that she was in the back seat when her body was recovered
indicates that is where she was when the car hit the water. There
was no way she could have dived downward against the inrushing
water and moved from the front to the back seat underneath the
upside-down seat back.
The wounds on the back of <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> Kennedy's skull, those just above
his ear and the large bump on the top indicate he was knocked out.
His actions at the hotel the next morning show he was not aware of
Mary Jo's death until <ent type='GPE'>Markham</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Gargan</ent> arrived. The trip to the
pay phone on Chappaquiddick can only be explained by his receiving
a call there, not making one. There were plenty of pay phones in
or near Ted's hotel if he needed to make a private call. The tides
in the channel and the direction in which <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> claimed he swam do
not match. In addition it would have been a superhuman feat to
have made it across the channel (as proven by several professionals
who subsequently tried it).
Deputy Sheriff <ent type='PERSON'>Christopher Look</ent>'s testimony, coupled with the
testimony of <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> LaRosa and two <ent type='PERSON'>Lyons</ent> girls, proves that there were
two people in Ted's car with Mary Jo at 12:45 PM. The three party
members walking along the road south toward the cottage confirmed
the time that Mr. Look drove by. He stopped to ask if they needed
a ride. Look says that just prior to that he encountered Ted's car
parked facing north at the juncture of the main road and the dirt
road. It was on a short extension of the north-south section of
the road junction to the north of the "T". He says he saw a man
driving, a woman in the seat beside him, and what he thought was
another woman lying on the back seat. He remembered a portion of
the license plate which matched Ted's car, as did the description
of the car. <ent type='GPE'>Markham</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Gargan</ent> and Ted's driver's testimony show that
someone they talked to in the pitch black night sounded like <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent>
and was about his height and build.
None of the above evidence was ever explained by <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> or by
anyone else at the inquest or at the hearing on the case demanded
by district attorney <ent type='PERSON'>Edward Dinis</ent>. No autopsy was ever allowed on
Mary Jo's body (her family objected), and <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> made it possible to
fly her body home for burial rather quickly. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> haters have
seized upon Chappaquiddick to enlarge the sexual image now being
promoted of both <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>. Books like "<ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent>dy Bare"
take full advantage of the situation.
Just which operatives in <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> at the high
levels or the lower levels were on Chappaquiddick Island? No
definite evidence has surfaced as yet, except for an indication
that there was at least one woman and at least three men, one of
whom resembled <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and who sounded like him in the
darkness. However, two pieces of testimony in the <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>
hearings provide significant clues as to which of the known <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
case conspirators may have been there.
E. Howard Hunt told of a strange trip to <ent type='LOC'>Hyannisport</ent> to see a
local citizen there about the Chappaquiddick incident. Hunt's
cover story on this trip was that he was digging up dirt on <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> for use in the 1972 campaign. The story does not make much
sense if one questions why Hunt would have to wear a disguise,
including his famous red wig, and to use a voice-alteration device
to make himself sound like someone else. If, on the other hand,
Hunt's purpose was to return to the scene of his crime just to make
sure that no one who might have seen his group at the bridge or
elsewhere would talk, then the disguise and the voice box make
sense.
The other important testimony came from <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Tony</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Ulasewicz</ent></ent> who said
he was ordered by the Plumbers to fly immediately to Chappaquiddick
and dig up dirt on <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent>. The only problem <ent type='PERSON'>Tony</ent> has is that,
according to his testimony, he arrived early on the morning of the
"accident", before the whole incident had been made public.
<ent type='ORG'>Ulasewicz</ent> is the right height and weight to resemble <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and
with a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> voice-alteration device he presumably could be made to
sound like him. There is a distinct possibility that Hunt and <ent type='PERSON'>Tony</ent>
were there when it happened.
The threats by <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent>, the frame-up at
Chappaquiddick, and the murders of <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Bobby</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> cannot
have failed to take their toll on all of the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>s. Rose, <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Jackie</ent>, Ethel and the other close family members must be very tired
of it all by now. They can certainly not be blamed for hoping it
will all go away. Investigations like those proposed by <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Downing</ent> only raised the spectre of the powerful
<ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> taking revenge by kidnapping some of the seventeen
children.
It was no wonder that a close <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> friend and ally in
<ent type='GPE'>California</ent>, Representative <ent type='PERSON'>Burton</ent>, said that he would oppose the
<ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> resolutions unless <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> put his stamp
of approval on them. While the sympathies of every decent <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n
go out to them, the future of our country and the freedom of the
people to control their own destiny through the election process
mean more than the lives of all the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>s put together. If <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> were alive today he would probably make the same statement.
<ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Dean</ent> summed it up when he said to <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> as recorded
on the White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> tapes in 1973: "If <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent>dy knew the bear trap he
was walking into at Chappaquiddick. . . ."[5]</p>

<p>____________________</p>

<p>[1] "The fabulous <ent type='PERSON'>Jackie</ent>" -- Christian <ent type='PERSON'>Cafarakis</ent> -- Productions de <ent type='GPE'>Paris</ent>
-- 1972</p>

<p>[2] "You the Jury" -- <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Cutler</ent> -- Self Published -- 1974</p>

<p>[3] A rope attached to the stick which held the <ent type='ORG'>Oldsmobile</ent> throttle wide
open caught the drivers rear view mirror and tore it loose so that
it was hanging by the rear bolt. There was no other mark on the
left side of the car.</p>

<p>[4] A sliver of glass from two broken windows no doubt caused this
bleeding since Mary Jo was already face down and unconscious in the
rear seat. Since there was no autopsy this clean cut went
unnoticed by the embalmers.</p>

<p>[5] On page 121, "White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Tapes," Paperback Edition, published by New
York Times</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> Chapter 8
1972 - Muskie, <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>McGovern</ent></p>

<p> In 1972 <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> was faced with another set of
problems. Again the objective was to insure Nixon's election at
all costs and to continue the cover-ups. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> might have made it
on his own. We'll never know because the <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> guaranteed his
election by eliminating two strong candidates and completely
swamping another with tainted leftist images and a psychiatric case
for the vice presidential nominee. The impression that <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> had
in early 1972 was that he stood a good chance of losing. He
imagined enemies everywhere and a press he was sure was out to get
him.
<ent type='ORG'>The <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> realized this too. They began laying
out a strategy that would encourage the real nuts in the <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>
administration like E. Howard Hunt, G. <ent type='PERSON'>Gordon Liddy</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>ald
<ent type='PERSON'>Segretti</ent> to eliminate any serious opposition. The dirty tricks
campaign worked perfectly against the strongest early <ent type='NORP'>Democratic</ent>
candidate, <ent type='PERSON'>Edmund Muskie</ent>. He withdrew in tears, later to discover
he had been sabotaged by <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Liddy</ent> and company.
<ent type='PERSON'>George Wallace</ent> was another matter. At the time he was shot, he
was drawing 18% of the vote according to the polls, and most of
that was in <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> territory. The conservative states such as
<ent type='NORP'>Indiana</ent> were going for <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent>. He was eating into Nixon's
southern strength. In April the polls showed <ent type='PERSON'>McGovern</ent> pulling a
41%, <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> 41% and <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> 18%. It was going to be too close for
comfort, and it might be thrown into the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> - in which case
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> would surely lose. There was the option available of
eliminating George <ent type='PERSON'>McGovern</ent>, but then the <ent type='NORP'>Democrats</ent> might come up
with <ent type='PERSON'>Hubert Humphrey</ent> or someone else even more dangerous than
<ent type='PERSON'>McGovern</ent>. Nixon's best chance was a head-on contest with <ent type='PERSON'>McGovern</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> had to go. Once the group made that decision, the <ent type='PERSON'>Liddy</ent>
team seemed to be the obvious group to carry it out. But how could
it be done this time and still fool the people? Another patsy this
time? O.K., but how about having him actually kill the Governor?
The answer to that was an even deeper programming job than that
done on <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent>. This time they selected a man with a lower I.Q.
level who could be hypnotized to really shoot someone, realize it
later, and not know that he had been programmed. He would have to
be a little wacky, unlike <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent> or <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Arthur Bremer</ent> was selected. The first contacts were made by
people who knew both <ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Segretti</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Milwaukee</ent>. They were
members of a leftist organization planted there as provocateurs by
the intelligence forces within <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent>. One of
them was a man named <ent type='PERSON'>Dennis Cossini</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent> was programmed over a period of months. He was first set
to track <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and then <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent>. When his hand held the gun in
<ent type='GPE'>Laurel</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Maryland</ent>, it might just as well have been in the hand of
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>ald <ent type='PERSON'>Segretti</ent></ent>, E. Howard Hunt, G. <ent type='PERSON'>Gordon Liddy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent>, or
<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>.
With Wallace's elimination from the race and McGovern's
increasing popularity in the primaries, the only question remaining
for <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> was whether <ent type='PERSON'>McGovern</ent> had any real
chance of winning. The polls all showed Wallace's vote going to
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and a resultant landslide victory. That, of course, is
exactly what happened. It was never close enough to worry the
<ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> very much. <ent type='PERSON'>McGovern</ent>, on the other hand, was worried. By the
time of the <ent type='GPE'>California</ent> primary he and his staff had learned enough
about the conspiracies in the assassinations of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent> that they asked for increased Secret
Service protection in <ent type='GPE'>Los Angeles</ent>.
If <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> had decided to kill Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>McGovern</ent> the
<ent type='ORG'>Secret Service</ent> would not have been able to stop it. However, they
did not, because the election was a sure thing. They did try one
more dirty trick. They revealed <ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Eagleton</ent>'s psychiatric
problems, which reduced McGovern's odds considerably.
What evidence is there that Bremer's attempt on <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> was a
directed attempt by a conspiratorial group?
<ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent> himself has told his brother that others were involved
and that he was paid by them. Researcher <ent type='PERSON'>William Turner</ent> has turned
up evidence in <ent type='GPE'>Milwaukee</ent> and surrounding towns in <ent type='GPE'>Wisconsin</ent> that
<ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent> received money from a group associated with <ent type='PERSON'>Dennis Cossini</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>ald <ent type='PERSON'>Segretti</ent></ent> and J. <ent type='PERSON'>Timothy Gratz</ent>. Several other young
"leftists" were seen with <ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent> on several occasions in <ent type='GPE'>Milwaukee</ent>
and on the ferry crossing at Lake <ent type='GPE'>Michigan</ent>.
The evidence shows that <ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent> had a hidden source of income.
He spent several times more than he earned or saved in the year
before he shot at <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent>. Bremer's appearance on TV, in court and
before witnesses resembled those of a man under hypnosis.[1]
There is some evidence that more than one gun may have been
fired with the second gun being located in the direction opposite
to <ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent>. Eleven wounds in the four victims that day exceeds the
number that could have been caused by the five bullets <ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent>
fired. There is a problem in identifying all of the bullets found
as having been fired from Bremer's gun. The trajectories of the
wounds seem to be from two opposite directions. All of this--the
hypnotic-like trance, the possibility of two guns being fired from
in front and from behind, and the immediate conclusion that <ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent>
acted alone--sounds very much like the arrangement made for the
<ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> assassination.
Another part of the evidence sounds like the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> case. A lone
blue Cadillac was seen speeding away from the scene of the shooting
immediately afterward. It was reported on the police band radio
and the police unsuccessfully chased it. The car had two men in
it. The police and the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> immediately shut off all accounts of
that incident.
E. Howard Hunt testified before the Ervin <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> that Charles
<ent type='PERSON'>Colson</ent> had asked him to go to Bremer's apartment in <ent type='GPE'>Milwaukee</ent> as
soon as the news about <ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent> was available at the White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>.
Hunt never did say why he was supposed to go. <ent type='PERSON'>Colson</ent> then said
that he didn't tell Hunt to go, but that Hunt told him he was
going. Colson's theory is that Hunt was part of a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> conspiracy
to get rid of <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and to do other dirty tricks.
Could Hunt and <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> have had in mind placing
something in Bremer's apartment rather than taking something out?
The "something" could have been Bremer's diary, which was later
found in his car parked near the <ent type='GPE'>Laurel</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Maryland</ent> parking lot.
Hunt did not go to <ent type='GPE'>Milwaukee</ent>, because the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> already had agents at
the apartment. Perhaps Hunt or someone else went instead to
<ent type='GPE'>Maryland</ent> and planted the diary in Bremer's car. One thing seems
certain after a careful analysis of Bremer's diary in comparison to
his grammar, spelling, etc., in his high school performances in
English. <ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent> didn't write the diary. Someone forged it, trying
to make it sound like they thought <ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent> would sound given his low
I.Q.
One last item would clinch the conspiracy case if it were true.
A rumor spread among researchers and the media that <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>-TV had
discovered <ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent> and G. <ent type='PERSON'>Gordon Liddy</ent> together on two separate
occasions in TV footage of <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> rallies. In one TV sequence
they were said to be walking together toward a camera in the
background. <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> completely closed the lid on the subject.
The best source is obviously <ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent> himself. However, no
private citizen can get anywhere near him. Even if they could he
might not talk if he had been programmed. Unless an expert
deprogrammed him, his secret could be locked away in his brain,
just like Sirhan's secret is locked within his mind.</p>

<p>____________________</p>

<p>[1] "Report of an Investigation" by <ent type='PERSON'>William Turner</ent> for <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>
on Government <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent>.</p>

<p> References:</p>

<p> "<ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> and Hunt", The <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Review of Books -- Gore
Vidal -- December 13, 1973.</p>

<p> "The <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> Shooting" -- <ent type='PERSON'>Alan Stang</ent> -- "<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n Opinion" --
October, 1972.</p>

<p> "Why Was <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> Shot?" -- R.F. <ent type='PERSON'>Salant</ent> -- Self Published --
Monsey, N.Y.</p>

<p> "Interview With <ent type='PERSON'>Charles Colson</ent>" -- <ent type='PERSON'>Dick Russell</ent> -- "<ent type='ORG'>Argosy</ent>" --
March, 1976.</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p>--
daveus rattus </p>

<p> yer friendly neighborhood ratman</p>

<p> KOYAANISQATSI</p>

<p> ko.yaa.nis.qatsi (from <ent type='EVENT'>the Hopi Language</ent>) n. 1. crazy life. 2. life
in turmoil. 3. life out of balance. 4. life disintegrating.
5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.
From dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com Wed Jun 10 10:08:58 1992
Received: from pl122c.eecs.lehigh.edu by ns-mx.uiowa.edu (5.64.jnf/920408)
on Wed, 10 Jun 92 10:08:44 -0500 id AA10332 with SMTP
Received: from SGI.COM by PL122c.EECS.Lehigh.EDU (5.61/1.34)
id AA15979; Wed, 10 Jun 92 10:53:16 -0400
Received: from [192.102.132.11] by sgi.sgi.com via SMTP (911016.SGI/910110.SGI)
for <ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122C.EECS.LEHIGH.EDU id AA02901; Wed, 10 Jun 92 07:55:47 -0700
Received: by ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (920110.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
for @sgi.sgi.com:<ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122C.EECS.LEHIGH.EDU id AA02416; Wed, 10 Jun 92 07:55:45 -0700
Date: Wed, 10 Jun 92 07:55:45 -0700
From: dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (dave "who can do? ratmandu!" ratcliffe)
<info type="Message-ID"> 9206101455.AA02416@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com</info>
To: <ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122c.EECS.Lehigh.EDU
Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (4/11)
Status: RO</p>

<p>Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (4/11)
Summary: we were robbed of our capability of electing a president we wanted
Keywords: part 4 of 11: first half of chapter 9
Lines: 995</p>

<p> chapter 9 stands out as one of the most detailed explorations i've ever
read *anywhere* concerning the media's culpability in the cover-up of
the assassination of the president. the major media's collusion in
covering-up the truth of the assassination is one of the most tragic
*and* revealing indicators about just how far this nation has moved away
from *some* kind of representative democracy to, what, totalitarian
"democracy"? until we the people confront such crimes as the cover-up,
perpetrated and perpetuated by "the official reality consortium," we will
continue to experience an evermore expanding strangulating oligarchy and
ever decreasing accountability.
--ratitor</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> Chapter 9
<ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> of the Media</p>

<p> As mentioned in Chapter 1, one of the two clever strategies used
by <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> in the taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent> has been the
control of the news media.
For those <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n citizens who steadfastly refuse to believe
that all of the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n establishment news media could be
controlled by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and its friends in the White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>, the
continuing support of <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>'s <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent>
conclusion by virtually all of the major news media organizations
in November, 1975, twelve years after the event, must have been
very puzzling indeed. Since 78% of the public believe that there
was a conspiracy in the case, there must be a series of questions
in the minds of the most intelligent of the 78% about the media's
position on the subject.[1]
This Chapter is intended to enlighten readers and to remind them
of the control exercised by the intelligence community and the
White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> over the 15 organizations from whom the public gets the
vast majority of its news and opinions.
Let's begin with 1968-1969. By 1973 the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n public had
begun to develop a skepticism toward information they received on
television or radio. Various news stories appearing in our
national news media through those years had brought about this
attitude. Some examples are: the Songmy-<ent type='ORG'>Mylai</ent> incident, the
<ent type='GPE'>Pueblo</ent> story, the murder of <ent type='ORG'>Black Panther</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Fred Hampton</ent>, the
<ent type='ORG'>Pentagon Papers</ent>, the Clifford <ent type='ORG'>Irving</ent> hoax, the <ent type='GPE'>Bangladesh</ent> tragedy
and the India-<ent type='GPE'>Pakistan</ent> war, <ent type='PERSON'>Hoover</ent> &amp; <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> antics, the <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Anderson</ent></ent>
papers, and IT&amp;T and the <ent type='NORP'>Republican</ent> National Convention.
The general reaction was bound to be, "Don't believe everything
you read, see or hear, especially the first time around, and more
especially if the story comes from <ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>." In the case of the
<ent type='ORG'>Pentagon Papers</ent>, things we all had taken as gospel for nearly two
decades suddenly seemed to crumble.
To what extent can the national news media be held responsible
for this situation? What has happened to the inquiring reporter
and the crusading editor who are both searching for and printing
the truth? If a government or a president lies or keeps secrets,
can the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n news media really find out about it? And if they
do, what moral, ethical, political or other criteria should they
use in uncovering the lies and presenting them to the public?
Vice President <ent type='PERSON'>Agnew</ent> would have said, "The press is already
going too far." Members of the press would have said, "We must
remain independent and maintain the freedom of speech." Just how
independent is the news media? Is it controlled to some extent by
<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>?
The answer to some of these questions can be found by taking an
inside look at the major national news media organizations during
1968 and 1969 and how they treated the most controversial news
subject since <ent type='EVENT'>World War</ent> II. The assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
and its aftermath is an all-pervading, endless topic. It has yet
to reach the <ent type='ORG'>Pentagon Papers</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Anderston</ent> papers, or <ent type='ORG'>Mylai</ent> stage of
revelation. Precisely because it is still such a controversial
subject, verboten for discussion among all major news media (unless
the discussant supports <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>), it serves as an
excellent case study.
A categorical statement can be made that management and
editorial policy, measured by what is printed and broadcast in all
major <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n news media organizations, supports the findings of
<ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>. This has been true since 1969, but it was
not true between 1964 and 1969.
Of significance in this analysis and what it implies about the
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n public's knowledge about the assassination and its
aftermath is a definition of "major <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n national news media."
It can be demonstrated that an overwhelming mass of news
information reaching the eyes and ears of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>ns comes from
about fifteen organizations. They are, in general order of
significance: <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>-TV &amp; Radio <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>-TV &amp; Radio, <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>-TV &amp; Radio,
Associated <ent type='ORG'>Press</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>United Press</ent>, "Time-Life-Fortune-Sports
Illustrated," McGraw Hill "Business Week," "Newsweek," "U.S. News
&amp; World Report," "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times" News Service, "<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>"
News Service, Metromedia News Network, <ent type='ORG'>Westinghouse</ent> Radio News
Network, Capital City Broadcasting Radio Network, the <ent type='PERSON'>North</ent>
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n Newspaper <ent type='ORG'>Alliance</ent>, and the "Saturday <ent type='ORG'>Evening Post</ent>" (the
"<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>" is, of course, now defunct.)
There are some subtle reasons for this, not generally
appreciated by the average citizen. <ent type='ORG'>Television</ent> has, of course,
become the primary source of information. For any nationally
circulated news story, local stations rely heavily on film,
videotape and written script material prepared and edited by the
three networks. Once in a while Metromedia may also send out TV
material. In effect, this means that editorial content for a vast
majority of the television information seen by <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n citizens
everywhere originates not only with three or four organizations but
also with a very small number of producers, editors and
commentators in those networks.
A large majority of any national news items printed by local
newspapers originates in a small number of press-wire services. AP
and UP dominate this area, with selected chains of papers
subscribing to a lesser extent to new services of the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>
Times," "<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>," <ent type='PERSON'>North</ent> <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n Newspaper <ent type='ORG'>Alliance</ent>, and a
very small percentage receiving information from papers in Los
Angeles, <ent type='GPE'>Chicago</ent> and St. <ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent>.
In a national news story of major significance such as the
assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, the smaller local papers rely almost
exclusively on their affiliated news services. Economic reasons
dictate this situation. The small paper can't afford to have
reporters everywhere. The major newspapers might send a man to
<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> for a few days to cover the assassination, or they might
send a man to <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> to cover the <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> trial. But even
the major papers can't afford to cover every part of a continuing
story anywhere around the world. So they too rely on UP and AP for
much of their material. They also rely on AP, UP and <ent type='ORG'>Black Star</ent>[2]
for most of their photographic material.
In the case of news magazines, the holding corporations become
important in forming editorial policy in a situation as
controversial as the assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>. Time Inc. and "Life,"
"Newsweek" and the "<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>," "U.S. News," and McGraw Hill
managements all became involved.
Fifteen organizations is a surprisingly small number, and one is
led to conjecture about how easy or difficult it might be to
control or dictate editorial policy for all of them or some
appreciable majority of them. An article in "Computers and
Automation"[3] reprinted a statement by <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> R. <ent type='PERSON'>Rarick</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Louisiana</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>man and an entry made in the "<ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>ional Record" bearing
on this subject. In the reprint, the "Government Employees
Exchange" publication is quoted as stating that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> New Team
used secret cooperating and liaison groups after <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs in
the large foundations, banks and newspapers to change U.S. domestic
and foreign relations through the infiltration of these
organizations. The coordinating role at "The <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times" was
in the custody of Harding <ent type='ORG'>Bancroft</ent>, Executive Vice President.
A useful analysis consists of examining what happened
organizationally and editorially inside each of the fifteen
companies following the assassination of President <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>. My
personal knowledge, plus information available from a few sources
connected with the major news media, permits such an analysis to be
made for eleven of the fifteen. They are: <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>, Time-Life, "The <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times," "Newsweek," Associated <ent type='ORG'>Press</ent>, United
<ent type='ORG'>Press</ent>, "Saturday <ent type='ORG'>Evening Post</ent>," Capital City Broadcasting, and
<ent type='PERSON'>North</ent> <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n Newspaper <ent type='ORG'>Alliance</ent>. In addition, the performance of
nine local newspapers and TV stations directly involved in the
events in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> will be analyzed. These include:
"<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> Times <ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent>," "<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> Morning News," <ent type='GPE'>Fort Worth</ent> "<ent type='ORG'>Star</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Telegram</ent>," <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>-Affiliate <ent type='ORG'>WBAP</ent>, "<ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> Times Picayune,"
"<ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> Times <ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent>," and <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>-Affiliate <ent type='ORG'>WDSU</ent>-TV.
Most of these organizations had reporters and photographers in
<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> at the time of the assassination or within a few hours
thereafter. Most of them had direct coverage available when Jim
Garrison's investigation broke into the news in 1967 and during the
trial of <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> in 1969. For many of them the
<ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> trial became the running point in the changing of editorial
policy toward the assassination. For a few, the <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>
investigation and the <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> trial took on the aspect of waving a
red flag in front of a bull. They became directly involved in a
negative way and thus not only reported the news, but also biased
it.
Immediately following the assassination the media reported
nearly everything that had obviously happened. All was confused
for the first few days. The killing of <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> by <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent> on live
television produced even greater confusion.
For one year the major media reported everything, from probable
<ent type='NORP'>Communist</ent> conspiracies to the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent> theory. The media
waited for the <ent type='ORG'>Warren Report</ent>, and when it was issued in October of
1964 many of the major media fell into line and editorially backed
the Commission's findings. Some questioned the findings and
continued to question them until 1968 or 1969. "The <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>
Times" and "Life" magazine fell into this category. But by the
time the <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> trial ended in March 1969, every one of the fifteen
major news media organizations was backing <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>
and they have continued to maintain this editorial position since.
The situation would perhaps not be so surprising had not the
internal assassination research teams in several of these
organizations discovered the truth about the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> killing
between 1964 and 1968. These teams examined the evidence and
thoroughly analyzed it. No one who has ever taken the trouble to
objectively do just that has reached any conclusion other than
conspiracy.
In each and every case the internal findings were overruled,
suppressed, locked up, edited and otherwise altered to back up the
<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>. Management at the highest editorial and
corporate level took the action in every instance. Before drawing
any further generalization about the performance of the media in
the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case, it will be revealing to examine what happened and
specifically who took what actions in the case of the eleven
national organizations and the nine local ones listed earlier.</p>

<p> Time-Life</p>

<p> The Time Inc. organization let "<ent type='ORG'>Life Magazine</ent>" establish its
editorial policy while "Time" published more or less standard
"Time-Life" stories. "Life" became directly involved in the
assassination action and evidence suppression from the very
beginning, on November 22, 1963.
"Life" purchased the famous <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> movie from <ent type='PERSON'>Abraham</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent>
on the afternoon of the assassination for about $500000. The
first negative action took place when "Life" and <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> began
telling the lie that the price was $25000 (which <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> donated
to the fund raised for the widow of <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> policeman, J. D.
<ent type='PERSON'>Tippit</ent>, who had also been murdered that day). Apparently, both
"Life" and <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> were ashamed that he profited by the event. He
lived in fear that the true price would be revealed until the day
he died.
As many readers know, the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film (viewed in slow motion)
proves there was a conspiracy because of the backward motion of the
President's head immediately following the fatal shot. It proves
the shot came from the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> to the right and in front of
the president while Oswald's purported position was very nearly
directly behind him. The film also helps establish that five, and
not three shots, were fired, and that one of them could not have
been fired from Oswald's supposed sniper's nest because of the
large oak tree blocking his view.
"Life" magazine never permitted the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film to be seen
publicly and locked it up in November 1968 so that no one inside or
outside "Life" could have access to it, automatically becoming an
"accessory after the fact". "Life" helped protect the real
assassins and committed a worse crime than <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>.
In answer to those defenders of "Life" who will say, "But 'Life'
turned over a copy of the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film to <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>,
and it is available in the <ent type='ORG'>National Archives</ent>," let's look at the
facts. "Life" did not supply the copy of the film now resting in
the <ent type='ORG'>Archives</ent>. That copy came from Zapruder's original to the
<ent type='ORG'>Secret Service</ent> to <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> to the <ent type='ORG'>Archives</ent>. It is
available for viewing by the few people fortunate enough to visit
the <ent type='ORG'>Archives</ent>. It can not be duplicated by anyone, and copies can
not be taken out of the <ent type='ORG'>Archives</ent> or viewed publicly in any way.
The Archive management responsible for the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> assassination
records state that the "Life" magazine ownership of the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent>
film is what prevents copies from being made available outside the
<ent type='ORG'>Archives</ent>.
<ent type='ORG'>The <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> did not see the film in slow motion. Nor
does the average <ent type='ORG'>Archives</ent>' visitor get to see it in slow motion or
stop-action. Yet the most casual analysis of the film in slow
motion convinces anyone to conclude there was a conspiracy.
Thus "Life" magazine is an important part of the efforts to
suppress evidence of conspiracy.
"Life" was involved in several other ways as an accessory after
the fact. The organization began its efforts to discover the truth
about the assassination in 1964 when it assigned Ed <ent type='PERSON'>Kern</ent>, an
associate editor, to investigate. By the fall of 1966, <ent type='PERSON'>Kern</ent> had
become convinced that the basic evidence pointed to conspiracy.
"Life" management was also apparently convinced; they published
articles in November 1965 and November 1966 questioning the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
Commission's conclusions.
In the fall of 1966 "Life" transferred <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Billings</ent> from
their <ent type='GPE'>Miami</ent> office to headquarters in <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>. His assignment was
to take over the investigation of the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> assassination, and to
head a team of several people working full time on it. One of Dick
<ent type='PERSON'>Billings</ent>' objectives was to search for and acquire as much of the
missing photographic evidence as possible.
This author initiated a similar search, independent from "Life"
magazine, in September 1966. As often happens, people with common
objectives decided to work together. <ent type='PERSON'>Billings</ent> and the author
arrived at a tacit understanding that any <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination
photographs, including TV films or private movies, found by either
would be brought to the other's attention. In exchange for access
to "Life"'s photographic collection (including the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film
and slides), the author agreed to give "Life" the results of any
analyses of the photographic evidence. In cases where the author
could not afford to acquire some new piece of evidence, "Life"
would offer to purchase the materials from the owners and supply
copies to the author.
In this manner the author discovered and helped "Life" magazine
acquire the largest collection of photographic evidence of the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
assassination, outside of the author's personal collection and the
collection now located at the headquarters of <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> to
Investigate <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>, D.C. Among the photos
discovered were:</p>

<p> The Dorman movie Private
The <ent type='PERSON'>Wilma Bond</ent> photos Private
The <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Hughes</ent> movie Private
The <ent type='PERSON'>David Weigman</ent> TV footage <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>
The <ent type='PERSON'>Malcolm Couch</ent> TV footage <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>
The <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Beers</ent> photos "<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> Morning News"
The <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Allen</ent></ent> photos "<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> Times <ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent>"
The <ent type='PERSON'>George Smith</ent> photos Ft. Worth "<ent type='ORG'><ent type='ORG'>Star</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Telegram</ent></ent>"
The <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> Martin movie Private
<ent type='PERSON'>Hugh Betzen</ent>'s photo Private</p>

<p> (See "<ent type='ORG'>Computers and Automation</ent>," May 1970)</p>

<p> Many of these were important in proving conspiracy and some
showed pictures of the real assassins.
The "Life" team headed by <ent type='PERSON'>Billings</ent> was in the process of
discovering a great deal about the conspiracy during the 1966-1968
period. While editorially not taking a strong position favoring
conspiracy, "Life" did take a position that favored a new
investigation by the government. This was editorially summed up in
a lead cover story on the fourth anniversary of Kennedy's death in
November 1967 with the title, "A Matter of Reasonable Doubt". In
that issue, <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> Connally and his wife were shown examining the
<ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film's frames and concluding that he had been hit much
later in the film than <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> claimed. This meant
that two bullets struck the two men and, by the Commission's own
admission, pointed automatically to the conspiracy.
The government naturally did not respond to "Life"'s suggestion
for a new investigation, so nothing ever came of that editorial
policy. <ent type='PERSON'>Billings</ent>, however, continued his team's efforts and in
October 1968 was preparing a comprehensive article for the November
anniversary issue. The author continued to work with him and
continued being given access to the photos right up to October
1968.
It was at that point in time that a drastic change in management
policy occurred at "Life" magazine. <ent type='PERSON'>Dick Billings</ent> was told to stop
all work on the assassination; his entire team was stopped. All
of the research files, including the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film and slides and
thousands of other film frames and photographs, were locked up. No
one at the magazine was permitted access to these materials and no
one (including the author) was ever allowed to see them again.
Simultaneously, editorial and management policy toward the
assassination changed to complete silence. <ent type='PERSON'>Billings</ent> and crew were
not allowed to discuss the subject at "Life," let alone work on it.
In November 1968 the article <ent type='PERSON'>Billings</ent> had been working on was
turned into a non-entity. A few of the hundreds of photographs
collected by the author and purchased by "Life" were published in
the article, along with an innocuous commentary. Credit for
discovering the photos was given to a number of people at "Life"
magazine in <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>, not to the individuals who
actually found them.
That article, published nearly nine years ago, was the last word
"Life" has ever uttered about their extensive research probe and
their feelings about a conspiracy. <ent type='PERSON'>Dick Billings</ent> moved to
<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>, D.C. to become editor of the <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>ional Quarterly
and is a member on the board of directors of <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> to
Investigate <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> (<ent type='ORG'>CTIA</ent>).
Who made the policy change decision at "Life" and why? Various
high-level conspiracy enthusiasts claim that the cabal behind the
assassination of <ent type='ORG'>the President</ent> brought extreme pressure to bear
upon the owners and management of Time Inc. to silence all
opposition to <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> findings. Others conclude it
had something to do with the CIA's control of "Life"'s editorial
policy from inside. This author takes no position on why. Dick
<ent type='PERSON'>Billings</ent> knows only that the decision was made at high levels and
passed downward and that it was irrevocable.
Repeated attempts by the <ent type='ORG'>CTIA</ent> and several independent
assassination researchers to break loose the basic evidence in
"Life"'s possession, such as the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film, the <ent type='ORG'>Hughes</ent> film,
and <ent type='ORG'>the Mark Bell Film</ent>, met with total opposition and a stone wall.
Attempts to break loose the <ent type='ORG'>Archives</ent>' copy of the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film or
slides met the same stiff opposition. In 1971 "Life"
representatives indicated they might be interested in selling
rights to the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film for a sum in the neighborhood of a
million dollars.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent></p>

<p> The <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n public is aware of the editorial policy adopted by
the <ent type='GPE'>Columbia</ent> Broadcasting System toward the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> assassination
because of a special four-part series with <ent type='PERSON'>Walter Cronkite</ent> which
was broadcast on network TV in prime time in the summer of 1967.[4]
That series, while taking issue with some of the work of the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> *and criticizing the <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> police*, the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and the
<ent type='ORG'>Secret Service</ent>, nevertheless backed all of the basic <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> conclusions.
Anyone watching the <ent type='GPE'>Cronkite</ent> series might have wondered why the
basic evidence presented by <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> in an itemized format for each of
several areas in the case, did not always seem to point to the
conclusion reached at the end of each section. The conclusion
always agreed with <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>'s comparable conclusion.
Some viewers may even have noticed Cronkite's double-take after
reading through the basic evidence and then reading the phrase,
"and the conclusion is!" It seemed as though he didn't believe the
conclusion and hadn't seen it until he came to it in the script.
Actually, that is exactly what happened. <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> management caused
the entire script to be changed from one concluding conspiracy to a
script supporting <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> in the last week before the
first part of the series went on the air. <ent type='GPE'>Cronkite</ent> had not seen
the entire script until the program went on. Time had not
permitted changing all of the points of evidence, so in most cases
they were unchanged and only the conclusion was changed.
How did this come about? Who decided to change the script at
the last moment and why? Again there are control theories extant,
but the author's personal relationships to <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> people might help to
shed a little light on the subject.
The discussion with all of the <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> people always centered on
evidence of conspiracy and the <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>-TV film footage taken at the
assassination site. <ent type='PERSON'>Bob Richter</ent> was the most knowledgeable of all
the aforementioned people on the basic evidence and he was firmly
convinced there was a conspiracy. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Bernie</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Birnbaum</ent></ent> was convinced
that a new investigation was desirable and his wife was convinced
there had been a conspiracy. <ent type='PERSON'>Dan</ent> Rather believed there was a
conspiracy and so did <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Wes</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Wise</ent></ent>.
<ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> photographers <ent type='PERSON'>Sandy Sanderson</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Tom Craven</ent>, and <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Underwood</ent>
had taken movie-TV footages showing evidence of conspiracy.
Craven's footage, for example, showed the assassin's get-away car
driving away from the parking lot area behind the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>
about one minute after the shots were fired. <ent type='PERSON'>Sanderson</ent> filmed one
of the assassins being arrested in front of the Depository building
about 30 minutes after the shots. Most of this footage was either
lost or locked up in the <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> archives vaults in <ent type='GPE'>New Jersey</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Wes</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Wise</ent></ent> so strongly maintained his opinion about conspiracy
that he broadcast appeals for new photographic evidence over the
<ent type='ORG'>KRLD</ent> local TV shows. This was done against the orders of Eddie
<ent type='PERSON'>Barker</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Wes</ent> became Mayor of <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>, elected in 1971 and defeated
the <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>-established oligarchy. He actually received a new piece
of photographic evidence based on his TV appeal from a <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>
citizen named <ent type='PERSON'>Bothun</ent>, who had taken a picture of the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> a
few moments after the shots.
The script for the <ent type='GPE'>Cronkite</ent> series was being edited and was
going through its final preparation stages in May and early June.
The author was in constant touch with <ent type='PERSON'>Wise</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Birnbaum</ent> and Richter
during this period and was informed about the basic thrust of the
script toward conspiracy and recommendations for a new
investigation.
On May 8 a dinner meeting took place at the author's <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>
club with Mr. and Mrs. <ent type='PERSON'>Birnbaum</ent>. There, Mrs. <ent type='PERSON'>Birnbaum</ent> and the
author tried to convince <ent type='PERSON'>Bernie</ent> that he should take a stronger
position on a new investigation.
On May 18, <ent type='PERSON'>Bob Richter</ent> and one of <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>'s investigators
met in the <ent type='ORG'>National Archives</ent> with the author and reviewed the
evidence of conspiracy. On June 2, 3 and 4 in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>, the author
showed <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Bernie</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Birnbaum</ent></ent> and <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Wes</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Wise</ent></ent> a film taken by <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>ny Martin
that showed three of the assassins and their cohorts on the grassy
<ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> running toward the parking lot a few seconds after firing two
shots. <ent type='PERSON'>Wise</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Birnbaum</ent> tried to interest <ent type='PERSON'>Barker</ent> and others in
taking a look at the film.
On June 14 <ent type='PERSON'>Bob Richter</ent> invited the author to meet <ent type='ORG'>Midgely</ent>,
Lister and <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> at <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> where an interview was being
taped with <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent> for use in the series. At that time
<ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>, Richter and the author spent some time with the producer
and his assistant discussing the evidence of conspiracy.
Finally, on June 20, just five days before the program was to go
on the air, the author met with Richter and <ent type='PERSON'>Dan</ent> Rather in the
<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>, D.C. <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> studios. The script was reviewed by Richter
and Rather in the author's presence. The gist of the conversation
was that Rather and Richter agreed that the conclusions stating
conspiracy had to be made even stronger than they were at that
time.
The day before the program was aired, <ent type='PERSON'>Bob Richter</ent> assured the
author that the theme would point to conspiracy and demand a new
investigation. The author telephoned Richter immediately after the
first broadcast and asked what had happened. Richter was
devastated. He could not understand what had happened. From that
time forward his course paralleled that of <ent type='PERSON'>Dick Billings</ent>. He
resigned from <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> in disgust and formed his own company, Richter-McBride, in <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>. It was his original intent to make a film
about the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination based on his own research and the films
he could obtain. However, the massive suppression of the
assassination, especially the suppression of the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film by
Time-Life films, cancelled Richter's plans for a film.
Correspondence with <ent type='GPE'>Cronkite</ent> and others determined that the
decision to change the script, distort and hide CBS's own findings
and back up <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> to the hilt came from <ent type='ORG'>Midgely</ent> and
Lister. How much higher did the decision go? <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Salant</ent> was
head of the <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> News Division then and, of course, <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> C. <ent type='PERSON'>Paley</ent>
was (and still is) chairman of the board.
By an odd coincidence, in a sequel to the above <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> story, the
author had an opportunity to learn a little more about Mr. Paley's
knowledge. <ent type='PERSON'>Jeff</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Paley</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> Paley's son, returned to <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent>
States from <ent type='GPE'>Paris</ent> in the winter of 1967-1968, where he had been
writing news stories and a news column for "L'Express" and for the
<ent type='PERSON'>North</ent> <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n Newspaper <ent type='ORG'>Alliance</ent>, a group serving small papers in
<ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States. <ent type='PERSON'>Jeff</ent> had become convinced there was a
conspiracy in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case and came to interview <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> and
others and to do a story for <ent type='NORP'>French</ent> papers. (European papers and
magazines always believed and still do believe in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
assassination conspiracy.) He met at length with Richter and the
author and became quite disturbed at what <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> had done. He
approached his father with the idea that <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> had been wrong in the
<ent type='GPE'>Cronkite</ent> series and that something should be done to rectify the
situation.
Bill <ent type='PERSON'>Paley</ent> told his son that he knew nothing about the details
of the programs or the work lying behind the conclusions. He said
<ent type='ORG'>Midgely</ent> had been responsible for the entire production. He told
<ent type='PERSON'>Jeff</ent> that if he could show proof that the <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> conclusions were
wrong and there had been a conspiracy, that he would fire <ent type='ORG'>Midgely</ent>
and all the rest of the team and do the whole thing all over again
under new management.
Needless to say, this did not happen and the mystery about where
the decision to suppress the truth came from within <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> is as deep
as it ever was.
Since June 1967, <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> has remained editorially silent on the
subject of the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination. The photographic evidence of
conspiracy in their possession remains locked up and suppressed.
The Craven sequence--film footage by the <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> photographer (who had
been in the parade's camera car # 1) of a car driving out of the
Elm Street extension (left-to right in front of the <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> School
Book Depository) within 20 seconds of the assassination--was seen
by the author and <ent type='PERSON'>Jones Harris</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>, but was cut out of the
film where it appeared prior to the time the author and Richter
began searching for it. There is little question that <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> is an
accessory after the fact.
<ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> edited out one other important piece of TV film. In
November 1969, <ent type='PERSON'>Walter Cronkite</ent> conducted a three-part interview
with <ent type='PERSON'>Lyndon</ent> B. <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son at his ranch in <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent>. The series was
broadcast in the spring of 1970 and on the first program an
announcement was made that portions of the taped interview had been
deleted at <ent type='PERSON'>Lyndon</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son's request, "for reasons of national
security."
What actually happened and what <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son had said six months
earlier was made public due to a leak at <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>. The story appeared
in newspapers all over the U.S. several days before the broadcast.
<ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son told <ent type='GPE'>Cronkite</ent> that there had been a conspiracy in the
assassination of President <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> was not a lone
madman assassin, and that he, <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son, had known it all along.
<ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son reviewed the tapes a week or so before the program was to
go on the air and then called up the <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> management, asking that
his remarks be deleted.
Someone at <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> who was very disturbed by this called a member of
<ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> to Investigate <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> and told him what had
been deleted. This led to the story being printed in the
newspapers.</p>

<p> "The <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times"</p>

<p> The record of the "Times" through the 1969-1971 period follows
the same pattern as <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> and "Life" magazine editorial policies.
The early editorials following the <ent type='ORG'>Warren Report</ent> supported the
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>. The "Times" cooperated by publishing much of the
report in advance. In 1965, however, editorials began to appear
that questioned the Commission's findings and suggested a new
investigation. In 1964 the "Times" formed a research team headed
by <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Harrison</ent> <ent type='GPE'>Salisbury</ent></ent> to investigate the assassination. The team
of six included <ent type='PERSON'>Peter Khiss</ent> and Gene <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent>s. Their conclusions
were never made public by the "Times" but indications point to
their finding evidence of conspiracy.
<ent type='PERSON'>Khiss</ent>, in particular, through the 1966-1968 period in several
meetings and discussions with the author, expressed doubts about
the <ent type='ORG'>Warren Report</ent> and questioned the lone madman assassin theme.
When the <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> investigation made the news, the "Times" began a
regular campaign to undermine Garrison's case, to support the
<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>, and finally (during the <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> trial) to
completely distort the news and the testimony presented. Martin
<ent type='PERSON'>Waldron</ent> was the reporter sending in the stories from the <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent>
trial, but someone in <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> edited them to completely change
their content. The author saw the story written by <ent type='PERSON'>Waldron</ent> on the
first day of the trial and the final version appearing in the
"Times." The two were completely different, with Waldon's original
following the actual trial proceedings very closely.
The author, writing under the pen name of <ent type='PERSON'>Samuel</ent> B. <ent type='ORG'>Thurston</ent>,
postulated the possibility that "The <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times," on selected
subjects, including the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination, was controlled by the
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> through their representative among top management, Mr. Harding
<ent type='ORG'>Bancroft</ent>.[5]
In the summer of 1968, the author discovered a remarkable
similarity between the sketch of the assassin of Dr. Martin Luther
<ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> and one of the three tramps arrested in Dealey Plaza following
the assassination of President <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Peter Khiss</ent> wrote a story
about this and it was published by the "Times" in June, 1968.
Apparently that was the final straw for the "Times" management as
far as <ent type='PERSON'>Khiss</ent> was concerned. He was not allowed to do any more
research on assassinations or to discuss the subject at the
"Times." As he told the author in 1969, he doesn't attend any
press conferences about assassinations because he doesn't like it
when people in "Times" management say, "Here comes crazy old Pete
<ent type='PERSON'>Khiss</ent> again with his conspiracy talk."
The apex of "The <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times" actions and editorial positions
on the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination came in November and December 1971. They
published three items supporting <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> eight years
after the assassination, at a time when it seemed on the surface to
be a dead issue.
The first was a story about <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> eight years later by an
author from <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> who wrote his entire story as though it were an
established fact that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> was the lone madman assassin firing
three shots from the sixth floor window of the Depository building
and later killing police officer <ent type='PERSON'>Tippit</ent>.
The second was an Op-Ed page guest editorial by none other than
<ent type='PERSON'>David Belin</ent>, a <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> lawyer. He defended the
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> and attacked the researchers. The third was a story by
<ent type='PERSON'>Fred Graham</ent> about the findings of Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>Lattimer</ent>, who was allowed to
see the autopsy photographs and x-rays of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Graham</ent>
actually wrote most of his story, which solidly backed up the
<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> due to Lattimer's claims that the autopsy
materials proved no conspiracy, before <ent type='PERSON'>Lattimer</ent> ever entered the
<ent type='ORG'>Archives</ent>.
In other words, it appears that <ent type='PERSON'>Graham</ent> knew what <ent type='PERSON'>Lattimer</ent> was
going to find and say in advance. Either that or someone in
<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>, D.C. gave someone at the "Times" orders in advance to
prepare the story for the first page, upper left-hand corner, of
the paper. It really didn't make any difference whether Dr.
<ent type='PERSON'>Lattimer</ent> ever saw the x-rays and photographs.
The concerted campaign on the part of the "Times" management
could have been timed to prevent a discovery of new evidence of
conspiracy in the autopsy materials. The reason for this
possibility developing in the November 1971 period is that the
five-year restriction placed on the autopsy evidence by <ent type='PERSON'>Burke</ent>
Marshall, a <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> family lawyer, expired in November of 1971.
Four well-known and highly reputable forensic pathologists, Dr.
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Cyril</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Wecht</ent></ent> of <ent type='GPE'>Pittsburgh</ent>, Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> Nichols of <ent type='ORG'>the University</ent> of
Kansas, Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>Milton Helpern</ent> of <ent type='GPE'>New York City</ent> and Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> Chapman of
<ent type='GPE'>Detroit</ent> had already asked permission to examine the x-rays and
photos upon the expiration of the five-year period. All four were
known to question <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>'s findings. What better
way to freeze them out of the <ent type='ORG'>Archives</ent> than to select a doctor who
could be trusted to back up the <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> (<ent type='PERSON'>Lattimer</ent> had published
several articles doing just that), commission him to go into the
<ent type='ORG'>Archives</ent>, and then persuade "The <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times" to publish a front
page story in its <ent type='LOC'>Sunday</ent> issue demonstrating that no one else need
look at the materials because they supported the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
Commission's findings.
All attempts by researchers to convince "Times" management that
the other side of the story should be told have been completely
ignored. Lattimer's findings, if correct, actually prove
conspiracy. The "Times" has been informed of this but they have
shut off all discussion of the subject. The complete story of the
complicity of the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times" in the crimes to which they have
become an accessory would take up an entire volume.[6]</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent></p>

<p> The National Broadcasting Company became an active participant
in the government's efforts to protect <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> and to ruin Jim
<ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>.
Two of NBC's high-level management people, <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Townley</ent> of
NBC's affiliate in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>WDSU</ent>, and <ent type='PERSON'>Walter Sheridan</ent>,
executive producer, became personally and directly involved in the
<ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> trial. They were indicted by a grand jury in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> for
bribing witnesses, suppressing evidence and interfering with trial
proceedings. <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> top-level management backed <ent type='PERSON'>Sheridan</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Townley</ent>.
<ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> produced a highly biased, provably dishonest program
personally attacking <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> and defending <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> prior to the
trial. Frank McGee, who acted as moderator, later had to publicly
apologize for lies told on the program by two "witnesses" whom <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>
paid to give statements against <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>. The <ent type='ORG'>FCC</ent> ruled that <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>
had to give <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> equal time because the program was not a news
program but a vendetta by <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> against <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>. <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> did give
<ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> 30 minutes (compared to their one-hour attack) to respond
at a later date. <ent type='PERSON'>Sheridan</ent> was the producer of the one-hour show.
With <ent type='PERSON'>Sheridan</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Townley</ent> so deeply involved, and with such an
extremely strong editorial position favoring the Justice
<ent type='ORG'>Department</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>, and the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent> stance,
suspicions were raised about NBC's and RCA's independence.[7] At
one point in 1967 the president of <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>, according to Walter
<ent type='PERSON'>Sheridan</ent>, helped in the bribery efforts by calling Mr. <ent type='ORG'>Gherlock</ent>,
head of <ent type='ORG'>Equitable Life Insurance Company</ent>'s <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> office, and
asked for assurance that <ent type='PERSON'>Perry Russo</ent>, who worked for <ent type='ORG'>Equitable</ent>,
would cooperate with <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>.
<ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> is also the owner of several important pieces of
photographic evidence. A TV film taken by <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> photographer David
<ent type='NORP'>Weigman</ent> was suppressed by <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> and not made available to
researchers. It shows the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> in the background just a
fraction of a minute after the shots. Some of the assassination
participants can be seen on the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>.
Fortunately for researchers, <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> sold the <ent type='NORP'>Weigman</ent> film to the
other networks and to the news film agencies before realizing its
importance. The author was able to purchase a copy from Hearst
Metrotone News.
NBC's affiliate, <ent type='ORG'>WBAP</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Fort Worth</ent>, has several important film
sequences. <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Darnell took several sequences on the grassy
<ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> and in the parking lot which should contain important
evidence. <ent type='PERSON'>Dan</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Owens</ent> took TV movies in and around the Depository
building which should show how the snipers' nest was faked on the
sixth floor, and one of the assassins in front of the building.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent></p>

<p> Of the three major television networks, <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent> has remained more
objective and appears to be less under the thumb of the government
than the other two. For example, when <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> was busy defending the
<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> and attacking <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent> was
giving <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> a free chance to express his views without
interruption on their <ent type='LOC'>Sunday</ent> program, "Issues and Answers." They
have never taken an editorial position one way or another on
conspiracy. However, in the <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> assassination case, the
investigation was suppressed at <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>. The man heading the brief
investigation was stopped and sent to <ent type='GPE'>Vietnam</ent>. The man at <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent> who
called the shots in stopping the investigation and in suppressing
evidence in ABC's possession was a lawyer named Lewis <ent type='PERSON'>Powell</ent>.
The evidence owned by <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent> is a video tape of the crowd in the
Ambassador Hotel ballroom before, during and after the shots were
fired in the kitchen. The ballroom microphones, including ABC's,
picked up the sound of only three shots above the crowd noise.
Since <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent> fired eight shots, or certainly more than three, and
since <ent type='GPE'>Los Angeles</ent> police tests proved that Sirhan's gun could not
be heard in the position of the microphones in the ballroom, the
<ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent> film and soundtrack is important evidence of three other shots.
The sequence was originally included in the TV film of <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent>
Kennedy's 1968 campaign and assassination entitled, "The Last
Journey." Following a meeting at <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent> when the management learned
what the film showed, the next TV broadcast of "The Last Journey"
(scheduled for the following week) was cancelled without any
logical explanation. The next time the film appeared on <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent> (late
1971), the three-shot ballroom sequence had been cut.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>United Press</ent> International</p>

<p> Of all the fifteen major news organizations included herein, <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent>
has come closest to really pursuing the truth about the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
assassination. Yet they, too, have suppressed evidence, have not
had the courage of their convictions in analyzing conspiratorial
evidence, and by default have become accessories after the fact.
Two different departments at <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> became involved in the
photographic evidence of the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination. The regular photo
news service department, which receives wire photos and negatives
from many sources all over the world, accumulated a large
collection of basic evidence both from <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> photographers and by
purchasing wire service photos from newspapers, <ent type='ORG'>Black Star</ent>, AP and
other sources. This department has made all of its photographs
available to anyone at reasonable prices ($1.50 to $3.00 per
print).
<ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> photographer <ent type='PERSON'>Frank Cancellare</ent> was in the motorcade and
snapped several important photographs. In addition, five other
photographs at <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent>, taken by three unknown photographers, are
significant. All of these were purchased by the author from <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent>.
The other department has not been as cooperative. Within the
news department at <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Burt Reinhardt</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Rees Schonfeld</ent> have
varied in their attitude and performance. <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> news purchased the
commercial rights to two very important films shortly after the
assassination. These were color movies taken by <ent type='PERSON'>Orville Nix</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>Marie Muchmore</ent> (private citizens). Both show the fatal shot
striking <ent type='ORG'>the President</ent>, and both show evidence of conspiracy. In
the Nix film, certain frames (when enlarged) show one of the
assassins on the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> with a rifle. Both movies show a
puff of smoke generated by another one of the men involved in the
assassination.
<ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent>, under the direction of <ent type='PERSON'>Burt Reinhardt</ent>, did several things
with the Nix and <ent type='PERSON'>Muchmore</ent> films. They produced a book, "Four
Days," including several color frames from the movies. They made a
composite movie in 35mm from the original 8mm movies. The
composite used the technique of repeating a frame several times to
give the appearance of slow motion or stop action during key
sections of the films. <ent type='PERSON'>Reinhardt</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Schonfeld</ent> and Mr. <ent type='ORG'>Fox</ent>, a <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent>
writer, made the composite movie available to researchers at their
projection studio in <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> in 1964 and 1965.
<ent type='ORG'>Fox</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Schonfeld</ent> wrote an article for "Esquire" in 1965 which
portrayed the Nix film as proving the conspiracy theories about
assassins on the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> to be false. This was deemed
necessary by <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> management because a <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> researcher and a
photographic expert, after seeing the Nix film at <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent>, claimed it
showed an assassin with a rifle standing on the hood of a car
parked behind the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>.
The research team had used a few frames from the film in color
transparencies and enlarged them in black and white to show the
gunman.
In 1964, <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> gave <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> copies of both the Nix
and <ent type='PERSON'>Muchmore</ent> films for analysis. The films were later turned over
to the <ent type='ORG'>National Archives</ent> under a special agreement between <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> and
the <ent type='ORG'>Archives</ent>. This agreement reminds one of the agreements between
the <ent type='ORG'>Archives</ent> and the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> family on the autopsy materials, and
the obscure one between "Life" magazine, the <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>, the Secret
Service and the <ent type='ORG'>Archives</ent> on the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film.
The <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> agreement prevents anyone from obtaining copies of the
Nix and <ent type='PERSON'>Muchmore</ent> films or slides of individual frames for any
purpose. The agreement is just as illegal as the other two, yet it
has been just as effective in suppressing the basic evidence of
conspiracy.
In 1967, <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent>, apparently still not sure they would not be
attacked by researchers on what the Nix film revealed, employed
<ent type='ORG'>Itek Corporation</ent> to analyze the film. (At least it would appear on
the surface that <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> did the hiring.) <ent type='ORG'>Itek Corporation</ent>, a major
defense contractor, did an excellent job of obscuring the truth.
In an apparently highly scientific analysis using computer-based
image enhancement, they "proved" that not only was there no gunman
on the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>, but there was no person on the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> at all
during the shooting.
The final <ent type='GPE'>Itek</ent> report was made public and highly publicized by
<ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent>. It looked as though the <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> earlier claim of no gunman had
been scientifically substantiated. As a by-product, <ent type='GPE'>Itek</ent> got some
great publicity for their commercially available photo-computer
image enhancement system.
What the public did not know was that <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> gave <ent type='GPE'>Itek</ent> only 35mm
enlarged black and white copies of selected frames from the Nix
film. The great amount of detail is lost in going from 8mm color
to 35mm black and white. And <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> gave <ent type='GPE'>Itek</ent> carefully chosen frames
from the Nix film that did not show the gunman on the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>.
<ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>Itek</ent> defined "the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>" in a very limited and
carefully chosen way so as to exclude five people (in addition to
the fatal-shot gunman) on the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> who appear in the Nix film as
well as in every other photograph and movie taken of the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> at
the time the shots were fired.[8] In addition, man No. 2, who had
ducked down behind the stone wall during the Nix film, could not be
detected by <ent type='GPE'>Itek</ent> because they only had the Nix film.
Three men standing on the steps of the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>, and two men behind
the picket fence, were completely ignored or overlooked.
The author began to contact <ent type='PERSON'>Schonfeld</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Reinhardt</ent> in early
1967, viewed the two films both at <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> and in the <ent type='ORG'>Archives</ent>, and
requested copies of the original 8mm color films or color copies of
individual frames. The response to the requests were negative for
more than four years. During this time, however, the author, a New
York researcher, and a photographic specialist, enlarged in color
the correct frames from the Nix film. The enlargements clearly
show the gunman, not on top of a car but in front of a car, with
his rifle poised. He is standing on a pedestal protruding from the
eight-sided cupola behind the stone wall on the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>. The car is
parked behind the cupola and can be seen in several other
photographs and movies.
Unfortunately, UPI's agreement with the researcher prevents
making public the color enlargements. <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> has consistently
suppressed this evidence. In 1971, they offered to make the film
available for a very large sum of money, but they have never agreed
that it shows anyone on the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> and they will not make copies
available for research.
The <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> editorial position (in articles, the book "Four Days,"
letters and news releases) has supported <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>
through the years. The major difference between <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> and "Life" or
<ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> is that no drastic reversal of management policy took place at
<ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent>.</p>

<p> AP</p>

<p> Associated <ent type='ORG'>Press</ent> became an accessory after the fact by taking an
action unprecedented for a news wire service. It published a
three-part report by three AP writers in 1967, completely
supporting <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>. The report was transmitted by
wire to all AP subscribers over a three-day period and it occupied
a total of nine to ten full pages of the average newspaper. It was
not news, but editorial policy and took a position supporting the
<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> and the official government propaganda about the
assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>.
Most small newspapers rely on UP and AP for their news stories.
The three-part AP report ran in hundreds of papers across the
United States without opposition commentary. For many this was the
gospel at the time. What more could the conspirators and their
government protectors have asked?
AP photographers were on the scene in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> during the
assassination. <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Altgens</ent>, one of AP's men assigned to <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>,
took seven important photographs in Dealey Plaza. <ent type='PERSON'>Henry Burrows</ent>,
an AP photographer from <ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>, D.C., was in the motorcade and
snapped two pictures. Four other AP photographers took ten
important photographs. AP's photo department and <ent type='ORG'>Wide World Photos</ent>
in <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> purchased many other photographs taken in Dealey Plaza.
<ent type='ORG'>Meyer Goldberg</ent>, manager of <ent type='ORG'>Wide World Photos</ent>, set a policy early
in the 1966-1967 period which placed AP in the position of
partially suppressing basic photographic evidence. The policy
contained several parts. First, <ent type='PERSON'>Goldberg</ent> made it extremely
difficult for anyone to obtain access to the photographic evidence,
particularly the negatives. Second, he set a high enough price on
copies of photographs ($17.50 for one 8x10 black and white print)
to freeze out all but commercially-financed interests. Third, when
an original negative was discovered, the print order, when cleared
by <ent type='ORG'>Wide World</ent>, was always cropped. (Full negative prints showing
important details in the <ent type='PERSON'>Altgens</ent> photographs were nearly impossible
to purchase.) Whenever any suggestion was made to <ent type='ORG'>Wide World</ent> that
their photographs contained basic evidence of conspiracy, <ent type='PERSON'>Goldberg</ent>
and AP management turned blue with anger and literally refused to
discuss the subject or permit research in their files.
Various researchers, including <ent type='PERSON'>Josiah Thompson</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent>mond Marcus
and the author met this type of stiff opposition, but after many
visits discovered ways around it. The staff at <ent type='ORG'>Wide World</ent> in
charge of the photographic files was more cooperative, and at least
one staff member was completely convinced there was a conspiracy in
the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination.
Nevertheless, the broadly announced editorial policy and stance
of Associated <ent type='ORG'>Press</ent> between 1964 and 1972 fully supported the
<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent> fable.</p>

<p> "Newsweek"</p>

<p> "Newsweek"'s editorial policy and coverage of the assassination
and its aftermath was largely the doing of one man, Hugh
<ent type='PERSON'>Aynesworth</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Aynesworth</ent> was the <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>-<ent type='GPE'>Houston</ent> correspondent for
"Newsweek" following the assassination. He was in Dealey Plaza
when <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> was killed, and he turned in several stories during
the days and weeks following November 22, 1963. His point of view
was always closely allied with that of the <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> police, the
district attorney and the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>. He wholeheartedly supported the
<ent type='ORG'>Warren Report</ent>.
However, in May of 1967, after Garrison's investigation hit the
news, <ent type='PERSON'>Aynesworth</ent> wrote a violent attack on Garrison's
investigation, and it was published in "Newsweek." <ent type='PERSON'>Aynesworth</ent>
accused <ent type='PERSON'>Lynn Loisel</ent>, a <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> staff member, of bribing Al
<ent type='PERSON'>Beaubolf</ent> to testify about a meeting to plot the assassination.
<ent type='PERSON'>Beaubolf</ent> later denied this accusation in a sworn affidavit and
proved <ent type='PERSON'>Aynesworth</ent> and "Newsweek" to be fabricators of information.</p>

<p> "Saturday <ent type='ORG'>Evening Post</ent>"</p>

<p> The position of the "Saturday <ent type='ORG'>Evening Post</ent>" solidified after the
<ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> probe became public. It was based in large part on the
reporting of one man, <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent> wrote a blistering
article for the "<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>" published on May 6, 1967. He attacked
<ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent>, and claimed that Russo's original statement to
Assistant D.A. Andrew Sciambra differed from his later testimony.
In view of the earlier editorial position of the "<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>" when Lyron
Land and his wife questioned <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> findings, the
<ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent> article came as somewhat of a surprise. In fact, the "<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>"
had taken a strong conspiracy stand when in 1967 it published a
long article excerpted from <ent type='PERSON'>Josiah Thompson</ent>'s book, "Six Seconds in
<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>," and featured it on the magazine's cover.
The <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> investigation, however, turned the "<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>" around.
<ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent> became directly involved in the case, and in a sense was
more of an accessory than <ent type='PERSON'>Walter Sheridan</ent> or <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Townley</ent>. He
travelled to <ent type='GPE'>Louisiana</ent> from <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent>, spent many hours with Perry
<ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> and other witnesses, and generally obfuscated the <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> trial
picture.
<ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent> joined the efforts to persuade <ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> to desert <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>
and to help destroy <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> and his case. According to a sworn
<ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> statement, <ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent> visited his house four times within a few
weeks. <ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent> told <ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> he was working hand-in-hand with <ent type='ORG'>Townley</ent>
and <ent type='PERSON'>Sheridan</ent>, that they were in constant contact, and that they
were going to destroy <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> and the probe. <ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent> warned <ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent>
that he should abandon his position and that <ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> would be the
only one hurt as a result of the trial. <ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent> claimed <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>
would leave <ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> alone, standing in the cold.
<ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent> offered to hire a $200000-a-year lawyer from <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>
for <ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> if he would cooperate against <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>. He asked <ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent>
how he would feel about sending an innocent man (<ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent>) to the
penitentiary. <ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent> left <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>Baton Rouge</ent> and returned
to <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>, only to telephone <ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> several times and offer to pay
Russo's plane fare to <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> to meet with him and discuss going
over to <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent>'s side.
<ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent> was subpoenaed by Shaw's lawyers during a hearing in 1967
because his article attacked <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>. Sciambra welcomed the
opportunity to cross-examine <ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent> on the stand. He described the
article as being incomplete, distorted and tantamount to lying.
Sciambra said, "I guarantee that he (<ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent>) will be exposed for
having twisted the facts in order to build up a scoop for himself
and the 'Saturday <ent type='ORG'>Evening Post</ent>.'"
Sciambra went on to say that <ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent> had neglected the most
important fact of all in his article. It was that <ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent> had been
told by <ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Baton Rouge</ent> that <ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> and Sciambra had discussed
the plot dialogue (to assassinate <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>) at their initial meeting.</p>

<p> Capital City Broadcasting</p>

<p> This organization owns several radio stations in the capitol
cities of various states and in <ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>, D.C. Their interests
in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination increased in 1967 and 1968 when the
<ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>-<ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> case made headlines. A producer at Capital City,
<ent type='PERSON'>Erik Lindquist</ent>, decided to do a series of programs designed to
ferret out the truth. The author furnished various evidence for
scripts to be used in the programs. After several months of work
the project was cancelled, presumably by top management, and the
broadcasts never took place.</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>North</ent> <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n Newspaper <ent type='ORG'>Alliance</ent></p>

<p> This newspaper chain, with papers affiliated in small
communities through the northern and eastern U.S., supported the
<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> findings as did all the other major newspaper
services and chains.
The <ent type='ORG'>Alliance</ent> also became involved in the <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent> case
and it circulated the syndicated column by the black writer and
reporter, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Lomax</ent></ent>, who had taken an interest in finding out
what really happened in the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> assassination.
<ent type='PERSON'>Lomax</ent> located a man named <ent type='PERSON'>Stein</ent> who had taken a trip with <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent>
Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> from <ent type='GPE'>Los Angeles</ent> to <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent>. The two retraced the
automobile trip of <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Stein</ent>, beginning in <ent type='GPE'>Los Angeles</ent> and
heading through <ent type='GPE'>Arizona</ent>, New <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent>. They were trying to
find the telephone booth from which <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> had called a friend named
<ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> somewhere along the route. <ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent>, according
to <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent>, was the man who actually fired the shot that killed <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Stein</ent> remembered that <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> told him he was going to meet <ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent> in
<ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> and that <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> phoned <ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent> at someone's office. <ent type='PERSON'>Stein</ent>
couldn't remember exactly where the phone booth was because he and
<ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> had been driving non-stop day and night.
<ent type='PERSON'>Lomax</ent> wrote a series of articles depicting <ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent> as the killer
and <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> as the patsy. He sent them to the <ent type='ORG'>Alliance</ent>, a column each
day, from the places along the retraced trip he and <ent type='PERSON'>Stein</ent> took.
Finally, Lomax's column announced they had found the phone booth at
a gas station in <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> and that he was going to obtain the phone
number <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> had called in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent>. He presumably was planning
to visit the local telephone company office the next morning and
obtain the number.
That was the last <ent type='PERSON'>Lomax</ent> column ever to appear in the <ent type='PERSON'>North</ent>
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n <ent type='ORG'>Alliance</ent> papers. He seemed to disappear completely. The
readers were left hanging, not knowing whether he obtained the
phone number or whether he discovered who it belonged to. The
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> to Investigate <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> located <ent type='PERSON'>Lomax</ent> several
months later and asked him what had happened.
He said he had been told by the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> to stop his investigation
and not to publish or write any more stories about it. He said he
found the phone number and where it was located in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent>. He
gave the number to <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> to Investigate <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>. He
said he was afraid he would be killed and decided to stop work on
the case.
Whether <ent type='PERSON'>North</ent> <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n Newspaper <ent type='ORG'>Alliance</ent> management knew about
any of this remains unknown. What is known, however, is that <ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Lomax</ent> died in a very mysterious manner in 1970. He was traveling
at a very high speed and was found dead in a car crash, according
to the State police report. Lomax's wife says he was a very
careful driver and never drove at high speeds.</p>

<p>From dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com Thu Jun 11 08:37:11 1992
Received: from pl122c.eecs.lehigh.edu by ns-mx.uiowa.edu (5.64.jnf/920408)
on Thu, 11 Jun 92 08:37:01 -0500 id AA02015 with SMTP
Received: from SGI.COM by PL122c.EECS.Lehigh.EDU (5.61/1.34)
id AA17732; Thu, 11 Jun 92 09:22:19 -0400
Received: from [192.102.132.11] by sgi.sgi.com via SMTP (911016.SGI/910110.SGI)
for <ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122C.EECS.LEHIGH.EDU id AA19154; Thu, 11 Jun 92 06:24:54 -0700
Received: by ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (920110.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
for @sgi.sgi.com:<ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122C.EECS.LEHIGH.EDU id AA04892; Thu, 11 Jun 92 06:24:51 -0700
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 92 06:24:51 -0700
From: dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (dave "who can do? ratmandu!" ratcliffe)
<info type="Message-ID"> 9206111324.AA04892@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com</info>
To: <ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122c.EECS.Lehigh.EDU
Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (5/11)
Status: RO</p>

<p>Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (5/11)
Summary: we were robbed of our capability of electing a president we wanted
Keywords: part 5 of 11: second/last half of chapter 9
Lines: 908</p>

<p> <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> Newspapers</p>

<p> The two newspapers in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>, "The Times <ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent>" and "The
Morning News," became accessories after the fact. They suppressed
evidence of conspiracy and evidence concerning the <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> police
role in framing <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>. It was not immediately
established that the management policy of both papers supported the
official positions taken by the <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> police and district
attorney, the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>. During the first few
days immediately following the assassination, both newspapers
printed anything that came along. The editions on November 22
through 25 make very interesting reading for the researcher because
the stories were printed before anyone had any idea what to
suppress. (For example, there are stories about other people being
arrested, about other rifles being found near Dealey Plaza, and
about Oswald's rifle being a <ent type='ORG'>Mauser</ent> and a <ent type='NORP'>British</ent> 303 model.)
Editorial and management policy took over within a couple of
weeks and the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent> story received all the attention from
then on. The two papers have not since made any independent
inquiries, have not been interested in any conspiratorial
discussions, and have remained completely faithful to the official
governmental position.
There were some inquiring reporters around (like <ent type='PERSON'>Ronnie Dugger</ent>,
for example, or <ent type='PERSON'>Lonnie Hudkins</ent>), but they were eventually silenced
by management or the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> police. Photographers at the
two papers left town or were frightened out of talking about the
case or their photographs. Some of these photographs showed
evidence of conspiracy, including pictures of three conspirators
under arrest in Dealey Plaza. Other photographs proved that
members of the <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> police planted evidence in the Depository
building to frame <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>.
Between the assassination and 1967, the management and owners of
the "<ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent>" and "News" were not completely aware of the
significance of some of the evidence in their files. Nor were they
attempting to control their reporters and news staff. For example,
Hudkins found that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> had been a paid informer for the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>. He
even found what his pay number had been (S172). He took the
information to <ent type='PERSON'>Waggoner Carr</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> Attorney General, in January of
1964. <ent type='PERSON'>Carr</ent> brought it to the attention of <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Hoover</ent> denied it, and the matter died in secret executive sessions
of <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>.
Several photographs taken by "<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> Morning News" photographer
<ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Beers</ent> proved that the police created the so-called "sniper's
nest" from which <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> allegedly fired the shots. The pictures
show the positions of cartons in the sixth floor window before the
police moved them. Beers's photographs also indicate that the
police made the large paper bag found inside the Depository
building.
<ent type='ORG'>Beers</ent> was permitted to use his photographs commercially in a
book that he published jointly with R. B. <ent type='ORG'>Denson</ent>, called "Destiny
in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>." If it were not for that event, researchers would
probably never have seen Beers's photographs. Once the "Morning
News" editor, Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Krueger</ent>, discovered that the photographs
demonstrated both conspiracy and the complicity of some of the
<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> police force, he locked them up. The pictures remain
suppressed to this date.
The "Times <ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent>"'s record is not much better. Through 1967
<ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> Masiotta, the man in charge of the assassination photographs
taken by <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Allen</ent></ent>, made copies available on a very limited
basis. The basis in the author's case was that a total of twelve
pictures out of seventy-three taken by <ent type='PERSON'>Allen</ent> could be purchased.
The author was allowed to examine 35mm contact prints (about 3/4 X
1/2 inches) of the rest, and the selection decision was extremely
difficult. Three of Allen's photographs showed the "tramps" under
arrest who were part of the conspiracy.
In 1968 the "Times <ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent>" management realized the implications
of some of Allen's pictures in pointing out the real assassins, and
locked their files. To date they have not permitted anyone to see
the photos again or to purchase copies.
One photograph taken by "<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> Times <ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent>" photographer <ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent>son was so obviously in opposition to the official police
position that it was suppressed by late 1966. <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent>son was riding
in one of the news photographer's cars in the motorcade with
"<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> Morning News" photographer, Tom <ent type='PERSON'>Dillard</ent>. As <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent>son's car
approached the Depository building and travelled north on <ent type='GPE'>Houston</ent>
Street, between Main Street and Elm Street, <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent>son snapped a
picture (see map in May 1970 "Computers &amp; Automation" article). At
the time, the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> car was already on Elm Street and was
probably close to the position where the first shot was fired.
<ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent>son's car was eight cars behind Kennedy's (about twenty car
lengths).
<ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent>son can be seen taking this picture in the <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Hughes</ent>
film and in some of the TV footage taken by other photographers.
He also testified that he took the picture. When the author asked
Masiotta about the <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent>son photo in early 1967, he became very
flustered and claimed to know nothing about it. <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent>son himself
was finally located and, when asked about it, became very angry and
denied taking a picture. That photograph has never been seen by
anyone outside of the "Times <ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent>" staff. It's not difficult to
speculate about what it probably showed, since the <ent type='ORG'>Hughes</ent> film, the
<ent type='PERSON'>Weaver</ent> photo, the <ent type='PERSON'>Dillard</ent> photo and <ent type='ORG'>the Tom Alyea</ent> TV sequence all
show the same thing. <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent>son's photo, without doubt, showed
"Oswald's window" in the Depository building empty when <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>
should have been in it--an embarrassing counterpoint to <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent>son's
testimony that he saw someone in that window with a rifle. If
<ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent>son's photo (or anyone else's for that matter) showed <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> in
the sixth floor window, the whole world would have heard about it
on November 22, 1963.</p>

<p> <ent type='GPE'>Fort Worth</ent> "<ent type='ORG'><ent type='ORG'>Star</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Telegram</ent></ent>"</p>

<p> The <ent type='GPE'>Fort Worth</ent> "<ent type='ORG'><ent type='ORG'>Star</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Telegram</ent></ent>" shines like a light in the <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent>
darkness. It made photographic evidence from five of their
photographers, <ent type='PERSON'>Joe</ent> McAulay, <ent type='PERSON'>Harry Cabluck</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Jerrold Cabluck</ent>, George
Smith and <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> Davis available to everyone. Even though the
"<ent type='ORG'>Telegram</ent>"'s editorial stance was eventually pro-<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>,
the photographers, editors and the woman who ran the photo files
were all cooperative.
<ent type='PERSON'>George Smith</ent>'s photos showed the three members of the
assassination team under arrest. <ent type='PERSON'>Jerrold Cabluck</ent>'s aerial photos
were instrumental in establishing Dealey Plaza landmarks and
topography. <ent type='PERSON'>Joe</ent> McAulay's photos of a man arrested in Ft. Worth in
connection with the shooting might yet become valuable.</p>

<p> TV Station <ent type='ORG'>WFAA</ent></p>

<p> The second shining light in <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> was TV station <ent type='ORG'>WFAA</ent>, an <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>
affiliate. <ent type='ORG'>WFAA</ent> was very cooperative (albeit expensive) in
providing copies of all their photographic evidence. TV sequences
by <ent type='PERSON'>Tom Alyea</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Malcolm Couch</ent>, A. J. L'Hoste and <ent type='PERSON'>Ron Reiland</ent> were
made easily viewable and the copies made available. Much of this
evidence demonstrating conspiracy was also sold to TV networks and
newsreel companies.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>WBAP</ent> -- Ft. Worth</p>

<p> The <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> affiliate in Ft. Worth, <ent type='ORG'>WBAP</ent>, was less cooperative.
Even though public statements were made that viewing of <ent type='PERSON'>Dan</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Owens</ent>
and <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Darnell</ent>'s footage was possible, many roadblocks were thrown
into the path of researchers. As mentioned in the section on <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>,
Darnell's footage of the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> and parking lot is very important.
It has remained unavailable at <ent type='ORG'>WBAP</ent>.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>KTTV</ent> -- <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent></p>

<p> Independent TV station <ent type='ORG'>KTTV</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> also suppressed, or lost,
valuable evidence of conspiracy. <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent> Cook's TV footage contained
twelve important sequences. One is a sequence of a man being
arrested in front of the Depository building at about 1:00 p.m.
From other evidence it is possible to determine that the man may be
<ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> Sharp, participant in the assassination. <ent type='PERSON'>Cook</ent> can be seen
in a picture taken by <ent type='PERSON'>Phil Willis</ent> pointing his 16mm TV film camera
directly at the man from about ten feet away.
<ent type='ORG'>Willis</ent>' photo does not show the man's face. For this reason,
Cook's close-up footage is very important. In 1967 the author
interviewed <ent type='PERSON'>Cook</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> and found that his film had been turned
over to the editor at <ent type='ORG'>KTTV</ent>. A phone call to the station resulted
in a statement being made to the author that Cook's footage had
been lost "on the cutting room floor" and was not available for
viewing. No further efforts have even been made to open up KTTV's
evidence in the assassination.</p>

<p> <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> Newspapers</p>

<p> The only two publications in <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States that printed the
truth about the <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> trial were the <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> "Times
Picayune" and the <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> "Times <ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent>."
Between 1963 and 1967 both <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> newspapers used AP and UP
stories on most of their coverage of the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> assassination.
Suddenly, the papers found themselves deeply involved in the middle
of the sensational <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> investigation, and in 1969 they
reported on the <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> trial.
The papers took no editorial position on <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>, the
trial, the investigation, the assassination, or the guilt or
innocence of <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> until after the final verdict was delivered by
the jury. Then both papers savagely attacked <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> on the
editorial page. Off the record, the reporters and others at both
papers supported <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>. This was reflected in a book published
by the two "<ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent>" reporters, Rosemary <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> Wardlaw,
called "Plot or Politics."
The management and editors of the newspapers evidently paid more
attention to forces from <ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> than they did to
<ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> citizens or the testimony at the trial.
But the verbatim proceedings at the <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> trial, as well as all
of the detailed events for the two years that the Federal
Government successfully delayed the trial, were faithfully printed
in both the "<ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent>" and the "Picayune." While you and I, dear
reader, were treated to a highly biased account for three years
concerning events in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> by "Time" magazine, "Newsweek,"
"U.S. News," "The <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times," <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>, UP, AP, etc., the
average <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> citizen was well aware that the Justice
<ent type='ORG'>Department</ent>, under both <ent type='PERSON'>Ramsey Clark</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent>, was
responsible for continually delaying the trail. (You and I were
fed the impression that <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> delayed the trial.)
Mr. <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> citizen, let's call him <ent type='PERSON'>Joe</ent>, knew that Shaw's
lawyers were paid by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>. You and I were told that <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> paid
his lawyers a lot of money and suffered financially because of it.
<ent type='PERSON'>Joe</ent> knew that the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> was looking for <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> under his alias, Clay
Bertrand, before lawyer <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Dean</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Andrews</ent></ent> ever mentioned the name
associated with <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent> just before he was killed by <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent>. You and I were told that <ent type='PERSON'>Andrews</ent> fabricated the name Clay
Bertrand out of whole cloth, and no mention was made to us of the
FBI's search.
<ent type='PERSON'>Joe</ent> knew that twelve people saw <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> together with <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>
and <ent type='PERSON'>David Ferrie</ent> on many occasions, exchanging money on two
occasions. You and I were led to believe by "Time" and "The New
York Times" that only three people saw them together and that the
three were not credible witnesses.
<ent type='PERSON'>Joe</ent> knows how <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> was hounded and framed by the Justice
<ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> in a fake pinball rap. More importantly, he knows the
government did not want Regis <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> agent, and <ent type='PERSON'>Pierre Finck</ent>,
<ent type='ORG'>Army</ent> doctor at the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> autopsy, to testify at the trial.
Finck's testimony, however, was printed in the "Times Picayune"
but not in "Time" magazine. He said that an <ent type='ORG'>Army</ent> general gave
orders during the autopsy at Beth<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>a Naval Hospital. The
unidentified general told <ent type='ORG'>Finck</ent> and the other doctors not to probe
<ent type='ORG'>the President</ent>'s neck wound. We did not read about this or hear
about it.
The "Times Picayune" record of the <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> trial was especially
accurate. The "<ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent>"'s record was reasonably accurate, but
because the paper was printed by 3:00 p.m., the paper missed some
of the longer sessions.[9]</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>WDSU</ent>-TV -- <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent></p>

<p> As mentioned in the section on <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>WDSU</ent> became directly
involved in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination aftermath because of Rick <ent type='ORG'>Townley</ent>
and <ent type='PERSON'>Walter Sheridan</ent>. Both were under indictment by <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> for
bribing witnesses and tampering with evidence. <ent type='ORG'>Townley</ent>, on the
staff of <ent type='ORG'>WDSU</ent>, was close to the action with <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Andrews</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ferrie</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Perry Russo</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Layton Martens</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Gordon Novel</ent>, Sergio
Arcacha Smith, <ent type='PERSON'>David Lewis</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>David Llewelyn</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Guy Banister</ent>, and many
other participants in the drama.
According to accounts in the <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> papers and repeated in
<ent type='PERSON'>Paris Flammonde</ent>'s book "The <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> Conspiracy," <ent type='ORG'>Townley</ent> tried to
get <ent type='PERSON'>Perry Russo</ent>, Garrison's prime witness at the <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> trial, to
change his testimony at the upcoming trial to make it seem that
<ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> had hypnotized him and then asked leading questions to get
<ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> to testify against <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent>.
<ent type='ORG'>Townley</ent> went to Russo's house twice, threatened to discredit him
and perhaps have him fired from his job, and offered him a chance
to work closely with <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> in their efforts to "destroy <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> and
his case". <ent type='ORG'>Townley</ent> told <ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> he could get Shaw's lawyer, F.
<ent type='ORG'>Irving</ent> Dymond, to go easy on him if he would alter his testimony.
He assured <ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> that his employer, <ent type='ORG'>Equitable</ent> Life, had promised
the president of <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> that no retaliation would be taken against
<ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> if he cooperated with <ent type='ORG'>WDSU</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Walter Sheridan</ent> told <ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> that <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>WDSU</ent> could set him up in
<ent type='GPE'>California</ent> (where <ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> always wanted to live) if he helped break
the <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> probe's back. <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> would pay his expenses there,
protect his job, obtain a lawyer for <ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> and guarantee that
<ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> would never extradite him to <ent type='GPE'>Louisiana</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Sheridan</ent> told
<ent type='PERSON'>Russo</ent> that <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> had flown <ent type='PERSON'>Gordon Novel</ent> out of <ent type='GPE'>Louisiana</ent> to McLean,
<ent type='GPE'>Virginia</ent> (home of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>) and had given Novel (an important
witness for Garrison's case) a lie detector test. <ent type='PERSON'>Sheridan</ent> said
<ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> would make sure Novel would never be extradited to <ent type='GPE'>Louisiana</ent> to
testify. (Novel never was extradited.)
<ent type='ORG'>Townley</ent> also tried to influence <ent type='PERSON'>Marlene Mancuso</ent>, former wife of
<ent type='PERSON'>Gordon Novel</ent>, and an important <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> trial witness. He told her
that she should cooperate with <ent type='ORG'>WDSU</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> because <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> was
going to be destroyed and that <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> was not merely willing to
discredit the probe: he said <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> would go to jail.
On July 10, 1967, <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Townley</ent> was arrested and charged with
attempted bribery and two counts of intimidating two witnesses. He
was also accused of serving as an intermediary to influence cross-examining trial attorneys that the character and reputation of
<ent type='PERSON'>Perry Russo</ent> not be damaged.
<ent type='PERSON'>Sheridan</ent> was arrested on July 7 on the counts of intimidating
witnesses and attempted bribery. Both posted bond. Townley's
statements, however, did come true. The <ent type='ORG'>Federal Government</ent>, aided
and abetted by <ent type='ORG'>WDSU</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>, did crucify <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>.
The author's belief is that this kind of behavior in the face of
all the evidence gathered by the staffs of their own organizations,
on the part of 15 to 24 major news media management groups is
highly suspect. It might be that each major news organization shut
up about the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> assassination because each was afraid of
losing face or influence, <ent type='ORG'>FCC</ent> licenses, business or advertisers, or
Government favors of one kind or another.
This theory is perhaps best exemplified by a story told by
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Dorothy</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kilgallen</ent></ent>, before she died, to a close friend. <ent type='PERSON'>Kilgallen</ent>
was writing several articles about the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination for the
newspapers who published her column. She strongly believed there
had been a conspiracy that included <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent></ent>. She interviewed
<ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent> alone in his jail cell in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> (the only person outside of
the police who had this opportunity). She told her friend shortly
afterward that she was planning to "blow the case wide open" in her
column. She said the owner of the <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> newspaper where her
column appeared refused to let her print stories in opposition to
<ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>. When the friend asked her why, <ent type='PERSON'>Dorothy</ent>
said, "He's afraid he won't be invited to White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> parties any
more".
Of the three possible motives for suppression in the news media,
the influence from the top and from high government places seems
the most probable. When will we, as <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>ns, learn the truth
about influence in the case of the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> assassination?</p>

<p> Conclusions</p>

<p> The pattern of internal knowledge of conspiracy followed by the
complete suppression of such information is too strong to ignore.
Two conclusions suggest themselves as one reviews the evidence
regarding suppression and secrecy.
The first is that our national news media are controlled on the
subject of the assassination by some very high level group in
<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>. The orders to cease, desist, and suppress came from
the top in each case. To influence the very top level of all
fifteen major news media organizations would have taken a great
deal more than money, power, or threats. In fact, the only kind of
appeal which seems likely to have had a chance of shutting everyone
up is a "highly patriotic, national security," kind of appeal. It
was probably just such an argument that worked with the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>. Judging by the fact that <ent type='PERSON'>Lyndon</ent> B. <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son told Walter
<ent type='GPE'>Cronkite</ent> there was a conspiracy and then successfully persuaded <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>
to edit this out of his remarks "on grounds of national security,"
this kind of an appeal obviously does work.
The second possibility, rather remote from a probability
standpoint, should nevertheless be considered. It is that all 15
to 24 news organizations reached a point of exasperation and
disbelief in 1968-1969. It's possible the top managers of these 24
organizations reached this exasperation point independent of one
another. Within a two to three-year period, culminating in the
<ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> trial and discrediting of <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>, every one of these
managers might finally have said, "Stop, cease, desist, lock the
files, you're fired, shut up, I don't want to hear another word
about it."</p>

<p> 1976</p>

<p> How, one may ask, could all of this have happened in the world's
greatest democracy? What has become of the principles of the
Founding Fathers, <ent type='PERSON'>Horace Greeley</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Will Rogers</ent> and others, in which
the "free" press is supposedly our best protection from the misuse
of governmental power. Didn't things change with <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>? What
about the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times" and the "<ent type='ORG'>Pentagon Papers</ent>," the
"<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>," <ent type='PERSON'>Bernstein</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Woodward</ent>, <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>, NBC's white
paper on <ent type='GPE'>Vietnam</ent>, Sy Hersh and the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> stories in the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>
Times"?
The actions taking place in November-December, 1975 and on into
1976, proved the media were still influenced and controlled by the
same forces that controlled the media in 1968 and 1969. Some of
the names of the players were different: <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> for <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Colby</ent> for
<ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent>, Kelley for J. <ent type='PERSON'>Edgar Hoover</ent>. But the forces were the same.
The chairmen of the boards and presidents of <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>, Time,
Inc., "Newsweek"-"<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>," "<ent type='GPE'>Los Angeles</ent> Times," "<ent type='GPE'>Chicago</ent>
Tribune," <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent>, AP, and the rest, were still very much controlled
and influenced by the White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>Secret Team</ent>. Some of the
influence was by infiltration, as Fletcher Prouty so aptly
demonstrated.[10]
The <ent type='ORG'>Secret Team</ent> members were to be found everywhere at or near
the top. Other influence came from the <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> administration through
direct or indirect pressure. The <ent type='ORG'>FCC</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>IRS</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>the Department</ent> of
Commerce, the military and other government agencies had some
control over the media or the personal lives of the top managers.
(It must be remembered that Gerald <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> was and is one of the
cover-up conspirators in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case.)</p>

<p> What is the Evidence?</p>

<p> What is the evidence for this? One measures the influence by
results. In an era when all who have really examined the basic
evidence know there were conspiracies in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>RFK</ent>
assassinations, we still find the 15 organizations concluding there
were lone, demented gunmen in the two cases.
For example, <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> broadcast a two-part special on November 25 and
26, 1975, once again reinforcing their stand that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> acted
alone. Except for the substitution of <ent type='PERSON'>Dan</ent> Rather as chief narrator
in place of <ent type='PERSON'>Walter Cronkite</ent>, the cast was the same as in the 1967
four-part series. Leslie <ent type='ORG'>Midgely</ent> was the producer, <ent type='PERSON'>Bernie</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Birnbaum</ent>, the associate producer, and <ent type='PERSON'>Jane Bartels</ent>, Birnbaum's
girl-Friday. <ent type='PERSON'>Eric Sevareid</ent> and Eddie <ent type='PERSON'>Barker</ent> were missing. So was
<ent type='PERSON'>Bob Richter</ent>, another 1967 associate producer who had discovered the
truth about the conspiracy and the way <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> handled it. (He now
manages his own film-making company, Richter-McBride, in <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>.)
Richter's opinion about the 1967 <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> four-part special, as
expressed in an interview with <ent type='PERSON'>Jerry Policoff</ent> published in "New
Times" magazine in October 1975,[11] barred him from becoming a
consultant to <ent type='ORG'>Midgely</ent> on the November 25 and 26 programs.</p>

<p> Hard Evidence Never Mentioned</p>

<p> Time, Inc., in their November 17, 1975 issue supported the lone
assassin myth as they have since 1964.[12] Since "Life" was no
longer in existence, Time management used "Time" and "People"
magazines to further the causes of the White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> in
the cover-up of the cover-ups. The November 3, 1975 issue[13] of
"People" magazine hand-picked a group of "researchers" and
portrayed them as obvious maniacs who believed in and furthered the
conspiracy theories being bandied about. One of the favorite
tricks of the media throughout the years has been to couple the
words "conspiracy" and "theory" together; never once did the major
media mention any of the hard evidence pointing to conspiracy in
any of the four major cases. The "Time" policy and article,
according to <ent type='PERSON'>Jerry Policoff</ent>, was commanded from the very top, above
Hedley <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>ovan's level.[14]
The fine hand of <ent type='PERSON'>David Belin</ent> can be traced in the "Time"
article. All of the 1964 arguments against conspiracy were aired
once again, as though they were brand new.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>The Forces</ent> of Good vs. <ent type='ORG'>the Forces</ent> of Evil:</p>

<p> A Life and Death Struggle</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>David Belin</ent>: <ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent> shows up in several places. He constructed
a new <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>-White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> base on behalf of his superiors by personally
writing most of Chapter 19 of the <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> Report on the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and
the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>. That material was used by <ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent> and others to try and
shore up <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> defenses.
The reader may ask, "Why did <ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent> appear on 'Face the Nation'
on November 23, 1975 and get himself on the front page of the 'New
York Times' on the same day by proposing the reopening of the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
case?"[15] The answer lies in Belin's own explanation. He wants
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent> to see that a new investigation will confirm the findings
of <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>, thereby strengthening the country's faith
in its government. Just how did <ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent> manage to get on "Face the
Nation" and on the first page of the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times?" To answer
that you must analyze the life and death struggle that is going on
between the forces of evil who want to continue the cover-ups, and
the forces of good who want to expose the truth. Senators <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Gary Hart</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> Committee's subcommittee
looking into the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination were not the push-overs that
<ent type='PERSON'>Mark Lane</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Harold Weisberg</ent> and others once were. There were also
<ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> B. <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Downing</ent> and their new resolutions in
the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>, not to mention <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent> Edwards' subcommittee and <ent type='ORG'>Bell</ent>a
Abzug's subcommittee.
The evil forces needed to muster the strongest counterattack
possible at this stage. For them it was a matter of life and
death. So they rounded up <ent type='PERSON'>David Belin</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Joseph Ball</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Wes</ent>ley
Liebeler, <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> J. McCloy, Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Lattimer</ent>, the old <ent type='PERSON'>Ramsey Clark</ent>
panel of doctors who secretly went into the <ent type='ORG'>Archives</ent> in 1968, and
some of the coterie of writers who were in their camp in the
1960's.</p>

<p> "I've Seen No New Evidence"</p>

<p> Any doubts about Belin's recruitment by <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> and the White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>
disappeared with Gerald Ford's press conference on Wedn<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>ay,
November 26, 1975. A reporter asked <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> whether he would support
reopening the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> investigation.[16] He said, "I, of course,
served on <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>. And I know a good deal about the
hearings and the committee report, obviously. There are some new
developments--not evidence--but new developments that, according to
one of our best staff members (<ent type='PERSON'>David Belin</ent>), who's kept up to date
on it more than I, that he thinks just to lay those charges (of
conspiracy) aside that a new investigation ought to be undertaken.
He, at the same time, said that no new evidence has come up. If
those particular developments could be fully investigated without
reopening the whole matter that took us 10 months to conclude, I
think some responsible group or organization ought to do so. But
not to reopen all of the other aspects because I think they were
thoroughly covered by <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>."
Thus <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>, in one of his own inimitable paragraphs, tried to
give the impression that he was following the lead of <ent type='PERSON'>David Belin</ent>-
-rather than the other way around--in the continued cover-up
efforts. Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> was always saying, "I've seen no new
evidence." <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent> and the rest were forced to echo this
refrain, as though all of the things that have been learned since
1964 about the real assassins of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and their planners
and backers, were false rumors or stories and theories created out
of whole cloth by the researchers and later by <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>.[17]</p>

<p> Pure Coincidence?</p>

<p> One <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>-White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> lackey is <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent>, formerly a freelance
writer for the old "Saturday <ent type='ORG'>Evening Post</ent>." <ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent> was brought out
of mothballs to do a pro-<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> piece in the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>
Times" <ent type='LOC'>Sunday</ent> magazine section.[18] By pure coincidence, it
happened to appear on the same day that Belin's arranged interview
was found on page one. The "Times" is one of the worst, if not the
worst, news media organization on the evil side of the battle.
An article in the July 1971 issue of "Computers and
Automation"[19] shows that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> control of the "Times" had for
years been directed through Harding <ent type='ORG'>Bancroft</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>Secret Team</ent>
member there. He controlled all stories and editorial positions on
domestic assassinations. He undoubtedly arranged for both stories
to appear on the same day.[20]</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>. Cover-Up Broadcasting System</p>

<p> The <ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent> appearance on the <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> show, "Face the Nation", was no
doubt timed to coincide with the first two parts of the new <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>
whitewash series. (The new name for <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> is "Cover-Up Broadcasting
System".) The men at the top made the decisions in 1967 and 1975
to support <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>, and <ent type='PERSON'>Leslie Midgeley</ent> carried them
out. In 1967 the entire program format was changed by top
management from pro-conspiracy to pro-<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> in the last
ten days before the first show went on the air.[21] By 1975 there
wasn't any doubt about the conclusions. Midgeley and Co. started
out with the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent> thesis and, as <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>
did, merely sought witnesses, experts and explanations that would
back it up, while they totally ignored everything else.
The CIA's man at <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> who controlled this policy is not known.
Personal experiences and contacts within the organization by the
author have led to the conclusion that it is someone below the
level of <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> C. <ent type='PERSON'>Paley</ent> and above the level of Midgeley. That
leaves <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Salant</ent> and one or two other possibilities. <ent type='PERSON'>Salant</ent>
is known to have had intelligence connections through the decades
since <ent type='EVENT'>World War</ent> II.</p>

<p> Too Perfect Timing</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> and the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times" are sometimes simultaneously
orchestrated by the evil forces. One example was the <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> show
preview by the "Times" on November 24 (the show was scheduled to
appear on November 25 and 26).[22] The article, written by <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> J.
O'Connor, was a reverse-psychology strategy by the top managements
of both organizations and was used to reinforce their pro-<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> policies. To quote O'Connor, "In bringing some facts to
bear on the feverish speculation, <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> News is less sensational but
more telling." This was in reference to <ent type='PERSON'>David Susskind</ent> and Geraldo
<ent type='PERSON'>Rivera</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Channel</ent> 5 in <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>, and <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>, who the "Times" believed
provided no facts in disputing the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent> conclusion.
How did O'Connor and the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times" take a look at the <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>
shows *two days in advance* while other publications and reviewers
had to wait and watch it with the rest of us? There goes the
orchestration again.</p>

<p> "Newsweek" Editorial Position:
<ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent>, Hart and <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> Misled by Kooks</p>

<p> The "<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>"-"Newsweek" situation is a little more
mystifying. It is difficult to believe that Katherine <ent type='PERSON'>Graham</ent>,
owner of both publications, is a <ent type='ORG'>Secret Team</ent> member. The
"Newsweek" story on the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination, published in the issue
of April 28, 1975[23] was not as blatantly pro-<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> as
the "Time" article. Yet it left the impression with the readers of
"Newsweek" that editorial position regarded the researchers as
kooks who misled or talked Senator <ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent> and Representatives
<ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> into the wrong attitudes. "<ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> did fire
the shots" is the "Newsweek" message. Individuals at "Newsweek"
like <ent type='ORG'>Evert Clark</ent> did not really believe this. So where did the
pressure come from? Mrs. <ent type='PERSON'>Graham</ent> herself, or <ent type='PERSON'>Benjamin Bradlee</ent> at
the "<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>," or someone else near the top of "Newsweek?" With
reporters like <ent type='PERSON'>Bernstein</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Woodward</ent>, and Haynes <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son who later
moved into management, it is strange that the "<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>" supported the
<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>. Yet that has been the "<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>"'s editorial stance
since 1964. It remains adamant in its continuing contention that
lone madmen assassinated our three leaders and attempted to
assassinate <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent>.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>Eliminate</ent> Areas of Doubt</p>

<p> Researcher <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Blickenstaff</ent>, disturbed by a "Newsweek" article
in April of 1975, wrote to the editors. <ent type='PERSON'>Madeline Edmundson</ent> replied
for them. "It was certainly not our aim to discredit those who
doubt the conclusions of <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> or to express
opposition to a reopening of the investigation of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. Kennedy's
assassination."
Yet, "Newsweek" did exactly that and, in effect, took the same
editorial position it had taken in May, 1967, when <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> lackey Hugh
<ent type='PERSON'>Aynesworth</ent> was doing their dirty work. (<ent type='PERSON'>Aynesworth</ent> later did the
CIA's dirty work and supported <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> for the
"<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> Times <ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent>.") The new position in favor of reopening the
investigation was the one taken by <ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent>. It was expressed best by
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Harrison</ent> <ent type='GPE'>Salisbury</ent></ent>, the man at the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times" who knew
better. <ent type='GPE'>Salisbury</ent> was quoted in "Newsweek" saying, "A new
investigation is needed to answer questions of major importance.
We will go over all the areas of doubt and hope to eliminate them."</p>

<p> <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent>: Accessory After the <ent type='ORG'>Fact</ent> in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> Conspiracy Cover-Up</p>

<p> AP and <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> have not repeated their 1967-1968 performances
recently in which they sent out the longest stories ever broadcast
over their news service wires. They were so long that they were
divided into installments. The stories backed up the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> and attacked the researchers, especially <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>.
<ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent>, of course, became an accessory after the fact in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
conspiracy cover-up by suppressing the original 8mm color films by
<ent type='PERSON'>Marie Muchmore</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Orville Nix</ent>. It went even further by employing
<ent type='ORG'>Itek Corporation</ent> to prove there was no one on the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>.
In July of 1975 a <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> alumnus, Maurice <ent type='PERSON'>Schonfeld</ent>, published an
article in "<ent type='GPE'>Columbia</ent> Journalism Review"[24] that subtly contended
one of the riflemen on the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> as seen in the original Nix film
was either an illusion or a man without a rifle.</p>

<p> "Expert" Opinions</p>

<p> <ent type='GPE'>Itek</ent>: <ent type='GPE'>Itek</ent> is still at work helping out their friendly
employers, the U.S. government and the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>. <ent type='GPE'>Itek</ent> analyzed the
<ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film and the <ent type='ORG'>Hughes</ent> film on the <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> program aired in
November of 1975, giving its "expert" opinion that all shots fired
in Dealey Plaza came from the sixth floor window of the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent>
Building.
Maurice <ent type='PERSON'>Schonfeld</ent>, perhaps unwittingly, did a favor for
researchers in his "<ent type='GPE'>Columbia</ent> Journalism Review" article that
revealed that two officials of <ent type='GPE'>Itek</ent>, Howard <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Franklin</ent> T.
<ent type='PERSON'>Lindsay</ent>, were <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Secret Team</ent> members. So when <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>Salant</ent> or whoever at <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> needed help, all they had to do was call
upon good old <ent type='GPE'>Itek</ent> and Howard <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>. (Frank <ent type='PERSON'>Lindsay</ent> has since
departed.)</p>

<p> AP: Faithful to the White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent></p>

<p> Associated <ent type='ORG'>Press</ent> has been editorially silent since 1969. They
have faithfully broadcast all of the White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>-<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> cover or
planted stories without comment.</p>

<p> Keeping the Lid On</p>

<p> "<ent type='GPE'>Los Angeles</ent> Times:" "The <ent type='GPE'>Los Angeles</ent> Times," controlled by
<ent type='PERSON'>Norman Chandler</ent> who was strongly influenced by the <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>
administration, the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Evelle Younger</ent> (the Attorney General of
<ent type='GPE'>California</ent>), produced a complete cover-up effort in the <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> assassination conspiracy. Younger, of course, was D.A. in
<ent type='GPE'>Los Angeles</ent> County when <ent type='PERSON'>RFK</ent> was killed. He and Ed Davis, L.A.
Police Chief, teamed up with <ent type='PERSON'>Joseph Busch</ent>, assistant D.A., to cover
up the conspiracy evidence. The "Times" for a short, unguarded
period allowed reporter <ent type='PERSON'>Dave Smith</ent> to publish the truth about the
assassination. This stopped in 1974, after Al Lowenstein stirred
<ent type='PERSON'>Vincent Bugliosi</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Baxter Ward</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Bradley</ent>, and finally Governor
<ent type='PERSON'>Pat Brown</ent>, Jr. to take a new interest in the case.
Younger influenced <ent type='PERSON'>Chandler</ent> to shut off the flow of information
through the "<ent type='GPE'>Los Angeles</ent> Times." <ent type='PERSON'>Chandler</ent>, who contributed to the
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> campaign, undoubtedly was strong-armed by both <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>
(or the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>) to support the position of the <ent type='GPE'>Los Angeles</ent> police and
the D.A.'s office. Ronald Reagan and his immediate deputy at the
time also helped sway <ent type='PERSON'>Chandler</ent> and others in <ent type='GPE'>California</ent> to keep the
lid on.</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> Film Broadcast on Two Occasions</p>

<p> The <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n Broadcasting Corporation was the first of the
television networks to seemingly break away from <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>-White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>
control. In the spring of 1975, after <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> Groden, <ent type='PERSON'>Dick Gregory</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Ralph Schoenman</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Jerry Policoff</ent> decided to release and publicize
a clear, enlarged, stop-action color copy of the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film, the
<ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent> show hosted by <ent type='PERSON'>Geraldo Rivera</ent>, "Good Night, <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>," showed
the film on two occasions. <ent type='PERSON'>Rivera</ent> might have made this move
against the wishes of top <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent> management. <ent type='ORG'>Rumor</ent> had it during the
summer months that he was in hot water with high level people. All
doubts about ABC's position disappeared when they broadcast an
assassination special during the week of November 17, 1975 that
supported the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent> theory.</p>

<p> "Conspiracy Fever"</p>

<p> "Commentary:" One surprising newcomer to the cover-up
conspiracy group is "Commentary." The liberal, open-minded, non-government magazine "Commentary" broke their pattern in the October
1975 issue[25] when it published an article by Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>Jacob Cohen</ent> from
<ent type='ORG'>Brandeis University</ent> which attacked the researchers as paranoid
<ent type='ORG'>conspiratorialists</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Cohen</ent> has been writing these defenses for the
<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> for over ten years. This article was republished
in several other places in November, 1975, as part of the
orchestrated campaign by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>-White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>.</p>

<p> A Straight News Story</p>

<p> "U.S. News and World Report:" "U.S. News" may be one of the few
media publications to change positions. On September 15, 1975 they
ran a story entitled, "Behind the Move to Reopen the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> Case". It
was a straight news story about Senator Schweiker's efforts and
list of uncovered evidence raising new questions. The article
closed with: "Numerous <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>ns who long have doubted the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> conclusions will be watching what the Senate does with
his (Schweiker's) idea." That is as close as any of the fifteen
organizations came to saying they believe <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> was
wrong.</p>

<p> A Breath of Fresh Air</p>

<p> "Saturday <ent type='ORG'>Evening Post</ent>:" Like a breath of fresh air from the
heartland of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent> in <ent type='NORP'>Indiana</ent>polis, <ent type='NORP'>Indiana</ent>, the revived
"Saturday <ent type='ORG'>Evening Post</ent>" (<ent type='PERSON'>Bobbs Merrill</ent> subsidiary) took an
editorial stance. The "<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>" not only published several strong
articles on the assassinations but also called for reopening all of
the cases, supported the <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>-<ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> resolutions, and offered
a sizable reward for information leading to conviction of the
murderers of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>.[26] Thus the "<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>" joined the ranks
of the "<ent type='ORG'>National Enquirer</ent>," "National Tattler," "<ent type='ORG'>National Insider</ent>,"
"<ent type='ORG'>Argosy</ent>," "Penthouse," "Gallery," "<ent type='ORG'>Genesis</ent>" and other publications
of this type, plus nearly all the "underground newspapers" in
calling for new investigations.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> Operatives Are Serving as Journalists
For News Organizations Abroad</p>

<p> "<ent type='ORG'>Variety</ent>:" On November 12, 1975, "<ent type='ORG'>Variety</ent>" published an article
on the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> and Senate <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>s' suspicions about
relationships between the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and broadcasting organizations.[27]
"<ent type='ORG'>Variety</ent>" said the committees were probing the CIA's influence on
the media organizations, particularly management connections, and
commented, "A central issue in the investigations is reports of
financial dealings with the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and media firms with extensive
overseas staffs."
<ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Colby</ent> admitted that <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> operatives were currently
serving as journalists for news organizations abroad, and that
"detailmen" were assigned abroad to news organizations, often
without the knowledge of management. <ent type='PERSON'>Ronald Dellums</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>California</ent>
representative asked <ent type='PERSON'>Colby</ent> in an open session of a <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> hearing if
the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> had ever asked a network to kill a news story. <ent type='PERSON'>Colby</ent> would
not answer specifics in open session, so the panel went immediately
behind closed doors to grill him for several hours.</p>

<p> Conclusions</p>

<p> It is to be hoped that all committees in the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> and Senate
will investigate the <ent type='ORG'>Secret Team</ent> members in the 15 media
organizations and their influence and control over editorial
policies on domestic assassination conspiracies. It is also to be
hoped that the committees will investigate the role of then-president Gerald <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> and his working relationship to various <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
people in the original cover-up of the <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
assassination conspiracy. Certainly, <ent type='PERSON'>David Belin</ent>'s relationship to
the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and to <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> in the media cover-up campaign needs be
investigated.
Fletcher Prouty claimed in his November, 1975 article in
"Gallery Magazine," "<ent type='ORG'>The Fourth Force</ent>,"[28] that <ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent> is a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
operative. Prouty says, "The <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> did not look
into this (the <ent type='ORG'>Fourth Force</ent>-<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>) because it had been penetrated on
behalf of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> by <ent type='PERSON'>David Belin</ent>, its chief counsel and former
counsel of <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>. In fact, <ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent> still reports to
the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>." If this is indeed true, it explains every move <ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent> has
made since 1964 and it also explains the mysterious way he appeared
and reappeared on the front pages and editorial pages of various
major newspapers, on choice television shows, and on the
<ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>.
If the <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> leaves the media-government-<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> link untouched-
-more serious than any of the other problems raised by the
assassination conspiracies and their cover-ups--<ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States
might, in fact, be headed for the real 1984.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>script</p>

<p> On April 27, 1976 "The <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times" published a story on the
Senate <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> revelation that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> would be
keeping twenty-five journalist agents within the news media.[29]
The <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> disclosed that <ent type='PERSON'>George Bush</ent> planned to keep these
people in the media positions that they had occupied for a long
time.
The significant point about the story was a statement by a
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> staff member that many of the individuals were in
executive positions at <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n news organizations. <ent type='PERSON'>Bush</ent> had
directed that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> stop hiring correspondents "accredited" by
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n publications and other news organizations. The "Times"
recognized that the pivotal word in Bush's directive was
"accredited." "Executives who do not work as correspondents are
apparently not covered by Mr. Bush's directive, nor are freelance
writers who are not affiliated with a specific employer." The
article also said that in most cases the media organization was not
aware of the individual's <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> connection.
This was yet the best confirmation that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> had its Secret
Team members planted at the top of the media. Only one executive
is required at the top of a media organization to control it when
needed. Since the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> had twenty-five executives planted, that
figure is more than enough to control the fifteen media
organizations mentioned in this chapter.
Who are they? The answer can be supplied by watching where the
decisions come from to halt or change the news about domestic
political assassinations.
The indications from the analysis in this chapter are that the
following media executives are among the twenty-five retained by
the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>: Harding <ent type='ORG'>Bancroft</ent>, Jr. ("<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times"); <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Salant</ent>
(<ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>); <ent type='PERSON'>George Love</ent> (Time, Inc./"Life"); <ent type='PERSON'>Walter Sheridan</ent> (<ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>);
Lewis <ent type='PERSON'>Powell</ent>, lawyer (<ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>); and <ent type='PERSON'>Benjamin Bradlee</ent> ("<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>").</p>

<p>____________________</p>

<p> [1] "Accessories After the <ent type='ORG'>Fact</ent>" is the title of a book by Sylvia
Meagher, published by <ent type='PERSON'>Bobbs Merrill</ent> in 1967, accusing the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> and the various government agencies of covering up the
crime of the century. This book accuses the national news media
of the same crimes. </p>

<p> [2] <ent type='ORG'>Black Star</ent> is a <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> based organization made up of free-lance photographers, called stringers, in every major city. They
do contract work for news media with <ent type='ORG'>Black Star</ent> acting as
contracting agent.</p>

<p> [3] <ent type='PERSON'>Samuel</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Thurston</ent>, "The <ent type='ORG'>Central <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Agency</ent></ent> and 'The New
York Times,'" "<ent type='ORG'>Computers and Automation</ent>," July, 1971.</p>

<p> [4] <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>-TV Special on the Assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> -- June 25,
26, 27 and 28, 1972.</p>

<p> [5] "<ent type='ORG'>Computers and Automation</ent>," July, 1971</p>

<p> [6] For a more detailed analysis of the "Times"' culpability and
selective bias in reporting the facts of the assassination, see
<ent type='PERSON'>Jerry Policoff</ent>'s October 1972 article in "The Realist:" "How All
the News About Political <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> In <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States Has
Not Been Fit to Print in 'The <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times.'"</p>

<p> [7] A detailed review of NBC's performance and <ent type='PERSON'>Walter Sheridan</ent>'s and
<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Townley's involvement is given in "The <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> Conspiracy"
by <ent type='PERSON'>Paris Flammonde</ent>.</p>

<p> [8] Those interested in more detail are referred to the map in the
May 1970 issue of "<ent type='ORG'>Computers and Automation</ent>" on the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
assassination. The <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> definition of "the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>" was the
area bounded by the picket fence, the stone wall, the top of the
steps on the south, and the cupola.</p>

<p> [9] For a comparison of <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> newspapers and all other media
coverage of the <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> trial, see the author's unpublished book
"<ent type='ORG'>The Trial</ent> of <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> -- The <ent type='ORG'>Truth</ent> and the Fiction."</p>

<p>[10] Prouty, L. Fletcher, "The <ent type='ORG'>Secret Team</ent>," <ent type='ORG'>Prentice Hall</ent>, 1973.</p>

<p>[11] Policoff, Jerry, "The Media and the Murder of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>", "New
Times," October, 1975.</p>

<p>[12] "Who Killed <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>? Just One Assassin," "Time" magazine, November
24, 1975.</p>

<p>[13] "Up <ent type='ORG'>Front</ent> -- Did One Man With One Gun Kill <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F, <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>?
Eight Skeptics Who Say No," "People," November 3, 1975.</p>

<p>[14] Author's discussion with <ent type='PERSON'>Jerry Policoff</ent>, November 29, 1975.</p>

<p>[15] "<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> Panel Aide Calls for 2nd Inquiry Into <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> Killing",
"<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times," November 23, 1975, p. 1.</p>

<p>[16] Transcript of Gerald <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Press</ent> Conference "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times,"
November 27, 1975.</p>

<p>[17] For a summary of the evidence and scenario about what it shows
the reader is referred to two articles in "People and the
Pursuit of <ent type='ORG'>Truth</ent>:" "The Assassination of President <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F.
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> the Involvement of the <ent type='ORG'>Central <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Agency</ent></ent> in the
Plans and the Cover-Up," May 1975, and "Who Killed <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>?,"
October, 1975. Both by the author.</p>

<p>[18] <ent type='PERSON'>Phelan</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> R., "The Assassination," "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times Magazine
Section," November 23, 1975.</p>

<p>[19] <ent type='ORG'>Thurston</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Samuel</ent> F. (psuedonym for <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>), "The
<ent type='ORG'>Central <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Agency</ent></ent> and 'The <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times'" "Computers
and Automation," July, 1971.</p>

<p>[20] <ent type='ORG'>Bancroft</ent> retired in early 1976. A successor has undoubtedly been
groomed by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>. However, <ent type='ORG'>Bancroft</ent> still has a strong
influence at the "Times" on the subject of assassinations.</p>

<p>[21] Based on a discussion among the author, <ent type='PERSON'>Dan</ent> Rather, and <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent>
Richter at <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>, D.C., approximately ten days before
the first <ent type='GPE'>Cronkite</ent>-<ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> section of the 1967 four-part series on
the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination.</p>

<p>[22] O'Conner, <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> J., "TV: <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> News is Presenting Two Hour-Long
Programs on the Assassination of President <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>", "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>
Times," November 24, 1975.</p>

<p>[23] "<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>: New Questions and Answers," "Newsweek," April 28, 1975.</p>

<p>[24] <ent type='PERSON'>Schonfeld</ent>, Maurice W., "The Shadow of a Gunman," "<ent type='GPE'>Columbia</ent>
Journalism Review," July-August, 1975.</p>

<p>[25] <ent type='PERSON'>Cohen</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>, "Conspiracy Fever," "Commentary," October, 1975.</p>

<p>[26] "Saturday <ent type='ORG'>Evening Post</ent>," September, October, November and
December, 1975 issues.</p>

<p>[27] "D.C. Digs Deep Into TV News Ties With <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>," "<ent type='ORG'>Variety</ent>," November
12, 1975.</p>

<p>[28] Prouty, L. Fletcher, "<ent type='ORG'>The Fourth Force</ent>," "Gallery," November,
1975.</p>

<p>[29] "<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> Will Keep More Than 25 Journalist-Agents," "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times,"
April 27, 1976, p. 26.</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p>--
daveus rattus </p>

<p> yer friendly neighborhood ratman</p>

<p> KOYAANISQATSI</p>

<p> ko.yaa.nis.qatsi (from <ent type='EVENT'>the Hopi Language</ent>) n. 1. crazy life. 2. life
in turmoil. 3. life out of balance. 4. life disintegrating.
5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.</p>

<p>From dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com Fri Jun 12 09:16:33 1992
Received: from pl122c.eecs.lehigh.edu by ns-mx.uiowa.edu (5.64.jnf/920408)
on Fri, 12 Jun 92 09:16:18 -0500 id AA05588 with SMTP
Received: from SGI.COM by PL122c.EECS.Lehigh.EDU (5.61/1.34)
id AA19548; Fri, 12 Jun 92 09:59:36 -0400
Received: from [192.102.132.11] by sgi.sgi.com via SMTP (911016.SGI/910110.SGI)
for <ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122C.EECS.LEHIGH.EDU id AA20770; Fri, 12 Jun 92 07:02:12 -0700
Received: by ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (920110.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
for @sgi.sgi.com:<ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122C.EECS.LEHIGH.EDU id AA14133; Fri, 12 Jun 92 07:02:10 -0700
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 92 07:02:10 -0700
From: dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (dave "who can do? ratmandu!" ratcliffe)
<info type="Message-ID"> 9206121402.AA14133@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com</info>
To: <ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122c.EECS.Lehigh.EDU
Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (6/11)
Status: RO</p>

<p>Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (6/11)
Summary: we were robbed of our capability of electing a president we wanted
Keywords: part 6 of 11: chapter 10 thru chapter 12
Lines: 1057</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> Chapter 10
<ent type='ORG'>Techniques and Weapons</ent> and 100 Dead Conspirators and Witnesses</p>

<p> As Chapter 1 made clear, one of the two fiendish stratagems used
by <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> to cover-up the truth and to fool the
people was the use of various intelligence techniques and weapons.
The use of such techniques in assassination and murder completely
conceals the real killer's presence or the real cause of death.
From the moment the crime occurs the public is led to believe that
there is either one lone madman assassin or that the death was
accidental, due to natural causes, or committed by natural enemies
of the victim. Some of the techniques are so unique that they are
nearly impossible for the average <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n to believe.
The intelligence forces of <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States as well as those of
other countries have out-Bonded <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Bond. The development of
sophisticated murder methods and the control of humans for warfare
and spying in other countries came home to <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States,
effectively used by <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Penn Jones</ent>, Jr.
published a list of "mysterious deaths" in his series of four
volumes, "Forgive My Grief."[1] <ent type='PERSON'>Sylvia Meagher</ent> published facts
about the first eighteen witnesses at Dealey Plaza murdered through
the use of these techniques in the book, "Accessories After the
<ent type='ORG'>Fact</ent>."[2] Very few people other than researchers pay any
attention. Two movies with somewhat wider circulation, "Executive
Action" and "The Parallax View," covered the techniques fairly
well, but they were considered to be fiction by most viewers. So
the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> goes on murdering where and when it is necessary, and it
covers up the murders where necessary.
In 1974 and 1976, two murders became necessary. Rolando
<ent type='PERSON'>Masferrer</ent>, mentioned as a <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> conspirator, became dangerous to the
<ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, and he was eliminated in early 1976 with a non-sophisticated
weapon. A bomb was planted in his car in <ent type='GPE'>Miami</ent>. The cover-up in
this case merely involved planting an informer who claimed
<ent type='PERSON'>Masferrer</ent> was killed by a rival anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>n faction in
<ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent>.[3]
<ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> became quite nervous in 1974 after <ent type='PERSON'>Victor Marchetti</ent>'s
statements to the press earlier that year made it known that <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent>
was a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> contract employee and that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> gave him assistance
and protection before his trial in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> and after Jim
<ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> arrested him. <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> was murdered in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>
and the murder covered-up by simply controlling his embalming and
burial and blocking any local investigation.[4] The reason for his
murder was to keep him from talking and from returning to the
public eye.
The techniques and weapons fall into several classes. First,
there are sophisticated weapons developed by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>. An example
of this is the umbrella poison dart gun used in Dealey Plaza to
shoot <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> in the throat. Such a weapon was postulated by <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Cutler</ent> and the author in mid-1975 as the one that fired the first
shot from near the Stemmons Freeway sign.[5] This seemed
incredulous to most observers and so wild an idea that the author
and <ent type='PERSON'>Cutler</ent> did not discuss it with many researchers. Then Mr.
Charles Senseney, a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> weapon developer at <ent type='PERSON'>Fort Detrick</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Maryland</ent>,
testified before the Senate <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> in September
1975 and described an umbrella poison dart gun he had made.[6] He
said it was always used in crowds with the umbrella open, firing
through the webing so it would not attract attention. Since it was
silent, no one in the crowd could hear it and the assassin merely
would fold up the umbrella and saunter away with the crowd. (That
is almost exactly what happened in Dealey Plaza. The first shot
had always seemed to have had a paralytic effect on <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>. His
fists were clenched and his head, shoulders and arms seemed to
stiffen. There was a small entrance wound in his neck but no
evidence of a bullet path through his neck and no bullet was ever
recovered that matched that small size.)
Senseney testified that his Special Operations Division at Fort
Detrick had received assignments from the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> to develop exotic
weaponry. One of the weapons was a hand-held dart gun that could
shoot a poison dart into a guard dog to put it out of action for
several hours. The dart and the poison left no trace so that
examination would not reveal that the dogs had been put out of
action. The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> ordered about 50 of these weapons and used them
operationally. Senseney said that the darts could have been used
to kill human beings and he could not rule out the possibility that
this had been done by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>. He said he had developed a dart-launching device that looked like an umbrella.
A special type of poison developed induces a heart attack and
leaves no trace of any external influence unless an autopsy is
conducted to check for this particular poison. The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> revealed
this poison in various accounts in the early 1970s.
Among the witnesses, important people and conspirators who might
have been eliminated this way are: <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent>, J. <ent type='PERSON'>Edgar Hoover</ent>,
Earlene <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent>s (Oswald's land-lady) and Adlai <ent type='PERSON'>Stevens</ent>on.
A second category, already discussed in the <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>George Wallace</ent> shootings, is the use of a "programmed" assassin.
<ent type='ORG'>The Manchurian</ent> Candidate always seemed to be a science fiction
story. It is now well known that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> has used hypnosis and
"programming" to achieve a number of objectives, including murder.
Certainly there is little doubt that <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent></ent> was under
hypnosis when he wrote in his diary and when he fired the shots in
the general direction of <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>.[7] There is also
evidence that <ent type='PERSON'>Arthur Bremer</ent> was "programmed" to shoot at George
<ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent>. It is conceivable that one of the assassins in Dealey
Plaza could have been "programmed". A man surfaced after 1975
who--under deprogramming--remembered a firing situation resembling
Dealey Plaza. However, it is much less likely that the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> had to
use hypnosis in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> murder.
It is completely untrue that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> was programmed, as the book
"Were We <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent>led?" by <ent type='ORG'>Lincoln</ent> Lawrence (an alias for radio
commentator Art <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>) postulates. The evidence shows <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>
didn't fire a shot, that he was on the second floor of the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent>
Building at the time of the shots, and that he was very calm until
<ent type='PERSON'>Pat</ent>rolman <ent type='PERSON'>Baker</ent> pointed a gun at him. Strangely enough, Ford's
thesis is true. We were controlled by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, although he had the
details wrong.
A third popular technique is, of course, the patsy. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> has
developed this to the level of a real science. The assassination
is allowed to be obvious, but the assassin is presented as a single
madman or criminal who acts alone. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent></ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent></ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Arthur Bremer</ent> have all been
patsies. They are not all exactly alike, nor is the way in which
they were used the same in each case. For example, <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent>
did not fire any shots, while <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent> did. <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent>
and <ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent> were "programmed", whereas <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent> was talked into killing
<ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> by his friends in the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>. Four of the five men were
framed; a lot of evidence was manufactured and planted to
implicate them, including fake diaries, fake photographs, planted
guns, bullets and shells, and men using their identities. The one
who did not fit this category was <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent>. It was not needed in his
case because he killed <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> before live television and believed
until the day he died of cancer that his friends were going to get
him out of jail in exchange for his "patriotic" act.
The use of "seconds", men who looked like the patsy and who used
his name (true of <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent>) is a common intelligence
technique. The planting of fake photos in the case of <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>
required some relatively special photographic facilities, but the
job was not done well enough to avoid detection.
A fourth technique is the "accidental" death. Many witnesses
and conspirators have been murdered in this way. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Bowers</ent></ent>, the
railroad yard control tower man who saw the real assassins behind
the picket fence in Dealey Plaza, was killed when his car rammed
into a concrete abutment in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> (it was traveling at high
speed). The doctor who examined <ent type='PERSON'>Bowers</ent> prior to his removal from
the car, stated that he probably received an injection of some
kind prior to the crash. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Lomax</ent></ent>, the black author who was
getting close to the truth in the <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent> case, was
killed in <ent type='GPE'>Arizona</ent> when his car was forced off the road after he
was made to drive at high speed. <ent type='PERSON'>Hale Boggs</ent> disappeared in an
airplane crash that left no trace of the plane. And of course the
classic "accident" occurred at Chappaquiddick.
A fifth technique is an induced death that produces another
finding of the cause either by disguising the true cause or by
controlling the coroner or those in charge of burial. Examples
are: <ent type='PERSON'>David Ferrie</ent>'s murder by means of a karate chop to the back
of his head, disguised as an embolism of the brain, <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent>'s
murder by means unknown because there was no autopsy and complete
control of his removal and burial; <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent></ent>'s supposed death by
cancer in jail (real cause unknown because he was never out of the
PCG's hands until he was under ground).
Then there is a favorite sixth technique: mock suicide.
Examples of <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> murders that somehow became suicides are: Hank
Killam, a husband of one of Ruby's dancers, who committed suicide
by throwing himself through a plate glass window off the street in
<ent type='GPE'>Miami</ent>; Betty <ent type='LOC'>Mooney</ent>, one of Ruby's girls who hung herself in her
jail cell by using her leopard-skin tights; <ent type='PERSON'>Roger Craig</ent>, who shot
himself; <ent type='PERSON'>Jesus Crispin</ent>, who knew <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent>, supposedly killed himself
in his jail cell; <ent type='PERSON'>Grant Stockdale</ent>, who threw himself off the top
of a tall building in <ent type='GPE'>Miami</ent>.
There are some on the list who were admittedly murdered, but
supposedly not by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>. These include <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> Perrin, Nancy
Perrin's husband; <ent type='ORG'>Buddy Walters</ent>, deputy sheriff under Sheriff
Decker, shot by a man he was trying to arrest; Eladio Del Valle, a
cohort of <ent type='PERSON'>Ferrie</ent>, killed in <ent type='GPE'>Miami</ent> by an axe on the same day <ent type='PERSON'>Ferrie</ent>
was murdered; <ent type='PERSON'>Rolando Masferrer</ent>, blown up in his car; Eddy
Benevides, shot by an unknown assailant (he recovered). The
cover-ups in each of these cases were put into effect by
controlling the investigation or simply by not having one.
The complete list of deaths, including the eight major ones
(<ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>RFK</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>MLK</ent>, Mary Jo Kopechne, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>David Ferrie</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent>) numbers over a hundred. Here is a partial
list:</p>

<p> 1. <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
2. <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
3. <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent>
4. Mary Jo Kopechne
5. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>
6. <ent type='PERSON'>David Ferrie</ent>
7. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent></ent>
8. <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent>
9. <ent type='ORG'>Buddy Walthers</ent>
10. <ent type='PERSON'>Roger Craig</ent>
11. Eladio Del Valle
12. <ent type='PERSON'>Rolando Masferrer</ent>
13. <ent type='PERSON'>Hank Killam</ent>
14. Rose Cherami
15. <ent type='PERSON'>Hale Boggs</ent>
16. J. <ent type='PERSON'>Edgar Hoover</ent>
17. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Lomax</ent></ent>
18. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Bowers</ent></ent>, Jr.
19. <ent type='PERSON'>Jesus Crispin</ent>
20. <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Koethe</ent>
21. Bill Hunter
22. <ent type='PERSON'>Tom Howard</ent>
23. Earlene <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent>s
24. Betty <ent type='PERSON'>McDonald</ent>
25. <ent type='PERSON'>Eddy Benevides</ent>
26. <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> Perrin
27. <ent type='PERSON'>Gary Underhill</ent>
28. <ent type='PERSON'>Bill Chesher</ent>
29. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Dorothy</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kilgallen</ent></ent>
30. <ent type='PERSON'>David Goldstein</ent>
31. <ent type='ORG'>Levens</ent> (first name unknown)
32. <ent type='PERSON'>Teresa Norton</ent>
33. <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Reynolds</ent>
34. Harold <ent type='PERSON'>Russell</ent>
35. Marilyn Moore <ent type='ORG'>Wall</ent>e
36. <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> Whaley
37. <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Worrell, Jr.
38. Captain <ent type='PERSON'>Frank Martin</ent>
39. Mrs. Earl T. Smith
40. <ent type='PERSON'>Karyn Kupcinet</ent>
41. <ent type='PERSON'>Albert Guy Bogard</ent>
42. <ent type='PERSON'>Hiram Ingram</ent>
43. <ent type='PERSON'>Nicholas Chetta</ent>
44. <ent type='PERSON'>Mary Bledsoe</ent>
45. Jude <ent type='ORG'>Presto</ent>n Battle
46. <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> M. <ent type='PERSON'>Crawford</ent>
47. <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Carr</ent>
48. <ent type='PERSON'>Kathy Fullmer</ent>
49. Clyde <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son
50. Reverend A. D. W. <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent>
51. <ent type='PERSON'>Carole Tyler</ent>
52. Dr. Mary Sherman
53. <ent type='PERSON'>Grant Stockdale</ent>
54. J. A. <ent type='ORG'>Milteer</ent>
55. Hugh Ward
56. <ent type='PERSON'>Perry Russo</ent>
57. <ent type='PERSON'>Maurice Gatlin</ent>, Sr.
58. W. <ent type='PERSON'>Guy Banister</ent>
59. Charles P. <ent type='ORG'>Cabell</ent>
60. <ent type='PERSON'>Dorothy</ent> Hunt
61. <ent type='PERSON'>Michelle Clark</ent>
62. <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Roselli</ent>
63. <ent type='PERSON'>Sam Giancana</ent>
64. <ent type='PERSON'>Fred <ent type='PERSON'>Lee</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Crisman</ent></ent>
65. <ent type='PERSON'>Carlos Prio Socarras</ent>
66. <ent type='PERSON'>Charles Nicoletti</ent>
67. <ent type='PERSON'>Jimmy Hoffa</ent>
68. George De Mohrenschildt
69. General <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>ald <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>aldson
70. <ent type='PERSON'>Lou Staples</ent>
71. <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> C. <ent type='PERSON'>Sullivan</ent>
72. <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Chaney</p>

<p> The large majority of these murders eliminated witnesses to,
participants in, or investigators of one of the assassinations.
People involved with the participants in one of the assassinations
or cover-ups were also listed above. The participants were: <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>David Ferrie</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Rolando Masferrer</ent>, J. <ent type='PERSON'>Edgar Hoover</ent>
(in the cover-up), and <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> Perrin. There were four
investigators: <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Koethe</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Lomax</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Dorothy</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kilgallen</ent></ent> and Hale
<ent type='PERSON'>Bogg</ent>s. The rest were witnesses or associates.
Two articles[8] written in 1976 analyzed some of these deaths
and concluded that they were not accidents unconnected with the
assassinations of our leaders. Another analysis by the authors
demonstrated that fifty of the first seventy murders met three
criteria for proving death by foul means. All involved people
directly or indirectly linked to the major assassinations. All met
death under violent or very strange circumstances. No autopsies
were performed in any of these murders.
The Charles Senseney dart weapon might have been used in some of
the murders. The injection given <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Bowers</ent></ent> produced such a
paralytic and terrorized expression on <ent type='PERSON'>Bowers</ent>' face that the doctor
examining his body exclaimed he had never seen such before. Grant
Stockdale was found to have died of a heart attack on his way to
the street from the top of a building (a dart might have killed
him).</p>

<p>____________________</p>

<p> [1] "Forgive My Grief" Volumes I, II, III, IV, <ent type='PERSON'>Penn Jones</ent>, Jr., Self
Published, Midlothian, <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent>.</p>

<p> [2] "Accessories After the <ent type='ORG'>Fact</ent>," <ent type='PERSON'>Sylvia Meagher</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Scarecrow Press</ent>,
N.Y., 1976</p>

<p> [3] "<ent type='GPE'>Miami</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent>," March, 1976.</p>

<p> [4] "The Mysterious Death of <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent>," <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Russell</ent>, "True
Magazine."</p>

<p> [5] "The <ent type='ORG'>Umbrella</ent> Man," R.B. <ent type='PERSON'>Cutler</ent>, &amp; R.E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, "Gallery
Magazine," June, 1978.</p>

<p> [6] "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times," September 19, 1975.</p>

<p> [7] "<ent type='PERSON'>RFK</ent> Must Die!," <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> Kaiser, E.P. Dutton &amp; Co. Inc., N.Y.C.,
1970.</p>

<p> [8] (a) Self published article by <ent type='PERSON'>Gary Schoener</ent> -- <ent type='GPE'>Minneapolis</ent>,
<ent type='GPE'>Minn</ent>. Researcher.</p>

<p> (b) <ent type='ORG'>Assassination Information Bureau</ent> (<ent type='ORG'>AIB</ent>), <ent type='GPE'>Cambridge</ent>, Mass,
Research project and article.</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> Chapter 11
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> -- The Pardon and the Tapes</p>

<p> As <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> grew larger and the number of murders
increased through the years, it became more and more difficult to
keep the veil of secrecy surrounding the takeover intact. As
Nixon's instability increased, the danger of revealing the secret
superstructure to the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people increased.
<ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> and Nixon's resignation from office nearly ruined
everything for <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent>. A splinter faction in the
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> began showing strength and all of the dirt might have been
leaked to the press and to the people. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> himself had pulled
the most dangerous boner in the history of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>. He installed a
secret tape recording system that recorded a number of
conversations about the PCG's murders, assassinations and dirty
tricks. Even worse, <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> did not destroy the tapes before the
<ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> found out about them and went after them. As soon as it
became obvious that <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> would be forced to resign, the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> had to
use a desperation strategy.
Gerald R. <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> pardoned <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> M. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> on September 8, 1974:
such was the PCG's strategy. Many skeptical U.S. citizens nodded
their heads knowingly and assumed <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> had made his "deal" with
<ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> when he nominated him for the vice presidency. <ent type='PERSON'>Evans</ent> and
<ent type='ORG'>Novak</ent>[1] assumed that Julie <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Eisenhower</ent> talked <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> into the
pardon on grounds that Nixon's health was poor. The Ford's fears
for Nixon's health didn't seem to convince very many news media
people who saw a rosy-cheeked, apparently robust ex-president in
San Clemente.[2]
The pardon seemed to most <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>ns and news editors a gross
error in judgment and a miscarriage of justice. But once again the
United States was fooled. This time, the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>
managed to pull the wool over the eyes of the public and to
narrowly escape revealing what can be called "the entire rotten
crust at the top of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n power." Any reasonable hypothesis
about what actually happened, based on the evidence at hand, had
not been even remotely suggested by either <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> or the media by
1976.
Any explanation of the situation leading to the pardon begins
with the relationship between Gerald <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>. It
goes back to 1960, the year Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> planned the overthrow of
Castro's <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>. As earlier chapters have made clear, the U2
incident and <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs was the beginning.
In 1960, <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and the White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> action officer worked on the
plans for what was later called <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs invasion.[3] Prior
to that time the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> had accumulated plenty of reasons to
want <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> overthrown. The anti-<ent type='NORP'>Communist</ent> attitude was the
superficial reason. Beneath it were Nixon's connections with the
<ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent> and his friendships and financial holdings that were greatly
damaged when <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> closed the casinos run by the mob in <ent type='GPE'>Havana</ent>.[4]
When <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> debated about the <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>n situation in the
1960 campaign, <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> purposefully lied to the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people about
U.S. plans for an invasion.[5] When he narrowly lost to <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>,
it created a deep wound, and he and the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> spent much of the next
three years planning revenge.
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> became a tool of a number of <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>ns and <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>ns, both
inside the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and outside, who agreed with him that casting out
<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> was highly desirable. One of these men was E. Howard
Hunt.[6] Another was <ent type='PERSON'>Bernard Barker</ent>.[7] A third was Carlos Prio
<ent type='ORG'>Socarras</ent>.[8] <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Bissell</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Allen</ent> <ent type='GPE'>Dulles</ent></ent> were
the three higher level men in the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>.
These <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> cronies and financial partners became involved with
the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>. They murdered <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>.[9] Whether <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was
directly involved in the PCG's planning for the assassination is
still open to question, although one researcher believes that he
was.[10] There certainly is substantial evidence that <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was
out to at least politically sink <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son, and aimed to
do so in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> immediately before <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> was killed. (See section
on evidence).[11]
Whether <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was directly involved in planning the
assassination of President <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> does not have to be
settled here. What is important is that <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was directly
involved in covering up the truth about who did kill <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>.
Evidence from the <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>-<ent type='ORG'>Haldeman</ent> tapes of June 1972 indicated that
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> knew the truth about the assassination when he suggested
Gerald <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> be part of <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>.[12]
A close personal friendship had developed between <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>
during their days together in the <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>, when both were strong,
ultra-conservative, "red, white and blue", anti-<ent type='NORP'>Communist</ent>,
"religious" members who thought and talked alike.
When <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> realized that <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> had been killed almost
under his nose in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> by some of his Bay of Pigs friends, the
<ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> convinced him he had to do everything in his power to cover it
up and to bide his time until his powerful military and
intelligence friends could place him in the White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>. It took
one more murder by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> (<ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>) to get him there, and
still another attempted murder to keep him there (<ent type='PERSON'>George Wallace</ent>).
<ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> over the investigations of these murders was essential
for <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>. In order to guide a presidential commission
away from the truth, the closed small circle of people in the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>
who knew what had happened to <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> had to be enlarged.
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Allen</ent> <ent type='GPE'>Dulles</ent></ent> was no problem. He knew the cause was an
intelligence/military one from the day it happened. Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
was a different matter. He had to be fooled and later talked into
remaining silent "for the good of the country."
A ringleader inside <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> was crucial. It had
to be someone the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> could trust, one who had an honest
and trustworthy appearance. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> called on Gerry <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>, and he
convinced <ent type='ORG'>LBJ</ent> that <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> should be on the <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>.[13]
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> told <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> at some point prior to January, 1964 who killed
<ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> and why. He convinced <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> that every effort should be made to
make sure <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> was found to be the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent>. <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> did an
excellent job. He not only steered the <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> away from the
facts[14] whenever a key witness was interviewed or an embarrassing
situation developed, but he also nailed Oswald's coffin shut
personally by publishing his own book on <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>.[15] This, coming
from the chairman of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Armed Services <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, served to
firmly plant in the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n mind the idea that there was no
conspiracy, that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> was the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent>, and that the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> had done a good job.
From the day Ford's book was published, <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> became
totally beholden to each other. They also both became totally
beholden to the members of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> who were at or near the top of
things and who were part of the small knowledgeable circle. Other
members of the PCG's inner circle included J. <ent type='PERSON'>Edgar Hoover</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent>.
No one could be permitted by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> to come into power in the
White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>, the Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> or the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> unless they
were part of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> and willing to keep quiet and help suppress
the truth about the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination. The PCG's membership
widened, of necessity, when <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> was killed and <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>
became president. The people involved in killing <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
and Nixon's top aides had to be told the truth. This included
<ent type='ORG'>Haldeman</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ehrlichman</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Kissinger</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent> (who had the job of
controlling Hoover's successors in continuing the cover-ups) and
possibly others. <ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent> was instrumental in stopping Jim
Garrison's investigation of <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> and other <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> members and in
totally discrediting <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>.[16] He was aided by <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent>
and others in the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> through <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> support in the <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> trial
cover-up efforts.[17]
The White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> plumber section of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> decided in 1972, with
or without Nixon's knowledge and approval, to assassinate George
<ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent>, so that <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> would be assured of the conservative vote.
The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> and its debts once again grew. E. Howard Hunt and Charles
<ent type='PERSON'>Colson</ent>, along with <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Tony</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Ulasewicz</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>ald <ent type='PERSON'>Segretti</ent></ent> and others, were
in a position to make demands in exchange for their silence. The
Hunt million-dollar blackmail threat to reveal "seedy things" or
"hankypanky" was never explainable in terms of <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> or the
<ent type='PERSON'>Ellsberg</ent> break-ins. But three assassinations would certainly be
worth a cool million to keep Hunt silent. Again, the <ent type='ORG'>Haldeman</ent>-<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> June 23, 1972 tapes are revealing.[18]
When the <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> crisis occurred, <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was trapped by his own
tapes, and the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> was in grave danger. Discussions with <ent type='ORG'>Haldeman</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent> and others mention the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> assassination conspiracy
and the <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> murder attempt on tape. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> was suddenly
threatened as a group. The tapes couldn't all be destroyed because
too many <ent type='ORG'>Secret Service</ent> people knew about them. <ent type='ORG'>Haldeman</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>
managed to erase one revealing 18 1/2 minute section about the
assassinations, but who could remember exactly what telephone calls
or <ent type='ORG'>Oval Office</ent> conversations might have mentioned the truth about
the three murders?
The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> again sensed the need for a successor who
would keep quiet. They called on Gerry <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> when <ent type='PERSON'>Agnew</ent> was forced
out. <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, bound inextricably together by their mutual
cover-up of the assassinations, worked out a deal. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> nominated
<ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> to be his Vice President. The Senate, completely bamboozled
by <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>, never asked <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> any important questions about
the assassinations nor his performance on <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>.
When they asked <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> about his book, he committed perjury twice
before the Senate (see item # 15 in the list ennumerated below).
<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> agreed that <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> would keep quiet if <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>
remained silent and that <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> would succeed <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> if he were forced
to resign or be impeached. They agreed to a pardon afterward. But
the most critical part of the arrangement was that those tapes
revealing the truth about the assassinations be kept out of
circulation. When <ent type='ORG'>the Supreme Court</ent> ruled that the tapes must be
turned over, it was then time to implement their agreed-upon
strategy.
In addition, <ent type='PERSON'>Jaworski</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Colson</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Kissinger</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Haldeman</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Ehrlichman</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>, Hunt, <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> and anyone
else in the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> had to be bought off, pardoned, protected or killed
to insure their silences.
<ent type='PERSON'>Leon Jaworski</ent> resigned. People asked why. The real answer was
buried in the fact that <ent type='PERSON'>Jaworski</ent> knew what had been going on. He
knew because of information passed on to him by the Ervin <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>
and <ent type='ORG'>Cox</ent> regarding the assassination and the cover-up. He was also
personally involved in 1964 in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> cover-up.
<ent type='PERSON'>Jaworski</ent> could have been a problem, even though he helped with
the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> cover-up from the beginning.[19] Hunt was taken care of by
getting him out of jail, buying him a large estate in <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent> and
paying him a lot of money.[20] <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent> could be counted on.
<ent type='PERSON'>Kissinger</ent> may have been a problem, but he finally agreed. His
wiretaps were ordered to find out who knew about the
assassinations. <ent type='PERSON'>Hoover</ent> was dead. <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> was murdered.[21]
<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> was dead. <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Russell</ent> was dead. <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> Sherman <ent type='PERSON'>Cooper</ent>
was bought off (he received an important ambassadorship). <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> J.
McCloy was too old to worry about.
That left <ent type='PERSON'>Colson</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Haldeman</ent>, and <ent type='PERSON'>Ehrlichman</ent>, plus some
other small fry. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> strategy as planned with these men
involved pardons for all of them in exchange for their silence,
especially <ent type='ORG'>Haldeman</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent>, who not only knew what happened
to <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>, but who also took overt actions to cover-up. (<ent type='ORG'>Haldeman</ent>
erased the 18 1/2 minutes of tape and <ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent> nailed Jim
<ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>.)
Newer members of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> may cause some problems. They all have
to know the truth by now. <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Alex Haig</ent> must know.
<ent type='PERSON'>George Bush</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Colby</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Edward Levi</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Clarence Kelly</ent> knew
because of their access to the records, and they must have agreed
to cover-up continuance. <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> and his cronies in the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> had to
continue to knock out any efforts by <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> B. <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> of <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> to
start a new <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> investigation of the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination.
They were very successful in their control of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Rules
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Haig</ent> seemed to have been bought off with the promise of
a top <ent type='ORG'>NATO</ent> post in exchange for his silence. And control over
<ent type='ORG'>Frank Church</ent> and the Senate <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> was necessary.
Gerald <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> remained committed to the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> and to <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>.
The tapes had to be controlled and edited at all costs. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>
no doubt required help in listening to the tapes after <ent type='ORG'>Haldeman</ent>
left and in sorting out those in which assassinations and cover-ups
were discussed. General <ent type='PERSON'>Haig</ent> was undoubtedly the man he selected
to do the dirty work. It was almost certain that no tapes would be
turned over to Judge <ent type='PERSON'>Sirica</ent> or to <ent type='PERSON'>Jaworski</ent> with any assassination
references left on them. One of the tapes demanded by <ent type='PERSON'>Jaworski</ent> had
such references. This is the recording made on June 23, 1972 in
which <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Haldeman</ent> are discussing <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> just six days
after the break-in.
The <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> transcript of that tape turned over to Judge <ent type='PERSON'>Sirica</ent>
upon orders of <ent type='ORG'>the Supreme Court</ent> showed many sections labelled
"unintelligible." It is a near certainty that the critical
sections were edited out by <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and General <ent type='PERSON'>Haig</ent> before they were
turned over to <ent type='PERSON'>Sirica</ent> and prior to their transcription. Judge
<ent type='PERSON'>Sirica</ent> was the only person in the chain of possession of that tape
who could have been counted on to make a scientific analysis of the
tape to see whether it was tampered with before he received it.
His near brush with death in 1975 must be viewed in that light and
in the light of the PCG's use of weapon-induced heart attacks.
The rest of Nixon's tapes that were still in Gerald Ford's
possession and control might have contained many references to
assassinations and cover-ups. Rather than go through all of them
and edit or erase the critical material, it was more likely that
<ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> would either turn them over to <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> for total destruction or
sit on them as long as he was president.
The evidence for <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent>'s and <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>/Nixon's
strategy is as follows:</p>

<p> 1. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> action officer on <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>n invasion
plans in 1960.</p>

<p> 2. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was in contact with Hunt and others during the
Bay of Pigs planning.</p>

<p> 3. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> lied to the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people by his own admission
about <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent> of Pigs during his TV debates with
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> in 1960.</p>

<p> 4. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was financially linked to the <ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent> and to <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>n
casino operations before <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> took over.</p>

<p> 5. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was acquainted with Hunt, <ent type='PERSON'>Baker</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Martinez</ent>,
Sturgis, <ent type='PERSON'>Carlos Prio Socarras</ent>, and other <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>
people and anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> people in <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent>, and he was
financially linked to <ent type='PERSON'>Baker</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Martinez</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Socarras</ent>.</p>

<p> 6. Hunt, <ent type='PERSON'>Baker</ent>, Sturgis and <ent type='ORG'>Socarras</ent> were connected with
the assassination group in the murder of <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>.</p>

<p> 7. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> for three days, including the
morning of the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination. He was trying to
stir up trouble for <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>.</p>

<p> 8. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> went to <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> under false pretenses. There was
no board meeting of <ent type='ORG'>the Pepsi Cola Company</ent> as he
announced his law firm had had to attend.</p>

<p> 9. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> did not admit being in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> on the day <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
was shot and did not reveal the true reason for his
trip. He held two press conferences on the two days
before the assassination, attacking both <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son and emphasizing the <ent type='NORP'>Democratic</ent> political
problems in <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent>.</p>

<p> 10. Research indicates that <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> either knew in advance
about assassination plans, or learned about them soon
after the assassination.</p>

<p> 11. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> proposed to <ent type='PERSON'>Lyndon</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son that Gerald <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> serve
on <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>.</p>

<p> 12. <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> led the <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> cover-up by controlling the
questioning of key witnesses and by several other
means.</p>

<p> 13. <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> helped firmly plant the idea that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> was the
only assassin and that there was no conspiracy by
publishing his own book, "<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>: Portrait
of the Assassin."</p>

<p> 14. <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> purposefully covered up the conspiracy of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>
in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination and also covered up the fact
that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> was a paid informer for the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>. He did
this by dismissing the subject in his book as worthless
rumor and by keeping the executive sessions of the
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> (where Oswald's <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> informer status was
discussed) classified Top Secret.</p>

<p> 15. <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> continued the cover-up when he was questioned
before being confirmed by the Senate as Vice President.
He lied under oath twice to the Senate <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>. He
stated that he had written his book about <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> with
no access to classified documents. He lied about this
because his book used classified documents about
Oswald's <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> informer status. He lied when he said
that the book was entitled, "<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>:
Portrait of *an* Assassin." This was significant in
1973 because the public by then had become very
skeptical about a <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent>. By changing one word
in the title, <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> made the book seem a little less
like what it actually was--an effort to make <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> the
assassin.</p>

<p> 16. <ent type='PERSON'>Jaworski</ent> aided in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> cover-up by sitting on
evidence of conspiracy accumulated by <ent type='PERSON'>Waggoner Carr</ent>,
<ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> Attorney General, who he represented in liaison
with <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>. He also stopped the
critical testimony of <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent></ent> when he testified
before <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>, and diverted attention
away from Ruby's intent to reveal the conspiracy to
kill both <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>.</p>

<p> 17. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> became president in 1968 only because <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> was killed by a conspiracy. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> was well
aware of the conspiracy whether or not he approved of
it in advance.</p>

<p> 18. <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent> and J. <ent type='PERSON'>Edgar Hoover</ent> joined <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and the
lower level members of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> in covering up the <ent type='PERSON'>RFK</ent>
murder conspiracy. They classified the evidence "Top
Secret" and murdered several witnesses, controlled the
judge in the <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent> trial and the district attorney and
the chief of police in <ent type='GPE'>Los Angeles</ent> during and after the
trial. They still control these people and the Los
Angeles County Board of Supervisors. <ent type='PERSON'>Clarence Kelly</ent>
also became involved.</p>

<p> 19. The plumbers group ordered the assassination of George
<ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> in 1972 to insure Nixon's election by picking
up Wallace's vote (about 18%, according to polls).</p>

<p> 20. J. <ent type='PERSON'>Edgar Hoover</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent> were aware of who
killed <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>. They helped
cover-up both conspiracies.</p>

<p> 21. <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent> controlled the trial of <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> and the
<ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> investigation and discredited <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> by
framing him in a <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> gambling case.</p>

<p> 22. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Haldeman</ent> discussed the assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, the conspiracy, Hunt's involvement, the
possibility that Hunt might talk, the cover-up, <ent type='ORG'>the Bay</ent>
of Pigs relationship between <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, Hunt and the other
<ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> members, and the briefing <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> might have had to
give anyone running against him in 1972, on matters of
"national security".</p>

<p> 23. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent> discussed the assassinations and the
attempt to assassinate <ent type='PERSON'>George Wallace</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent>
executed orders to suppress the truth about these
events.</p>

<p> 24. Gerald <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> had possession of the most critical tapes
on which assassinations and cover-ups were discussed.</p>

<p> 25. <ent type='PERSON'>Jaworski</ent> could be counted on to keep the assassination
material under wraps even after his resignation. He
was aware of the conspiracy evidence and cover-up in
all three cases (<ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>RFK</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>George Wallace</ent>).</p>

<p> 26. Hunt was taken care of and will keep silent. He had
been out of jail and living on a beautiful $100000
estate in <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent> with plenty of money, across the
street from his Bay of Pigs friend, <ent type='PERSON'>Manuel Artime</ent>.</p>

<p> 27. <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> was murdered by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, undoubtedly to keep
him from talking once the truth about his <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> position
was revealed by <ent type='PERSON'>Victor Marchetti</ent>. He was embalmed
before the coroner could determine the cause of death.
Evidence indicates he was killed somewhere and then
brought back to his apartment.</p>

<p> 28. <ent type='PERSON'>Hale Boggs</ent>, a <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> member, was possibly
killed by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>. Bogg's airplane disappeared in
<ent type='GPE'>Alaska</ent>. No trace of it was ever found and no
explanation of how the plane could have crashed has
ever been given. Mrs. <ent type='PERSON'>Bogg</ent>s has expressed doubts about
it being an accident.</p>

<p> 29. Four of the seven <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> members are dead:
<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Dulles</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Russell</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Bogg</ent>s. Of the remaining
members, <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> was President, <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> McCloy is retired and
living in Connecticut, and <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> Sherman <ent type='PERSON'>Cooper</ent> was made
ambassador to East <ent type='GPE'>Germany</ent>.</p>

<p> 30. <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Russell</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Hale Boggs</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Cooper</ent> believed there
was a conspiracy in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination. <ent type='PERSON'>Russell</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>Bogg</ent>s both said so publicly.</p>

<p> 31. <ent type='ORG'>Haldeman</ent> erased 18 1/2 minutes of a taped discussion
with <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>. This tape undoubtedly contained "national
security" matters. The fact that <ent type='ORG'>Haldeman</ent> did the
erasing can easily be determined by tracing the trail
of possession of the tape from the day it was taken out
of the vault to the day the gap was discovered.
<ent type='ORG'>Haldeman</ent> had the tape with the recorder alone for
nearly 48 hours. No one else had the tape alone long
enough to do the erasing.</p>

<p> 32. <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> contemplated pardons for <ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent>,
<ent type='ORG'>Haldeman</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ehrlichman</ent> and possibly others who know the
number one secret.</p>

<p> 33. Ford's statements to the sub-committee of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>
Judiciary <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> concerning his pardon of <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>
dodged the real issue. Only <ent type='PERSON'>Elizabeth Holtzman</ent> asked
questions coming close to the number one secret. When
she asked about a prior agreement, <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> said, "I have
made no deal, there was no deal, *since I became Vice
President*." Those last few words were not reported by
the press, but a large number of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>ns watched and
heard him say them. Of course he spoke truthfully
because the "deal" was made *before* he became Vice
President.</p>

<p>____________________</p>

<p> [1] <ent type='PERSON'>Evans</ent> &amp; <ent type='ORG'>Novak</ent> column -- September 12. 1974.</p>

<p> [2] "<ent type='GPE'>Paris</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent> Tribune" -- September 12, 1974.</p>

<p> [3] "Compulsive Spy," <ent type='PERSON'>Tad Szulc</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Viking Press</ent>, 1974.</p>

<p> [4] "<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent>," <ent type='PERSON'>Jeff Gerth</ent>, "<ent type='LOC'>Sundance</ent>," December, 1972.</p>

<p> [5] "My Six Crises," <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> M. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>.</p>

<p> [6] "Compulsive Spy."</p>

<p> [7] "<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent>."</p>

<p> [8] "<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, Bay of Pigs &amp; <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>," -- R.E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, "Computers and
Automation," January, 1973.</p>

<p> [9] "<ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, Bay of Pigs &amp; <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>."</p>

<p>[10] Trowbridge <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Holy Cross College</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Boston</ent>, MA, Several papers and
articles.</p>

<p>[11] <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> Hearings &amp; Exhibits -- Vol. 23, Pages 941-943.</p>

<p>[12] <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> Transcript of June 23 1972 tape -- "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times," August
6, 1974.</p>

<p>[13] Trowbridge <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> -- Article on Gerald <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> &amp; <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>.</p>

<p>[14] Ibid.</p>

<p>[15] Gerald <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> "<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>: Portrait of the Assassin."</p>

<p>[16] "The Framing of <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>", R.E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, "Computers and
Automation," December, 1973.</p>

<p>[17] "The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> Assassination" -- Unpublished article by
R.E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>.</p>

<p>[18] <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> tape, June 23, 1972.</p>

<p>[19] <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> Exhibits -- Testimony of <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent></ent>, Vol. V,
Pages 181-213 and Vol. XIV, pages 504-571. Also Trowbridge <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>
article on <ent type='PERSON'>Jaworski</ent>.</p>

<p>[20] "<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> Watch" and <ent type='PERSON'>Triss Coffin</ent> newsletter, August 10, 1974.</p>

<p>[21] Zodiac News Service release -- August 20, 1974.</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> Chapter 12
<ent type='ORG'>The Second Line</ent> of Defense and Cover-Ups in 1975 and 1976</p>

<p> The mini-war waged by assassination researchers and a few
<ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>men from 1964 to 1976 to reopen the major assassination
inquiries never really disturbed <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent>. But in
1975, simultaneous with the revelations about all of the terrible
things the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> did, the researchers and a few of their
friends in the media and in <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> began to draw more attention
than was comfortable for the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>.
A special renewed effort became necessary to extend the cover-ups. Part of this effort was a program to bring the media back
under control and to reinforce media support of the cover-ups.
This has been discussed in some detail in Chapter 9. Another part
of this effort was the expansion of the <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> Commission's
assignment to reinforce the cover-up of the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination
conspiracy. <ent type='ORG'>Separate</ent> new efforts were necessary to control the
courts and lawyers and other public officials in the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> assassination conspiracies. These were brought
about by appeals for new trials by <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent></ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent> B.
<ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent>. The appeals were accompanied by new revelations. New
publicity was given to demands for an investigation into the
<ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> shooting by prominent people, including <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> himself.
A minor success in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case was scored by researchers with
the assistance of <ent type='PERSON'>Dick Gregory</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Geraldo Rivera</ent> of <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Tom Snyder</ent>
of <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Mort Sahl</ent> and others. They managed to have the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent>
film and other photographic evidence of conspiracy shown on local
and national television. No one of any intelligence outside the
<ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> who has even seen the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film questions the fact that
shots came from two different directions in Dealey Plaza. This
breakthrough after eleven years of effort put new public and
<ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>ional pressures on the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>. It was closely followed by a
grass roots campaign conducted by <ent type='PERSON'>Mark Lane</ent>'s Citizens <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>
of Inquiry to reopen the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case. <ent type='ORG'>Press</ent>ure was brought to bear on
<ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>men by their local constituents as a result of this
campaign. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent> from <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Downing</ent> from
<ent type='GPE'>Virginia</ent> introduced resolutions in the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives
calling for the reopening of all four cases and the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case, so
the public and <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> had a formal base to work with and a goal
to reach.
New revelations were made in 1975 about the FBI's and the CIA's
information withheld from <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>. From <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> came
the admission that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> had been in closer contact with the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>
than believed and that <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent></ent> had been an <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> informer.
Perhaps the most dangerous development for the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> was the
creation of a sub-committee under the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> committee to
investigate the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination. This two-man subcommittee
formed by Senator <ent type='PERSON'>Gary Hart</ent> of <ent type='GPE'>Colorado</ent> and Senator <ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent> of
<ent type='GPE'>Pennsylvania</ent> became a real threat when it was given authority by
the full Senate <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> to conduct their own
independent investigation with a staff of nine people. It would be
harder to control their efforts than to control the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent>
committee, where the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> had several strong allies, including
Senators <ent type='PERSON'>Goldwater</ent> and Tower.
Gerald <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Colby</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent> (from his faraway post
in <ent type='LOC'>Asia</ent>) and the other <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> members developed a three-prong strategy
for the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case in order to cope with all of these new problems.
First came the reinforcement of the lone-assassin <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> scenario. <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> selected <ent type='PERSON'>David Belin</ent> to be chief of
staff of the <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>. <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> admitted that <ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent> in
his <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> role--as well as in his advocacy to
reopen the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case in order to prove <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>
findings correct--was acting as "one of our best staff members."
This was necessary so that the <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> could add a
new assignment to its original charter and investigate the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and
<ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>. The new assignment was to prove that all of the new questions
about the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film and the evidence for assassins on the
grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> were answerable in support of <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>
conclusions.
The former <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> commissioner now President, who led the
cover-up and pardoned <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, nominated <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> staff
lawyer who led the cover-up at the working level as the new
<ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> chief of staff.
<ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent> did his job like a faithful dog. He personally called in
the most dangerous researchers, including <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Cyril</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Wecht</ent></ent> and Dick
Gregory's cohorts, <ent type='PERSON'>Ralph Schoenman</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> Groden, who had been
making all of the noise on television. With the help (and possibly
the knowledge) of only one other staff man, <ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent> interviewed these
witnesses briefly, almost casually: then he misquoted them, edited
their statements, or left them out of the <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> Report. He
purposefully did not call any researchers other than <ent type='ORG'>Wecht</ent> who
might have presented some embarrassing evidence of conspiracy. He
instead called a number of "experts" from the stable of <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> people,
including some of the <ent type='PERSON'>Ramsey Clark</ent> doctors panel that had examined
the medical evidence in 1968 to back up <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>
during the <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> investigation and the <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> trial. He also
called on reliable Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>Lattimer</ent>, the urologist, to testify again
about the bullet wounds above the navel.
<ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent> wrote the chapter of the <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> Report
himself. It formed a base for controlled media presentations of
the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent> scenario. <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> used much of the basic material in
its series in 1975. Others quoted liberally from the favorite
misquotes of <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Cyril</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Wecht</ent></ent> and the statements of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> doctors
concerning the fatal shot at frame 313 of the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film. That
had always been a sticky point with <ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent> and the other <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> defenders and technical cover-up artists in the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>.
<ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent> was nearly driven to distraction at times, trying to avoid
any discussion of the back-to-the-left acceleration of JFK's head
following the Z313 shot.
He was therefore delighted to be able to produce a medical
opinion that the back-to-the-left motion was consistent with a shot
directly from the rear. The fact that no ballistics experts or
physics experts were called to testify about Newton's second law of
motion and what happens to an object when struck by a rifle bullet
traveling at twice to three times the speed of sound was never
questioned by the <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> panel or the media. <ent type='ORG'>Belin</ent> easily
eliminated the assassins on the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> simply by persuading
the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> to say the assassins weren't there at all.
Over a period of several months in the second half of 1975, the
<ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> (through its control agents in the 15 media organizations, and
by using Belin's creation) hammered away again at the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent>
thesis. They caused the wave of excitement and furor created by
Gregory, <ent type='ORG'>Lane</ent>, Groden, Schoenman and their friends to die out.
Lectures on university campuses, discussions on FM radio talk shows
late at night, and conspiracy books and articles in underground
newspapers appeared as always. But there was no more showing of
the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film on <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> or <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>; nor was there any talk of
conspiracy in any of the major fifteen national news media
organizations.
The second part of the strategy was to create a fall-back, or
second line of defense in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case. If necessary the same idea
could also be applied in the other three cases when the situation
became too dangerous. There was less danger in 1975 in the <ent type='PERSON'>RFK</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>MLK</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> cases because the researchers and the media had not
yet consistently begun to tie in the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and other <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> high
level people. In 1976 a danger emerged in the <ent type='PERSON'>MLK</ent> case when it was
revealed that J. <ent type='PERSON'>Edgar Hoover</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> might be linked and that
<ent type='PERSON'>Hoover</ent> attempted to get <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> to commit suicide. However, that
development occurred several months after the implementation of the
strategy began in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case. Of course there had never been any
danger with the Chappaquiddick crime, because few researchers
realized what the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> had accomplished in that event. No
suspicions existed in <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> either, beyond some curiosity about
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Tony</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Ulasewicz</ent></ent> and E. Howard Hunt's strange visits to the island
and to <ent type='LOC'>Hyannisport</ent>.
There may be several second lines of defense positions already
prepared for the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case. The one that has been implemented in
1975 and 1976 is the "<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> did it in revenge" position. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>
realizes that while the media will behave like slaves to present
the first line of defense (<ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> did it alone), the public isn't
buying it any more. In 1969, shortly after the <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> trial
ended, the percent of people disbelieving the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent> theory
fell to its all-time low of just over 50%. By 1976 it had risen to
80%, despite the faithful efforts of <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>, "Time," "Newsweek," et
al. More importantly, <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Gary Hart</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Downing</ent>, and a very large part of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> and
Senate weren't buying the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent> story any more either.
So, a good second line of defense story was needed. It had to
be one that the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> and Senate and <ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> and
hopefully <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> would buy. It had to be one which could be
created out of existing facts and then shored up by planted
evidence, faked records, dependable witnesses lying under oath, and
once again, the control and use of the media. The "<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> did it
in revenge" story met these requirements. The media had already
helped to some extent by publishing information from <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Anderson</ent></ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Lyndon</ent> B. <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>son and others about Castro's turning around various
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agents or sending agents of his own, including <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>, to
assassinate <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>. Perhaps even more importantly, Senator <ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent>
said he believed <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> might have been behind the assassination
and that this possibility should be investigated.
The <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> story strategy was implemented in 1975. Gradually at
first, a story appeared here or there in the press about the
assassins assigned to kill <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent>. Then the media began to reprint
the <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Anderson</ent></ent> story about Castro's turning around of some of
these agents. New authors of the story appeared. Anderson's
original story seemed to be forgotten. These articles never seemed
to have an identifiable source or any proof. <ent type='PERSON'>Hank Greenspun</ent> of the
<ent type='GPE'>Las Vegas</ent> newspaper circuit and the man involved with Howard
<ent type='ORG'>Hughes</ent>, Larry O'Brien, released a story to the "<ent type='GPE'>Chicago</ent> Tribune."
He said his information came from reliable sources.
The momentum began to build. More and more "leaked" information
about <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> and assassins and <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> being a pro-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent>ite hit the
establishment media. The stories and the sequence of events began
to be predictable, if a researcher had understood the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> and their
fight for survival in 1975 and 1976. Then the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> committee and
the <ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent> sub-committee issued statements that they were going
to investigate the "<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> did it" theory. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> began feeding
them information in various forms and various ways that would back
up the idea. The <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> sex scandal was released by Judith <ent type='PERSON'>Exner</ent>.
The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> provided her with an incentive to spice up the "<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> did
it" theory with a little sex involving <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> and one of the assassins
assigned to <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Roselli</ent>.
The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> realized they had the double advantage of drawing
attention to <ent type='PERSON'>Roselli</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> and the turn-around assassin idea,
while at the same time gnawing away at JFK's image. There was
press speculation that <ent type='PERSON'>Exner</ent> was a <ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent> plant in the White <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>
to find out how much <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> knew about the <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> assassination plans.
Since <ent type='PERSON'>Frank Sinatra</ent> had introduced Judith to both <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Roselli</ent>,
there was speculation about Sinatra's <ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent> friends linked to the
rat pack, to Peter Lawford, to JFK's sister and to <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> himself.
All of this was meat for the PCG's grinder. It certainly drew
Schweiker's attention away from <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent>, Hunt, Gabaldin, <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Ferrie</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent> and all of the other operatives involved in JFK's
murder. In fact, the <ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent> staff, which had the names and
locations of several participants and witnesses that could pinpoint
the <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent>-Hunt-<ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent>-Gabaldin group as the real assassins as early
as September, 1975 did not interview more than one or two of them
and did not follow up on the rest at all. Their attention was
diverted by the second line of defense strategy and they were also
influenced by infiltration by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>.
Part three of the strategy was the control of the <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> and
the committees in the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> and the Senate concerned with
investigations of the intelligence community and the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
assassination. This subject will be covered in depth in Chapter
14. Suffice it to say here that the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> planted people on the
staffs of the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> committee and the <ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent> sub-committee.
They exercised control over the other committees in the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> and
Senate (Abzug, <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent> Edwards, <ent type='ORG'>Pike</ent> committees) and they controlled
the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Rules committee, which effectively blocked the <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>
and <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> resolutions for over a year.
The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> has always had its supporters in both <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> and Senate.
So has the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>. So did J. <ent type='PERSON'>Edgar Hoover</ent> (sometimes through
blackmail) and <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent>. There was a story published in the
"<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>" about a dinner party given by Tom <ent type='PERSON'>Braden</ent>, former
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> man, at which all of <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent>' old buddies rallied to his
defense. Several well-known <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>men were there and Senator
<ent type='PERSON'>Symington</ent> gave a rousing speech supporting <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent> in his hour of
need.
Gerald <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>, of course, as then titular leader of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, had
many old friends in the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> had many supporters in both
<ent type='ORG'>House</ent> and Senate and still has to this day. Thus, control by the
<ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> over <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> and committees is not all that difficult.
Specific examples will be given in Chapter 14 of how this really
works. So the cover-ups continue. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> is still in the
driver's seat. The three parts of their strategy work very well.
The <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent> story is repeated at least once a month in some
media source or other. The "<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> did it" story will no doubt
make its official appearance again.
The <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> is under control. <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> was not under control,
nor was <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent>. But they couldn't do much without the Rules
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, which was controlled.
The people are left with no effective way of doing anything
about the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> and their crimes. What is worse, there is no way the
people can elect the man of their choice.</p>

<p>--
daveus rattus </p>

<p> yer friendly neighborhood ratman</p>

<p> KOYAANISQATSI</p>

<p> ko.yaa.nis.qatsi (from <ent type='EVENT'>the Hopi Language</ent>) n. 1. crazy life. 2. life
in turmoil. 3. life out of balance. 4. life disintegrating.
5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.</p>

<p>From dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com Mon Jun 15 08:55:21 1992
Received: by icaen.uiowa.edu ( 5.52 (84)/1.1) id AA02287
on Mon, 15 Jun 92 08:55:17 CDT.
Received: from pl122c.eecs.lehigh.edu by ns-mx.uiowa.edu (5.64.jnf/920408)
on Mon, 15 Jun 92 08:56:56 -0500 id AA14903 with SMTP
Received: from SGI.COM by PL122c.EECS.Lehigh.EDU (5.61/1.34)
id AA23617; Mon, 15 Jun 92 09:43:09 -0400
Received: from [192.102.132.11] by sgi.sgi.com via SMTP (911016.SGI/910110.SGI)
for <ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122C.EECS.LEHIGH.EDU id AA12463; Mon, 15 Jun 92 06:45:55 -0700
Received: by ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (920110.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
for @sgi.sgi.com:<ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122C.EECS.LEHIGH.EDU id AA01518; Mon, 15 Jun 92 06:45:54 -0700
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 92 06:45:54 -0700
From: dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (dave "who can do? ratmandu!" ratcliffe)
<info type="Message-ID"> 9206151345.AA01518@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com</info>
To: <ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122c.EECS.Lehigh.EDU
Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (7/11)
Status: RO</p>

<p>Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (7/11)
Summary: we were robbed of our capability of electing a president we wanted
Keywords: part 7 of 11: chapter 13 thru chapter 14
Lines: 326</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> Chapter 13
The 1976 <ent type='ORG'>Elect</ent>ion and Conspiracy Fever</p>

<p> To dramatize what might happen and probably did happen in 1976,
this chapter has been prepared by assuming the attitude typical of
today's innocent <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>ns. A new disease is sweeping <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>.
No, it's not the flu; it's conspiracy fever.[1]
People afflicted by the disease imagine conspiracies everywhere.
They believe, for example, that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> arranged for the takeover
in <ent type='GPE'>Chile</ent> and the assassination of Salvador <ent type='PERSON'>Allen</ent>de. They even
think <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kissinger</ent> had something to do with it. These poor
feverish devils have the strange idea that J. <ent type='PERSON'>Edgar Hoover</ent> was a
fiend rather than a public hero. They imagine that he ordered a
vicious campaign against Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent> and a conspiracy
against most of young <ent type='GPE'>America</ent> called Cointelpro. Some even think
<ent type='PERSON'>Hoover</ent> had <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> killed. There are some <ent type='GPE'>California</ent>ns with the west
coast strain of this bug who imagine that the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and the
<ent type='GPE'>California</ent> authorities created a conspiracy in <ent type='GPE'>San Diego</ent> and Los
Angeles against black citizens. The <ent type='GPE'>California</ent> group also think
there was something strange about <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>ald DeFreeze and the
Symbionese Liberation <ent type='ORG'>Army</ent>. They suspect an <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> or <ent type='GPE'>California</ent>
state authority conspiracy, complete with police provocateurs,
double agents, faked prison breaks, and a <ent type='PERSON'>Patty Hearst</ent>, alias
<ent type='PERSON'>Tania</ent>, all thrown in by our own government to create a climate that
would make the public accept the prevalence of terrorism and demand
a police state.
The disease spread to <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>men as well. It does not seem to
be limited, as it was before <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>, to people under the age of
30. There are even <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>men with a more virulent form of the
malady who are convinced their telephones are still being tapped.
They, along with thousands of others who suffer, no doubt reached
this conclusion just because they were told by a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>-controlled
media that hundreds of telephones were tapped a few years ago.
Early forms of conspiracy fever are no longer considered to be
dangerous. For example, all those sick citizens who imagined
conspiracies in the incidents at <ent type='LOC'>Tonkin Gulf</ent>, Songmy, <ent type='ORG'>Mylai</ent>, the
<ent type='GPE'>Pueblo</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>Black Panther</ent> murders are now considered to be more
or less recovered, since it turns out it was not their imaginations
working overtime after all. Even the special variety of the fever
which caused the impression that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> murdered a series of
foreign heads-of-state is no longer on the danger list.
There is still one form of the illness, however, that is
officially considered to be very dangerous, virulent, and to be
stamped out at all costs. It is the version producing the illusion
that all of America's domestic assassinations were conspiracies.
Those infected believe the conspiracies are interlinked in a giant
conspiracy to take over the electoral process in <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States
and to conceal this from the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people. Some citizens are
known to have this worst form of the fever. They include a
<ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>man or two. Others have come down with a milder form in
which they imagine separate conspiracies in four assassination
cases (<ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent>, and the attempted
assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>George Wallace</ent>).
Members of the <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> Administration, particularly <ent type='PERSON'>David Belin</ent>,
Mr. Ford's staff member on the <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>, went along
with an analysis made by Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>Jacob Cohen</ent>, a professional fever
analyst, that the disease has been spreading rapidly because of a
small group of "carriers" traveling around the country who are
infecting everyone else. Some of these carriers, called
assassination "buffs", were thought to have contracted the fever as
many as twelve years ago.
In the disease's worst form, the patient imagines that there
exists a powerful, high level group of individuals, some of whom
have intelligence experience. The highest level of fever in these
patients produces the idea that this high level group, usually
called the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, will eliminate presidential candidates not in their
favor or under their control. Others imagine that <ent type='PERSON'>Jimmy Carter</ent> has
been brought into the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> by threats against his children and
careful briefings by <ent type='PERSON'>George Bush</ent>.
It is worth analyzing the sick people with this domestic
assassination conspiracy fever to see how far their imaginations
take them. They calculate that the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, fearing exposure if any
president is not under their control and influence, will go to
whatever lengths are required to insure the election of the man
they do control. The idea is that Gerald <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> was nicely in the
PCG's pocket because he has been covering up for them ever since
1964. He has continued to help them through 1975 and 1976 by
maintaining a steady cover-up effort on all four cases. Jimmy
<ent type='PERSON'>Carter</ent> was perhaps brought under control. The feverish "buffs"
figure that the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> would have been sure to eliminate <ent type='PERSON'>Jimmy Carter</ent>
unless he could be controlled.
The scenario continues into the future. The more control
exercised by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, the stronger they become and the more people
in the executive branch become beholden to them to continue
covering up the cover-ups.
So, wake up <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>. Wipe out this disease. It's just as
dangerous as Communism, if not more so. Like the general in "Z",
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>ns must realize that such a disease has to be eliminated
whenever and wherever it appears.</p>

<p>____________________</p>

<p>[1] "Conspiracy Fever" is derived from an article with that title by
<ent type='PERSON'>Jacob Cohen</ent>, a psychologist, in "Commentary" magazine, October,
1975.</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> Chapter 14
<ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>the People</ent></p>

<p> The last hope of the people to take back their government from
the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> is through <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>. The executive branch is a captive of
the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>. The legislative branch has no power in the situation.
Where courts or judges do have some small measure of power, as in
the hearings and appeals for a new trial for <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent></ent>, they
have been controlled by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>. The ruling of the judge in the
<ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> appeals case, for example, was obviously a decision made for
him by someone higher up. He ruled that <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> could not have a new
trial after hearing a vast amount of evidence of conspiracy and
solid evidence that <ent type='PERSON'>Percy Foreman</ent> had duped <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> into pleading
guilty.
Unless a people's revolution comes along, and that hardly seems
likely, the only possibility left is to hope that <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> can do
it. What are the odds? From what has been pointed out so far, it
is obvious that if <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> is to expose the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, throw the rascals
in jail, and wipe the slate clean to seize the country back for the
people, a tremendous battle will be required. All of the forces of
the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, including their friends in the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> and Senate, will be
focussed on preventing this from happening. A power base within
both houses would have to be created that could not only do battle
with the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> but that would not be fooled by their myriad of
fiendishly clever techniques, methods and stratagems. It would
have to be a power base that protected itself from infiltration and
usurpation of its own resources. It would have to somehow conquer
the media control problem; otherwise, no <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n citizen would
know what it was doing or what the battle was about.
How would such a battle start and such a power base be
constructed? An important step would be to purify the special
committee created by either resolution and to purify the staff.
Preventing infiltration of staff by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> is especially
important. As mentioned in Chapter 12, the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> staff
and the <ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent> sub-committee staff were infiltrated by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>,
and specifically the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>. A leading assassination researcher and
former intelligence officer in the Defense <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Agency</ent> who
knew many, many <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agents discovered two of them in the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> staff offices in the fall of 1975. The other staff
members had not been aware that these two men were <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agents
because they were "deep cover" agents.
This problem is rather complex because there is always great
pressure from the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> or Senate to create a balance on any
appointed committee. Thus the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> committee was hamstrung by
several of the Senators appointed to be on it: they were close
friends and supporters of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>. Senators <ent type='PERSON'>Goldwater</ent> and
Tower, for example, fought very hard to block any efforts to have
the entire committee investigate potential <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> or <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> involvement
in domestic assassinations. This does not necessarily mean that
<ent type='PERSON'>Goldwater</ent> and Tower are members of the inner circle of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>.
But it does mean that <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> members who know who killed <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
and why can influence <ent type='PERSON'>Goldwater</ent> and Tower to block such efforts.
The first step in the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> or Senate might be floor voting
because of the tight control exercised by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> over the
committee procedure on resolutions. In the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>, for example, the
Rules <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> is all-powerful in determining which resolutions
are brought to the floor.
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent> introduced his resolution HR204 in 1975 and sent
it to the rules committee. Nearly a year passed. On March 18,
1976 Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>, together with Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent>, was tired of waiting
for some action by Chairman <ent type='PERSON'>Madden</ent> and they took the issue to the
floor of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> for discussion.[1] By this time the two
representatives had 125 co-sponsors for their two resolutions (an
unusually large number). <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> had taken over the
floor of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> for two hours and had several supporting
speakers. No one rose in opposition. Prior to that time,
Representative <ent type='PERSON'>Sisk</ent> from <ent type='GPE'>California</ent> and Representative <ent type='PERSON'>Bolling</ent> from
<ent type='PERSON'>Wes</ent>t <ent type='GPE'>Virginia</ent> had been vehemently outspoken in the Rules <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>
against both resolutions. <ent type='PERSON'>Madden</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Sisk</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Bolling</ent> all left the
<ent type='ORG'>House</ent> before <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> started speaking.
As a result of Gonzalez's and Downing's efforts, <ent type='PERSON'>Madden</ent> was
forced by Speaker <ent type='PERSON'>Albert</ent> and other members of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> and by some
of his own constituents to hold a formal hearing on the two
resolutions on March 31, 1976. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> controlled the hearing
through <ent type='PERSON'>Sisk</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Bolling</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Lott</ent>. The resolutions were tabled,
subject to future recall by the chairman. The vote was nine to
six. Representative <ent type='PERSON'>Bolling</ent> was called into the hearing from the
<ent type='ORG'>House</ent> floor to cast the ninth vote at the last minute. He heard
none of the arguments. He didn't have to. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> had instructed
him on how to vote.
This event is described to illustrate how difficult it would be
to overcome the control advantages on the side of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>. Only on
the Senate or <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> floor might it be possible to equalize things.
The two events, the two hour discussion on the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> floor on March
18, reported by the "<ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>ional Record," and the hearing by the
rules committee on March 31 illustrate another problem <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> has
combatting the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>. Not one of the major news media organizations
reported either event. Two hours on the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> floor is an
incredibly long time for any subject. There were many reporters
present from television, radio, newspapers and press services. Mark
<ent type='ORG'>Lane</ent> saw to that. But nothing appeared on <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>, or in
"Time," "Newsweek," or the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times." Why? The answer is
obvious. Very tight control over the news from the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> is
exercised by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>.
The larger implication is there for all to see who want to open
their eyes. Seeing it and believing it are two different things.
For nearly all <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>men who still have faith in <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, the
whole point of this book, and the existence of a <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> which included <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Kissinger</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>, the
fifteen major news media management level people, plus nearly
anyone else of importance in the executive branch and many
<ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>men, is too much to swallow. They would rather have the
whole thing go quietly away than face up to something that
gigantic. And that is the real source of the PCG's strength, the
unbelievability of it all.</p>

<p> Addendum to Chapter 14</p>

<p> Several truly historic and highly encouraging events occurred in
the months of September and October, 1976 that could indicate a
change in the tide and power and control described in earlier
chapters.
First, on September 15, a coalition of representatives from the
Black Caucus, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Downing</ent> managed to get
Resolution H1540 through the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Rules <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Mark Lane</ent>,
Coretta <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> and others were responsible for creating pressures
that finally convinced Speaker Carl <ent type='PERSON'>Albert</ent>, Chairman Tom <ent type='PERSON'>Madden</ent> of
the Rules <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> and others that this was necessary and
desirable. The new resolution, made up of parts of the <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> resolutions plus input from Representative <ent type='PERSON'>Walter Fauntroy</ent>
from <ent type='ORG'>the Black Caucus</ent> called for a special 12-person committee to
reopen the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> and Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> cases and any other deaths that the
committee might decide to investigate.
The Rules <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> voted nine to four in favor. Representative
<ent type='PERSON'>Bolling</ent>, who perhaps unknowingly had lent his support to the
opposition in the earlier vote, was an important swing vote and
actually introduced the resolution in the meeting. The position of
the nine who voted for the resolution was more than vindicated two
days later, when the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>, by the extraordinary vote of 280 to 64,
passed the resolution. History was made. On that day cheers
should have gone up from several hundred dedicated researchers
around the world, and <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> should have begun
looking for rocks to crawl under.
The real war was only beginning, however. The "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times"
barely reported the event, did not mention the vote, and buried the
story in the middle of another story with one-half inch in one
column. The "<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Star</ent>" and "<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>" carried larger stories
and the "<ent type='ORG'>White Plains Reporter</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Dispatch</ent>" made it a first page
headline story. The PCG's media control slipped a bit.
The next hurdle was for <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Fauntroy</ent> to
convince <ent type='PERSON'>Albert</ent> that the chairman of the new committee for 1977
should be Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> since Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> had announced his
retirement. Because elections were being held in November, Mr.
<ent type='PERSON'>Albert</ent> named Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> as chairman for the balance of 1976, with
Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> as next in line. He also let it be known to the press
that Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> would be the best choice to head the committee
next year.
Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Albert</ent> then named ten other members of the committee for the
1976 period. Four of them, <ent type='ORG'>Fauntroy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Burke</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>, were
members of <ent type='ORG'>the Black Caucus</ent>. Stewart McKinney, Representative from
Connecticut, is a well known supporter of the truth. Those five,
together with <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>, could probably be counted on to
try to arrive at the truth. The other five representatives--<ent type='PERSON'>Dodd</ent>
from Connecticut, <ent type='PERSON'>Preyer</ent> from <ent type='GPE'>Tennessee</ent>, Devine from <ent type='GPE'>Ohio</ent>, Thone
from <ent type='GPE'>Nebraska</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Talcott</ent> from <ent type='GPE'>California</ent>--were unknown quantities.
If the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> theory holds up, at least one of them, and perhaps two,
will turn out to be <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> representatives.
The next event of significance occurred on October 4 when Mr.
<ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> named <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, former district attorney from
<ent type='GPE'>Philadelphia</ent> and fearless prosecutor of the <ent type='PERSON'>Yablonski</ent> murderers, as
executive director of the committee's staff. The main significance
of this event was who was not named. <ent type='PERSON'>Bernard Fensterwald</ent>, Jr., was
in strong contention, but he was not selected because of suspicions
that he might be a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agent and also because of conflicts of
interests among his clientele. <ent type='PERSON'>Fensterwald</ent> represented Otto
Otepka, <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> McCord, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent></ent> and Andrew St. George, among
others. There is certainly a strong <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> flavor and <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> influence
among his clients. Whether or not <ent type='PERSON'>Bud Fensterwald</ent> himself works
for the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> or the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, his rejection as executive director was a
healthy sign that the committee might be able to go through the
purification process described as essential in Chapter 14.
<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> had his hands full attempting to separate <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>
applicants for staff positions from non-<ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> members. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>,
during the same time period (September and October) these historic
events were taking place, was very active in spreading its second
line of defense information. "<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> did it in revenge" stories
began popping up everywhere. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Anderson</ent></ent> was revived to back up
the strategy by publishing another of his "<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> did it" columns.</p>

<p>____________________</p>

<p>[1] <ent type='ORG'>House Resolution</ent> 204 -- <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent>
<ent type='ORG'>House Resolution</ent> 498 -- <ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Downing</ent></p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p>--
daveus rattus </p>

<p> yer friendly neighborhood ratman</p>

<p> KOYAANISQATSI</p>

<p> ko.yaa.nis.qatsi (from <ent type='EVENT'>the Hopi Language</ent>) n. 1. crazy life. 2. life
in turmoil. 3. life out of balance. 4. life disintegrating.
5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.</p>

<p>From dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com Tue Jun 16 09:54:48 1992
Received: by icaen.uiowa.edu ( 5.52 (84)/1.1) id AA04897
on Tue, 16 Jun 92 09:54:42 CDT.
Received: from pl122c.eecs.lehigh.edu by ns-mx.uiowa.edu (5.64.jnf/920408)
on Tue, 16 Jun 92 09:56:09 -0500 id AA14283 with SMTP
Received: from SGI.COM by PL122c.EECS.Lehigh.EDU (5.61/1.34)
id AA25477; Tue, 16 Jun 92 10:39:31 -0400
Received: from [192.102.132.11] by sgi.sgi.com via SMTP (911016.SGI/910110.SGI)
for <ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122C.EECS.LEHIGH.EDU id AA17886; Tue, 16 Jun 92 07:42:10 -0700
Received: by ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (920110.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
for @sgi.sgi.com:<ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122C.EECS.LEHIGH.EDU id AA00714; Tue, 16 Jun 92 07:42:08 -0700
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 92 07:42:08 -0700
From: dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (dave "who can do? ratmandu!" ratcliffe)
<info type="Message-ID"> 9206161442.AA00714@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com</info>
To: <ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122c.EECS.Lehigh.EDU
Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (8/11)
Status: RO</p>

<p>Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (8/11)
Summary: we were robbed of our capability of electing a president we wanted
Keywords: part 8 of 11: chapter 15
Lines: 1172</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> Chapter 15
The Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>,
<ent type='ORG'>The Intelligence Community</ent> and the News Media</p>

<p> Part I</p>

<p> The Top Down vs. The Bottom Up Approach
To Assassination Investigations</p>

<p> Two vastly different views have been held by both assassination
researchers and members of <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> during the last three years
about the best way to arrive at the truth concerning political
assassinations in <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States. The conservative view
dictates we must build an investigative base from the ground
upward, beginning with the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination, and use "hard"
evidence in each assassination case. This view assumes that any
grand, overall conspiracy to cover up the cover-ups would be
detected and made public following exposure of the first layer of
cover-ups.
The less conservative view holds that the political processes
underlying the original assassinations and the massive cover-up
superstructure should be attacked and exposed simultaneously.
The resolutions to establish a Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> to Investigate
<ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>, introduced by <ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Downing</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent> in
the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives in 1975, were somewhat related to both
views. The conservative <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> resolution called for a sole
investigation of the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case. Gonzalez's resolution called for
the reopening of all four major cases--<ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>RFK</ent>, Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>George Wallace</ent>--and more importantly, it called for an
investigation of the possible links among all four. <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>
stated that he believed the country might be experiencing an
assassination-controlled electoral process. His approach was
clearly allied with the less conservative view.
Research groups, such as <ent type='PERSON'>Mark Lane</ent>'s Citizen's <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> of
Inquiry (<ent type='ORG'>CCI</ent>), <ent type='PERSON'>Bud Fensterwald</ent>'s <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> to Investigate
<ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> (<ent type='ORG'>CTIA</ent>), and <ent type='PERSON'>Bob Katz</ent>'s Assassination Information
Bureau (<ent type='ORG'>AIB</ent>) were also divided in their views. <ent type='ORG'>CCI</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>CTIA</ent> took
the bottom-up approach and tended to support <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent>. <ent type='ORG'>AIB</ent> took the
overview political approach and tended to support <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>. The
Black Caucus, Coretta <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> and others were primarily interested in
a broad overview of the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> assassination.
The coalition formed by <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>the Black Caucus</ent>
finally brought about the creation of the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on
<ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> in the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>, which represents a mixture of these
views and approaches.
The work of the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> will produce results if it is
recognized that the bottom-up approach alone cannot be used
successfully against the group of powerful individuals that
currently controls the environment in which any investigation
attempts are to be made. The best way the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> can
succeed against this group is to use what will be labelled the "top
down" approach to investigating and exposing the truth as a
supplement to the bottom up approach.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>The <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent></p>

<p> The earlier part of this book described a group of individuals
in <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States and labelled them the "<ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent>."
The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> is that group of individuals or organizations that
knowingly participated in one or more of the assassination
conspiracies or related murders or attempted murders, plus the
individuals who knowingly participated or are still participating
in the cover-ups of those conspiracies or murders. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>
includes any people in the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>, Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent>, Secret
Service, local police departments or sheriffs offices in Los
Angeles, <ent type='GPE'>Memphis</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> or <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent>, judges, district
attorneys, state attorneys general, other federal government
agencies, the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives, the Senate, the White
<ent type='ORG'>House</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>, or <ent type='ORG'>the Department</ent> of Defense as well as any
people in the media who are under the influence of any of the
above, who participated or are participating in the cover-ups or
the cover-ups of the cover-up. There are indications that people
in every one of the above organizations or groups belong to the
<ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>.</p>

<p> Hard Evidence of Conspiracy</p>

<p> Anyone who has honestly and openly taken the time to examine a
few pieces of hard evidence in any one of the four major cases has
no trouble deciding there were individual conspiracies in each. In
the face of this situation, the layman wonders why the <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>
continually demands hard evidence of conspiracy. Statements
continue to appear in the media to the effect that, "I've seen no
evidence of conspiracy." Or, "We are not sure whether there were
others involved in addition to <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent></ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent></ent> or <ent type='PERSON'>Arthur Bremer</ent>." These statements are made in
spite of the fact that even the most casual analysis clearly shows
that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Sirhan</ent>, and <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> did not fire any of the shots that
struck <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>RFK</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>MLK</ent>, and that they were all patsies. <ent type='PERSON'>Bremer</ent>
fired some of the shots in the <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> case, but there is evidence
that another gun was fired.
The hard evidence is all old evidence. It goes back at least to
1967 and 1968 in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case, and back to 1970 through 1972 in the
<ent type='PERSON'>RFK</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>MLK</ent> cases. The <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> evidence is a little fresher, but
nevertheless convincing. The people who demand new evidence are
either members of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, or they are brainwashed by the media
members of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> into ignoring the old evidence. They do not
choose to see or to hear the old evidence, even when it is
literally placed before their very eyes and ears. Thus the words
"hard evidence" are merely substitutes for the words "no
conspiracy".</p>

<p> The Bottom Up Approach</p>

<p> The bottom up approach is doomed to failure no matter how the
Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> tries and no matter how much effort any official
body puts into attempts to offer that "bombshell" that Tip O'<ent type='PERSON'>Neill</ent>
and others look for to prove conspiracy in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>MLK</ent> cases.
The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> is in complete control of the situation. It controls the
media and the media controls the minds of most citizens and the
<ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> is a living, dynamic body right now. They can
eliminate an investigation or investigators right now. They can
eliminate a member of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> or a member of the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>
right now.
The bottom up approach will never get off the ground because the
<ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> will not allow it. As long as the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> controls all the sources
of evidence that might contain the hard evidence in the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
and local police files, as long as it controls the courts, and as
long as it controls the media, no one will be allowed to prove hard
evidence before the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>, the Senate, <ent type='ORG'>the President</ent>, or any one in
the Executive Branch.</p>

<p> The Events of 1976 and 1977</p>

<p> That the PCG's control exists is more clearly evident now than
it has ever been before. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> is operating in an almost blatant
fashion. Any observer who keeps his eyes wide open and assumes
that such a group exists, can see it operate almost every day.
The prime objectives of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> in 1976 and 1977 were:</p>

<p> 1. To block and eliminate the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on
<ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> in the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives.</p>

<p> 2. To firmly implant the idea that the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination
was a <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> plot.</p>

<p> 3. To block any <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>ional attempts to investigate the
four assassination cases.</p>

<p> 4. To control the <ent type='PERSON'>Carter</ent> Administration in such a way as
to permit only an executive branch investigation that
will conclude there was a <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent>-based <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> conspiracy
and no conspiracy in the other cases.</p>

<p> The 1977 activities of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> lent themselves to a new
approach, the "top down" approach to exposing the truth.</p>

<p> Exposing the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent></p>

<p> The top down approach obviously begins with exposing the PCG's
immediate, present activities. The following examples are
illustrative. The Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> is certainly in a better
position to know which individuals and actions taken by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>
since the formation of <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> in September, 1976 would be
most easily attacked. The first example is the leaked Justice
<ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> report on the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> case.</p>

<p> The Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> Report</p>

<p> The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> members' actions were leaked in the February 2, 1977
<ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> report and released a few weeks later. To review the list of
<ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> members involved in the cover-up of the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> case: J. Edgar
<ent type='PERSON'>Hoover</ent>, the <ent type='GPE'>Memphis</ent> <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Phil Canale</ent> (<ent type='GPE'>Memphis</ent> D.A.), <ent type='PERSON'>Fred Vinson</ent>
(State <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent>), Judge Battle, <ent type='PERSON'>Percy Foreman</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> Bradford
<ent type='ORG'>Huie</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Gerald Frank</ent> (author), <ent type='PERSON'>Frank Holloman</ent> and other members of
the <ent type='GPE'>Memphis</ent> police and judges at the state and federal court
levels.
One of the judges who became a <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> member in later years was
Judge McCrea. He heard <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent></ent>'s plea for a new trial.
Solid evidence of the conspiracy to frame <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> was introduced at
that hearing.
Everyone who read or heard the evidence, with the exception of
Judge McCrea and his law clerk, reached the conclusion that <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> was
framed and that his lawyer, <ent type='PERSON'>Percy Foreman</ent>, deliberately mishandled
the case. Nevertheless, McCrea decided that <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> would not get a
new trial. The case was appealed all the way to <ent type='ORG'>the Supreme Court</ent>
with no reversals of the decision.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>Leaking the</ent> Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> Report on the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> Case</p>

<p> Attorney General <ent type='PERSON'>Levi</ent> some years later ordered a review by the
Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> of the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> assassination and the FBI's handling
of its investigation. A report was prepared by Michael J. <ent type='PERSON'>Shaheen</ent>,
who did most of the Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> work. No public
announcement was made in 1976 upon completion of the report.
Suddenly, on the exact day that the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> was debating whether to
reconstitute the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> (February 2, 1977), the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent>
report was leaked to the <ent type='NORP'>Republican</ent> minority leader of the
opposition, Representative Quillen of <ent type='GPE'>Tennessee</ent>. He announced he
had a copy of the report. Representative <ent type='PERSON'>Yvonne Burke</ent> from
<ent type='GPE'>California</ent>, a member of the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> and also a member of
the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> responsible for oversight of the Justice
<ent type='ORG'>Department</ent>, took strong issue with Quillen over the leak. She said
she had unsuccessfully tried to obtain the report that day from the
Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent>. Quillen stated at first he did not have the
report, but had an Associated <ent type='ORG'>Press</ent> release describing the report.
About an hour later, he said he had received a copy of the report.
<ent type='PERSON'>Burke</ent> stated that was very strange; not even the proper committee
of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> had received a copy.
The report was quoted to say that the Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> had
closed the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> case and concluded <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent></ent> was the lone
assassin. Placed in the hands of the opposition to the Select
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, the statement was strategically useful. Quillen argued
against continuing <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> on the strength of the conclusions
reached in the report.</p>

<p> Releasing the Report</p>

<p> On February 19, 1977, the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> report was released by the
Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent>. Blaring headlines again emphasized no
conspiracy and exonerated the FBI's conduct in their investigation.
A showdown meeting was scheduled for February 21 between <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> and Tip O'<ent type='PERSON'>Neill</ent>, to be followed the same day by a meeting
of the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> to determine whether they would continue
with <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> as chief counsel.
The absurd report was published in the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times" on
February 19, 1977. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> 's tactics became somewhat obvious on
that date. Attorney General <ent type='PERSON'>Griffin Bell</ent>, having inherited the
report from Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Levi</ent>, let slip an important opinion on the <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>
program, "Face the Nation" on the <ent type='LOC'>Sunday</ent> before the report was
described as "still secret" by the <ent type='GPE'>UPI</ent> news release quoting Mr.
<ent type='ORG'>Bell</ent>.
<ent type='ORG'>Bell</ent> said he believed there were questions the report did not
answer. <ent type='ORG'>Bell</ent> clarified his concerns after the February 19 release
of the report by stating on the 24th that he might want to
interview <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> to find out where <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> obtained all of the money he
had before and after <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> was shot, and whether anyone helped him
obtain false passports or make travel arrangements. Perhaps <ent type='ORG'>Bell</ent>
was troubled by one of the report's conclusions--that one of Ray's
motives in killing <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> was to make a "quick profit."
This indicates that Mr. <ent type='ORG'>Bell</ent>, and presumably Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Carter</ent>, are not
members of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> cover-up on the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> case. It also seems
obvious that Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Levi</ent> and the people preparing the report and
conducting the review had become members of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>. The timed
release and leaking of that report and the total whitewash of the
<ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> conspiracy are too patently obvious to be coincidental. This
is one area in which the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> has an excellent chance
to expose a raw nerve of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>.</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Michael Shaheen</ent> -- <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> Member</p>

<p> A key <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> member in the situation would appear to be Mr.
<ent type='PERSON'>Shaheen</ent>, Judge McCrea's law clerk mentioned earlier in the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>
cover-up in <ent type='GPE'>Memphis</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Shaheen</ent> was deeply involved in the old
cover-up as well as the new cover-up. He is from <ent type='GPE'>Memphis</ent> and part
of that closed circle of people in <ent type='GPE'>Tennessee</ent> who know very well
what happened to <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent> and how <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> was framed. Mr.
<ent type='PERSON'>Shaheen</ent> is now planning to become a judge in <ent type='GPE'>Memphis</ent> with the help
of all his co-conspirators and <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> members.
Who called the shots in this Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> effort? Was it
<ent type='PERSON'>Levi</ent>? Was it the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> members left over from the <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent>-<ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>
administration? Was it members of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> still in the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>? Was
it the <ent type='GPE'>Tennessee</ent> wing of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> that includes Judge McCrea, Phil
Canale, Howard <ent type='PERSON'>Baker</ent>, Mr. Quillen and <ent type='PERSON'>Bernard Fensterwald</ent>, Jr.?
The Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> should find out. The report itself is easily
attacked. It quotes the fake <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Charlie</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stevens</ent></ent> testimony all over
again, as if no one knew he had been bought off by <ent type='PERSON'>Hoover</ent> to
identify <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Stevens</ent> was dead drunk and saw nothing on the day of
the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> assassination.</p>

<p> Ignoring or Suppressing Conspiracy and Framing Evidence</p>

<p> Shaheen's review did not touch upon any of the evidence
regarding the framing of <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> that was introduced at the hearing
that Judge McCrea and <ent type='PERSON'>Shaheen</ent> knew so very well. The witnesses who
had seen <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> at a gas station several blocks from the assassination
site when the shot was fired were ignored. <ent type='PERSON'>Grace</ent> Walden <ent type='PERSON'>Stevens</ent>
saw <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> (<ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent>) in the rooming house, identified <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> as the
man she saw, and knew <ent type='PERSON'>Charlie</ent> had seen nothing. She had to be
ignored. The witnesses who saw <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Youngblood</ent></ent> move away from the
bushes from which he had fired the shot had to be ignored. <ent type='PERSON'>Hoover</ent>
and <ent type='PERSON'>Fred Vinson</ent>'s use of Stevens's false testimony to extradite <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent>
from <ent type='GPE'>London</ent> had to be ignored. The FBI's role in <ent type='GPE'>Memphis</ent>,
including its instructions to the witnesses who had seen <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> to
keep quiet was to be kept a dark secret. The similarity between
Frenchy's photograph and the sketch of <ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent> and Ray's subsequent
identification of <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> as <ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent> had to be kept quiet.
More ignored evidence was turned up by <ent type='ORG'>Huie</ent>. He found three
witnesses who had seen <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> and <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>-<ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent> together both in
<ent type='GPE'>Atlanta</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>Montreal</ent>. They confirmed Ray's claim that he was
framed. All of the evidence involving <ent type='PERSON'>Youngblood</ent> and <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>,
uncovered by <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Livingston</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Wayne</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Chastain</ent></ent> and published in
"Computers and People" in 1974, was omitted.
<ent type='PERSON'>Livingston</ent> was Ray's attorney in <ent type='GPE'>Tennessee</ent>. <ent type='ORG'>Chastain</ent> is a
<ent type='GPE'>Memphis</ent> reporter. <ent type='PERSON'>Livingston</ent> and Chastain's sighting of <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>-<ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent> at the <ent type='GPE'>Detroit</ent> airport during a meeting between <ent type='PERSON'>Livingston</ent>,
<ent type='ORG'>Chastain</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Bud Fensterwald</ent> and the intermediary representing <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>
(in an attempt to obtain immunity for him in exchange for revealing
the identity of the <ent type='NORP'>Tennesseans</ent> and <ent type='NORP'>Louisianians</ent> who had hired him)
was ignored.
Exposure of this segment of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> would have done more to
bolster the 1977 efforts of the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> than any
presentation of conspiracy evidence in the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> case itself.</p>

<p> The PCG's Tactics With the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent></p>

<p> In the early days of the formation of <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> in September
1976, the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> might have taken <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> very lightly. The
PCG's efforts to stop an investigation from beginning in the spring
of 1976 through its control of the Rules <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> had been
successful. <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> had given up. But when the
three-way coalition suddenly brought about a reversal of their
earlier Rules <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> vote, and the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> quickly and
overwhelmingly passed a resolution to set up <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>
was forced to go back to the drawing boards for retaliation.
Before the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> had time to react, <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> hired
Dick <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> as chief counsel. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> very rapidly hired the
equivalent of his own <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>. He sensed from the start that he might
be up against both the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>, so he carefully screened
his investigators, lawyers, researchers and other personnel to
prevent intelligence penetration of the staff. However, some
personnel were "handed" to him by both <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent>.
It goes almost without saying that the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> would have tried to
infiltrate the staff. What they learned by their early
infiltration was that <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and his crack team were not only on
the right track in both the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>MLK</ent> investigations, but also
that the tactics used by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> in those weeks were making the
staff and some of the committee members suspicious about the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>
itself.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> of Prior Investigations</p>

<p> It became imperative for the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> to either eliminate the entire
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> or to gain control of it and to rid it of Dick <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>
and the senior staff people who were loyal to him. It was no
longer possible to turn the investigations around and bury the
information that had been gathered as the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> had done with six
prior <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>ional investigations. In each of the prior
investigations (five Senate investigations and one <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>
investigation of the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination) the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> had controlled the
results, disbanded the staffs and buried the evidence. The six
groups were:</p>

<p> 1. 1968--A Senate subcommittee under Senator Ed Long of
<ent type='GPE'>Missouri</ent> conducted a <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> investigation. Bernard
<ent type='PERSON'>Fensterwald</ent>, Jr., was in charge of a six-person team.

2. 1974--The Ervin <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> investigated the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case
during the <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> period. <ent type='PERSON'>Samuel</ent> Dash headed a team
of four that included <ent type='PERSON'>Terry Lenzer</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Barry Schochet</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>Wayne</ent> Bishop.

3. 1975--The <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>. A six-person team reported
to <ent type='ORG'>FAO Schwartz III</ent>. It included <ent type='PERSON'>Bob Kelley</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Dan</ent>
Dwyer, Ed Greissing, Paul <ent type='ORG'>Wall</ent>ach, <ent type='PERSON'>Pat Shea</ent> and David
Aaron.

4. 1975--The <ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent>-Hart subcommittee under the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> had a team headed by <ent type='PERSON'>David Marston</ent>, that
included <ent type='PERSON'>Troy Gustafson</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Gaeton Fonzi</ent>, and Elliott
<ent type='PERSON'>Maxwell</ent>.

5. 1975--<ent type='ORG'>Pike</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> in <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>. People unknown.

6. 1976--Senate <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> under <ent type='PERSON'>Dan</ent>iel
Inouye.</p>

<p> In addition, both Howard <ent type='PERSON'>Baker</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Lowell Weicker</ent> conducted
their own investigations of the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case during the <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent>
period.
<ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and his senior staff people are professionals compared
to the amateurs listed above. <ent type='PERSON'>Wayne</ent> Bishop was the only
professional investigator in all of the staff groups. It was easy
for the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> to cut off or alter the directions of the prior
investigations. Thus, the one with the greatest hope, the
<ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent> subcommittee, wound up not mentioning any of the
important evidence uncovered in <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent> and elsewhere in their
final report. The <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> and the public were left with the
impression that there might have been a <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> conspiracy to
assassinate <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>.</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> Strategy</p>

<p> Faced with the new committee and Sprague's staff, the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> had
devise a strategy that included:</p>

<p> 1. Attacking Dick <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> to discredit him with dirt and
print it in the media.</p>

<p> 2. Using the media to spread <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> propaganda and control
the sources of all stories concerning the Select
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>.</p>

<p> 3. Using <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>men to provide biased, distorted
quotes to the media for its use.</p>

<p> 4. Trying to discredit the entire committee by making it
appear to be disorganized and unmanageable.</p>

<p> 5. <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent>ling the voting and lobbying against the
continuation of the committee in January and February.</p>

<p> 6. Influencing members of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> to vote against the
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> through a massive letter and telegram
campaign.</p>

<p> 7. Exaggerating the emphasis placed on the size of the
budget requested by <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> without considering the
need for such a budget.</p>

<p> 8. Demanding that the committee justify its existence by
producing new evidence.</p>

<p> 9. Splitting the committee and attempting to create
dissension; creating a battle between <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent>
and <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and between <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent>.</p>

<p> 10. Hamstringing the staff so they could not receive
salaries, could not travel, did not have subpoena
power, could not make long distance telephone calls;
blocking access to the key files at the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>, Justice
<ent type='ORG'>Department</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Secret Service</ent>.</p>

<p> 11. Trying to insert their own man at the head of the
staff.</p>

<p> 12. Brainwashing <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent> into believing that <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>
and others were agents.</p>

<p> 13. Sacrificing <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent> when it became obvious the
<ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> could not control him as their chairman.</p>

<p> 14. Leaking stories that seemed to make the committee's
efforts unnecessary.</p>

<p> Media <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent></p>

<p> The primary technique used by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> is its nearly absolute
control of the media. This is not as difficult to achieve as one
might imagine. Since most of the stories about the committee
originate in <ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> under rather tightly-knit conditions, it is
necessary to control only a small number of key reporters and their
bosses. The rest of the media follow along like sheep.
The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> trotted out some of their old-timers in the media to
initiate the public and <ent type='ORG'>congress</ent>ional brainwashing program against
the committee. They used the same tactic against <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>
between 1967 and 1969. The old-timers included Jeremiah O'<ent type='PERSON'>Leary</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>George Lardner</ent>, Jr., and <ent type='PERSON'>David Burnham</ent>. Jeremiah O'<ent type='PERSON'>Leary</ent> of the
"<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Star</ent>" was on the CIA's list of reporters exposed the
year before. <ent type='PERSON'>George Lardner</ent> Jr. had been in <ent type='PERSON'>David Ferrie</ent>'s
apartment until 4 AM on the morning he was murdered. <ent type='PERSON'>Lardner</ent> was a
<ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> member in 1967, while he worked as a reporter for the
"<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>" (he is still with the "<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>"). <ent type='PERSON'>David Burnham</ent> at
the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times," one of the several reporters in <ent type='PERSON'>Harrison</ent>
Salisbury's and Harding <ent type='ORG'>Bancroft</ent>, Jr.'s stable of <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> workers, was
called upon to carry the brunt of the "Times"' attack.
There were, of course, others. As in 1967 and at other times
during the first decade of media cover-ups, the major TV, radio,
wire service, magazine and newspaper media acted as a cover-up
unit. <ent type='PERSON'>Ben Bradlee</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> chieftain at the "<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>,"
made sure that "Newsweek" did their hatchet jobs. Time, Inc., <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>
(with <ent type='PERSON'>Eric Sevaried</ent>, Dick <ent type='PERSON'>Salant</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Leslie Midgeley</ent>), <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> (with
<ent type='PERSON'>David Brinkley</ent>), and <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent> (with <ent type='PERSON'>Bob Clark</ent> and Howard K. Smith) all
went on the attack. The overall theme was that the committee would
soon die out.</p>

<p> Media Tactics</p>

<p> The tactics first used were to create the impression that the
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> was not going to find anything of importance. Then Dick
<ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> became the chief target. One of the dirty tricks used
against him portrayed him as arrogant, flamboyant, power-mad, and
as a man who usurped the powers of <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>. The writers and
editors of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> are very good at this sort of thing. The "New
York Times," with <ent type='PERSON'>Burnham</ent> writing and <ent type='GPE'>Salisbury</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Bancroft</ent>
directing, did a real hatchet job on <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>. These techniques
convinced <ent type='ORG'>congress</ent>men and much of the public. <ent type='ORG'>Sqrague</ent> was forced
to stay very quiet and away from reporters and cameras. That did
not deter the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> people. Once an image of a man has been created
by the media, it is not necessary for him to appear in public. He
could even disappear for several weeks, but the flamboyant, noisy
image would go on uninterrupted. This technique is much less
obvious than murder, but it works nearly as well. When the time
comes to destroy or eliminate the man, all the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> has to do is
create an image.</p>

<p> The Vote to Continue</p>

<p> The man chosen to eliminate <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> was the new chairman of the
Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent>. Before setting up a classic
"personality conflict" between <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> used
another tactic. It attempted to kill <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> with a vote not
to continue it in the 1977 <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>.
The <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> and media <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> members overemphasized the large budget
requested by Dick <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, the use of the polygraph, the use of the
psychological stress evaluator and the telephone monitoring
equipment. Rather than telling the truth about the budget,
describing how the money would be spent, and describing why and how
the equipment was going to be used, the media (aided and abetted by
<ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> members in the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> itself) made it seem as though the budget
was totally out of line and that citizen's rights would be violated
by the use of such equipment. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> planted false information
that led <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent> Edwards of <ent type='GPE'>California</ent> to play into their hands on the
equipment issue.
The year-end report of <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>, which they and the staff
hoped would make these subjects clear, countered the media attacks.
*But*, of course, the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> controls the media, and the report was
completely blacked out. Most citizens do not even know it exists.
Almost every U.S. citizen has heard and seen Dick <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> called a
rattlesnake and an unscrupulous character. However, the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> lost
the vote against continuing <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> and used a new method to
try to kill it.</p>

<p> The New Tactic</p>

<p> The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> decided to use <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> to control <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>. The
stage was set for the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> to knock off <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and to install one
of their own men. The plan was to do this by brainwashing <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> into distrusting <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and selected members of the
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> and the staff.
The idea was to use <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> in this way to install a <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> man
(the fact that he was a <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> man was unknown to <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>) as chief
of staff. <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> would fire <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and the key staff members,
first blocking their access to important files and witnesses. The
<ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> would then have been in a position to either fold up the
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> by March 31, or to direct its efforts toward finding a
<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent>-did-it conspiracy in JFK's case and no conspiracy in the
<ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> case.</p>

<p> Tactic Backfires</p>

<p> The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> did not forecast one important effect their tactics
would have. By the time <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent> became chairman, the other
eleven members of <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> and its staff had begun to smell a
rat. They noted with curiosity all of the strange coincidences
that occurred. During the floor debate on February 2, 1977 over
continuing <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>, Representatives Devine, <ent type='PERSON'>Preyer</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Burke</ent> and
<ent type='ORG'>Fauntroy</ent> let the rest of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> know that they believed
something peculiar was happening to them. The appearance of the
Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> report on that same day disturbed them very
much. The attacks on <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> upset them also.
The staff were even more disturbed. Most of them had assumed
they were being asked to conduct a thorough and unbiased
investigation of two homicides. The power of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> became
obvious to them over a period of several weeks. The effect of this
on both <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> and its staff was to drive all eighty-four
people (73 staff and 11 <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> members) into a solid block (the
only exceptions were Gonzalez's people on the staff), more
determined than ever to get at the truth. Some staffers began
using their own money for travel. All of them took pay cuts. Many
of them decided they would work for nothing if necessary to keep
going. The PCG's strategy had backfired. The eighty-four loyal
people were like one giant lion backed into a corner, spurred on to
greater heights to fight back.
For this reason, the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> tactic to use a brainwashed <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> failed. The eighty-four people resisted that <ent type='ORG'>manuever</ent> by
threatening to resign en masse. Tip O'<ent type='PERSON'>Neill</ent> and others were forced
to go against <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> resigned. The <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> voted by a
large majority to accept his resignation and Tip O'<ent type='PERSON'>Neill</ent> appointed
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent> as the new chairman. At this point, the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> decided
to abandon <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> and to try another tactic, signalled by an
article in the "<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Star</ent>" on March 3, 1977. Written by
"<ent type='ORG'>Star</ent>" staff writer Lynn <ent type='PERSON'>Roselli</ent>ni, the article was entitled,
"<ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>' Action Stuns Panel but Not the Home Folks." It was
manufactured by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> to discredit <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> and his final demise.
(It was the first anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> article to appear.) The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> had
obviously decided to throw <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> to the wolves. The significant
quote was supposedly from a "source familiar with <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>' career"
that said "<ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> focuses in on conspiracies, the weird angle of
things. Once he gets involved in something, he shakes it by the
throat until it's dead." That was a dead giveaway that the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> no
longer wanted <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> around.</p>

<p> Next Tactic -- Death By Acclamation</p>

<p> The PCG's next tactic was to convince a majority of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>
that <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> had had it because of the feuding as portrayed
in the press. They hoped to either eliminate <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>
altogether or eliminate the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> investigation or to force <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>
to resign. (After all, the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> conspiracy can always be blamed on
J. <ent type='PERSON'>Edgar Hoover</ent>, if it comes down to that. There is no particular
spillover from the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> case into <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>RFK</ent> or <ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent>, provided
<ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> can be kept out of the limelight.) It might have been
possible for the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>men to propose dropping the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case
or to propose postponing it in favor of continuing just the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent>
case with a reduced budget. Prior to March 31, a <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> floor vote
or a vote in the Rules <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> could have been proposed that
might have limited the investigations and <ent type='ORG'>the authority</ent> of the
Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> in this way. The rules under which the Select
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> would operate were not passed by <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> due to the
conflict between <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent> and the rest of the members, so the
proposal could have included restrictive rules. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> media
could have boosted this idea with the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> loyalists in the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Jim Wright</ent> appeared to be the new leader of the opposition to kill
the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>. More ground was being laid every day for a
negative vote on continuation. The hint was that <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>
must come up with a bombshell or that it will die.
The <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> fought off this tactic by diverting the attention
of the media through a series of very rapidly developing activities
and a substantial reduction in the proposed budget, which plummeted
to 2.8 million for the remainder of 1977. The <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> finally voted
to continue <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> by a very narrow margin, with a swing of
25 votes determining the result.
The final weapon used to obtain a vote to continue <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>
on March 30 was the resignation of Dick <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>.</p>

<p> Exposing the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent></p>

<p> The best way to expose the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> is to demonstrate that it has
been influencing or controlling the media and attempting to control
<ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>. How can this be done? It will be necessary to show who
the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> members are in the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> and the media and exactly what
they have been doing while they are doing it. Getting this kind of
information out to the public will be very difficult, since the
entire media group seems to be controlled. Live TV is not easily
controllable. If unannounced exposures of <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> members are made on
live TV there would be no way for the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> to stop it. About the
only way to set up such a situation would be to hold public
hearings with live TV coverage.
Exposing the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> to <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> might be accomplished on the floor
of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>. Evidence of the clandestine activities of <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>
members in the tactics described above could be introduced on the
floor without media coverage. This happened to a minor extent on
March 30 when some of <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> members began to accuse the
media of improper influence.</p>

<p> Who Are The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> Members</p>

<p> The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> members presently attempting to control the Select
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> must be clearly identified.[1] There are, no doubt, some
media people and Representatives who sincerely believe that there
were no conspiracies and who have been playing into the hands of
the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> without realizing it. Other Representatives, and media
people by the definition of the term <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, are purposefully
controlling the situation. It may be difficult to distinguish
between these two groups without tracing back some <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> connection
of the culprits. Any <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> or <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> clandestine relationship or any
direct connection with any of the assassination cases would be a
tip. An example of this is <ent type='PERSON'>George Lardner</ent>, Jr.'s direct connection
with the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case ten years ago. (<ent type='PERSON'>Lardner</ent> was in <ent type='PERSON'>David Ferrie</ent>'s
apartment for four hours after the midnight time of death estimated
by the <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> coroner. <ent type='PERSON'>Ferrie</ent> was killed by a karate chop to
the back of his neck.) <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent> interrogated <ent type='PERSON'>Lardner</ent> at some
length, but he never received a satisfactory explanation of what he
had been doing there.
While it may be difficult to tell which <ent type='ORG'>congress</ent>men are sincere
and which are knowingly trying to extend the cover-ups, the Select
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> must turn its attention to any member of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> who
throws up roadblocks or who speaks out strongly against the
continuation of the investigations. On this basis, one must
suspect every one of the Representatives cited below.
Many questions should be asked of this group. For example, who
encouraged Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Bauman</ent> during that autumn and on March 30, Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Sisk</ent>
last spring and Mr. Quillen in February to suddenly become so
vehement about stopping investigations of the assassinations?
Their stated reasons were that the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>s were opposed, costs,
the lack of new evidence, <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>, etc. But these
reasons can no longer be their own true beliefs. On whose behalf
were they acting? How did Trent <ent type='PERSON'>Lott</ent> find out that <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>
staff made a telephone call to <ent type='GPE'>Cameroon</ent>, which he discussed on
March 28 at the Rules meeting?
Who talked <ent type='PERSON'>Frank Thompson</ent> into a campaign to shut off the Select
Committee's financial resources? (The <ent type='ORG'>Thompson</ent> efforts cannot be
explained away by the ordinary controller's motivations.) Who
convinced <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Wright</ent> that <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> was doomed and that he
should personally intervene in the <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>
members' battle? And, most importantly, who brainwashed both <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Gail Beagle</ent> into mistrusting the people they had
always trusted? Answer these questions and publicize the answers,
and the top-down approach to exposing the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> and solving the
assassination conspiracies will be well along the path to success.</p>

<p> Part II</p>

<p> "Hard" and "Soft" Propaganda in 1977</p>

<p> When the time approached for the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on
<ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> to ask the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives for its 1978
budget, it was interesting to once again examine the PCG's control
over the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n news media and the <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>. To those who
observed the assassination scene with blinders removed, it was
patently obvious that the December 1977 date for the Select
Committee's budget approval was a target. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> attempted to
defeat <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>'s efforts to get at the truth underlying the
<ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent> assassinations and the cover-up
crimes associated with them.
An all-out effort was mounted by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> to influence the
thinking of citizens and the votes of the members of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>.
This effort manifested itself in the major news media--over the
three TV networks, the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times," "<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>,"
"Newsweek," "Time," book publishers, book reviewers, TV talk shows,
etc.
This massive campaign is a useful test to prove the validity of
contentions made by this author and others in 1976 and 1977
concerning the relationships between <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent> and
the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n news media, as utilized in the continuing cover-ups of
the domestic assassinations, and in the PCG's efforts to destroy
the reputations of assassination researchers[2] and the two
official investigations of the <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> assassinations.[3]
New evidence surfaced in 1977 to support these contentions: a
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> document released under the Freedom of Information Act and an
article by a new potential ally for assassination truth seekers,
Carl <ent type='PERSON'>Bernstein</ent>. Both of these documents were provided to the
author by <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> Gandolfo in <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>, who now has his own weekly
cable TV show on Friday nights on <ent type='GPE'>Manhattan</ent> TV entitled,
"Assassination <ent type='GPE'>USA</ent>."</p>

<p> Evidence of Media <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent></p>

<p> Carl <ent type='PERSON'>Bernstein</ent> wrote an article exposing the CIA's methods of
controlling the news media.[4] The basic technique dictates
planting a <ent type='ORG'>Secret Team</ent> member at the top of each major media
organization, or obtaining tacit agreements from the top man to use
reporters working for the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>, and to use <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> people, stories, and
policies on the inside of the organization. <ent type='PERSON'>Bernstein</ent> named men
above the level named by this author as <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> people in certain
organizations. For example, the author's claim was that Harding
<ent type='ORG'>Bancroft</ent>, Jr. has been the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> control point at the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>
Times." <ent type='PERSON'>Bernstein</ent> named <ent type='PERSON'>Arthur Hays Sulzberger</ent>, the owner of the
"Times" and Bancroft's boss, as the CIA's man at the "Times." At
<ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>, the author named <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Salant</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Bernstein</ent> names <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> C.
<ent type='PERSON'>Paley</ent>. At the "<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>" and "Newsweek" <ent type='PERSON'>Bernstein</ent> names
Philip <ent type='PERSON'>Graham</ent>, Katherine Graham's husband, former owner of the
"<ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>" and "Newsweek," and by inference, Mrs. <ent type='PERSON'>Graham</ent> since her
husband's death. The author named <ent type='PERSON'>Ben Bradlee</ent>. But Bernstein's
information confirms the author's contention that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> controls
the 15 news media organizations in the U.S.
The other <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> top level individuals named by <ent type='PERSON'>Bernstein</ent> are as
follows:</p>

<p> "<ent type='ORG'>Louisville Courier Journal</ent>"--<ent type='PERSON'>Barry Bingham</ent>, Sr.
<ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>--<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Wald
<ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>--<ent type='PERSON'>Sam Jaffe</ent>
Time, Inc.--<ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> Luce
Copley News Service--<ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Copley
Hearst--<ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent> Freiden</p>

<p> The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, through their prime intelligence members, are today
still controlling what the media do and say about the subject of
assassinations and the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>.[5] They
do this by influencing the heads of each organization who determine
media editorial policies that are carried out by their
subordinates. In some cases, however, lower level people are also
planted as reporters, editors or producers to execute the policies,
write the stories, produce the programs, review the books, or write
or publish the books. The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> also owns and controls many
publishing houses, freelance writers or reviewers who can also be
used in this massive campaign.
However, the reader should not immediately jump to the
conclusion that all of the media people knowingly continue to
cover-up of the assassination conspiracies. It is only necessary
that they actually believe the CIA's stories and positions against
conspiracies. For example, <ent type='PERSON'>Anthony Lewis</ent> at the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times"
participates in this entire fraud, actually believing that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>
was the lone madman assassin.
It is inconceivable, however, that men intelligent enough to
rise to the top of <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>, the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times et al." could
actually believe that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> was the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent>. Some or most
of them must be cooperating fully in the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> cover-up efforts.</p>

<p> Proof of <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> Efforts to Discredit Researchers</p>

<p> A recently released <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> document[6] was a dispatch issued from
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> headquarters in April 1967 to certain bases and stations to
mount a campaign through media contacts (called assets) against
certain assassination researchers. The targets included <ent type='PERSON'>Mark Lane</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Joachim Joesten</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Penn Jones</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Edward Epstein</ent> and Bertrand <ent type='PERSON'>Russell</ent>.
The document describes an entire program to be used to discredit
the "critics." Many of the exact expressions that were used by the
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>-controlled media to attack the researchers can be found in this
document. One example is: "The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> should use this argument in
general. Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested (by
critics) would be impossible to conceal in <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States,
especially since informants could expect to receive large
royalties, etc." Another argument suggested is: "Note that <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, Attorney General at the time and <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. Kennedy's
brother, would be the last man to overlook or conceal any
conspiracy."
How many times did we hear that between 1967 and 1969?
The document also suggests using an article by <ent type='PERSON'>Fletcher Knebel</ent>
to attack Ed Epstein's book and to attack it rather than Mark
Lane's book because "Lane's book is much more difficult to answer
as a whole, as one becomes lost in a morass of unrelated details."
The timing of this document is particularly important. April 1,
1967 was approximately two months after <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>'s
investigation surfaced, and only shortly after <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> found David
<ent type='PERSON'>Ferrie</ent> murdered in his own apartment and had <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> arrested.
Since we now know that both men were contract agents for the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
and that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> went to great lengths under <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent>'
direction to protect <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> and to keep his true identity from
being revealed, the chances are good that this document was
triggered by Garrison's investigation.
The names of the authors of the document have been blacked out
of the copy that was released. Further research might reveal who
actually wrote it and "pulled it together" (as a note in hand print
at the top states).</p>

<p> <ent type='ORG'>The Trial</ent> of <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent></p>

<p> The top level media control was demonstrated by the <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>-TV
program, "<ent type='ORG'>The Trial</ent> of <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>", whose co-director,
Lawrence <ent type='PERSON'>Schiller</ent>, had to have been selected at the suggestion of
the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Schiller</ent>, one of the worst people in the PCG's stable of
freelancers, is best known for his book supporting the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> and attacking the researchers, called "The
Scavengers."[7]
<ent type='PERSON'>Schiller</ent> is perhaps the biggest scavenger ever created. He
supposedly obtained a "deathbed" statement from <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent></ent> by
illegally and unethically sneaking a tape recorder into his
hospital room. He then parlayed this into a wide-selling record
with distasteful and untruthful propaganda. More recently he
seized the opportunity to interview <ent type='PERSON'>Gary Gilmore</ent> before his
execution, practically holding a mike to his mouth while the
commands were being given to the firing squad.
How, the reader may ask, could <ent type='PERSON'>Schiller</ent> become a co-producer of
a major <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent> television show? The answer is simple. He is
available to attack and ridicule the assassination researchers and
reinforce the no-conspiracy idea for the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>.
The <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent> production crew had the full cooperation of the <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>
police in re-enacting the assassination event in Dealey Plaza.
There is no way that could have happened without <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> influence.
The <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> police, quite guilty of cover-up in the case and having
some individual members on the assassination team, would not permit
anyone to film a reenactment of the assassination showing
conspiracy or the truth. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> had to assure them that the
program's editorial position would be anti-conspiracy.
The "Trial of <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>" was given extensive publicity
on TV, in magazines, in newspapers. In <ent type='GPE'>England</ent>, a special article
about it appeared in the <ent type='LOC'>Sunday</ent> magazine section of a <ent type='GPE'>London</ent>
newspaper complete with photographs from the shooting sequence as
filmed.[8] The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> spent an enormous amount of money on the
program and a publicity campaign. There is no way <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>-TV could
have done that on their own. More than 80% of the people believe
there was a conspiracy: why wouldn't <ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent> go along with the 80% of
their viewers and portray the truth? The answer again is simple:
<ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent> is controlled from the very top, probably much higher than the
<ent type='PERSON'>Sam Jaffe</ent> level, by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>.</p>

<p> Other TV Shows</p>

<p> Both <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> are planning major TV specials on the
assassinations. <ent type='ORG'>CBS</ent> is planning a show on <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>. The
theme will be that <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> was right and that both
<ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent> were lone nuts. Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Paley</ent> and Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Salant</ent> are the
<ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> people calling the shots. <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent> is planning a show on Martin
Luther <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> which will have a section on the assassination. Even
though Abbey Mann is directing the show and he would like to bring
out some of the facts, it is certain that the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> members of <ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>,
including <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Wald, will not permit any conclusions about Ray's
innocence or information about <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>-<ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent> or <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Youngblood</ent></ent>
(the real assassins) to be included.</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Priscilla</ent> McMillan--<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> Agent</p>

<p> One of the more remarkable things about the massive 1977
campaign of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> is their blatant use of freelance
writers and news reporters who are well known <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agents to nearly
anyone who has taken the time to pay attention. Three agents are
<ent type='PERSON'>Priscilla</ent> McMillan and her husband, George McMillan, and Jeremiah
O'<ent type='PERSON'>Leary</ent> of the "<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Star</ent>." <ent type='PERSON'>Priscilla</ent> (in particular) is so
obviously an agent that even <ent type='PERSON'>Dick Cavett</ent> indirectly accused her of
being one when she appeared on his show with <ent type='LOC'>Marina</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> to plug
her new book.
The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> decided the perfect time to publish McMillan's book[9],
which had been completed for several years. A publisher under <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
control was selected, and the book was published in time for the
December committee budget vote. The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> arranged that <ent type='LOC'>Marina</ent>
appear with <ent type='PERSON'>Pat</ent> on several national TV shows. <ent type='PERSON'>Priscilla</ent> had <ent type='LOC'>Marina</ent>
well rehearsed for these shows--she even retold the old lies about
<ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> shooting at <ent type='ORG'>General Walker</ent>. The commentators selected to
interview both women, including <ent type='PERSON'>Dick Cavett</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>David Hartmann</ent> (<ent type='ORG'>ABC</ent>),
and <ent type='PERSON'>Tom Snyder</ent> (<ent type='ORG'>NBC</ent>) had their orders to deal delicately with them
and not to ask any embarrassing questions. <ent type='PERSON'>Cavett</ent> came closest
with his essentially accusatory question about whether <ent type='PERSON'>Priscilla</ent>
was a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agent.
No one asked <ent type='LOC'>Marina</ent> the one embarrassing question she would have
had the greatest difficulty answering regarding the picture of
<ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> holding the rifle and the <ent type='NORP'>communist</ent> newspaper that <ent type='LOC'>Marina</ent>
claimed she took of him: "How was it possible for you to have
taken a photograph that since has been demonstrated to be a
composite of three photographs, with your husband's head attached
to someone else's body at the chin line?" (flashing on the screen
<ent type='PERSON'>Fred Newcomb</ent>'s slide showing the chin level discontinuity). <ent type='PERSON'>Cavett</ent>
actually flashed the fake photograph on the screen at the beginning
of his show, but he never mentioned it.
This monumental <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> effort that involved controlling at least
three TV networks, a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> publisher, <ent type='LOC'>Marina</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>, a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agent,
<ent type='PERSON'>Priscilla</ent> McMillan, an enormous amount of time and money, and a
special book review by the "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times"[10] demonstrates how
much power the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> has.
Some of those people who watched "Good Morning <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>" and the
"Tomorrow Show" and the "<ent type='PERSON'>Dick Cavett</ent> Show" (three different types
of national viewing audiences) who believe the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent> theory
and <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> had those beliefs reinforced by <ent type='PERSON'>Priscilla</ent>
McMillan and <ent type='LOC'>Marina</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>. It is wise for researchers, the Select
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> and others who know what is really
going on, not to underestimate this power of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>.</p>

<p> Fensterwald's Book</p>

<p> A book by <ent type='PERSON'>Bud Fensterwald</ent> appeared in 1977 under the sponsorship
of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>.[11] This clever effort on the part of one of the CIA's
best agents was designed to throw people off the track who have a
somewhat deeper interest in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination. It was meant to
divert attention away from the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> by omitting at least twelve of
the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> conspirators who were in the files of <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> to
Investigate <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> (co-founded by <ent type='PERSON'>Fensterwald</ent> and the
author in 1968).
No excuse can be given for leaving these key people out of the
book, because the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> had extensive files on most of them. Bud
<ent type='PERSON'>Fensterwald</ent> even had a personal correspondent relationship to the
key informant of the group, <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Case <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent>. The twelve are:
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Emilio Santana</ent>, Manuel Garcia <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>, Guy
Gabaldin, <ent type='PERSON'>Mary Hope</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Case <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Harry Dean</ent>, Ronald
<ent type='ORG'>Augustinovich</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Beckham</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Fred <ent type='PERSON'>Lee</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Crisman</ent></ent>, <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>, and <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent>
Lawrence. All of them were included in a description of the
details of the assassination team earlier in this book and in an
article by the author.[12]
<ent type='ORG'>Zebra Books</ent>, the publisher of Fensterwald's book, is a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>-controlled organization that has also published another
disinformation book, "Appointment in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>," by Hugh
Mac<ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>ald.[13] In both cases, the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> intended to misdirect
attention away from the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> participants while at the same time
admitting conspiracy. There is no way the story in Mac<ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>ald's
book can be true. It maintains that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> at least planned to
fire from the sixth floor window of the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent> Building. As all good
researchers know, the photographs of the window, inside and
outside, prove there was no one firing from that window that day.</p>

<p> The de Mohrenschildt Murder</p>

<p> The Murder Inc. branch of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> killed George de Mohrenschildt
when he became too dangerous for them. The media branch of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>
then undertook a campaign to discredit <ent type='PERSON'>Willem Oltmans</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>NOS</ent>-TV
(in <ent type='GPE'>Holland</ent>) who happened to be in possession of a series of video
and audio tapes of de Mohrenschildt that will be very damaging for
the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>.
The de Mohrenschildt murder has so far been concealed by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>
with the help of the media and portrayed as the suicide of a man
who had become insane. As <ent type='PERSON'>Willem Oltmans</ent>' book clearly
demonstrates[14] de Mohrenschildt was quite sane when he
disappeared from <ent type='GPE'>Belgium</ent>. He was in the process of giving Ed
Epstein a story about his involvement in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination when
he was murdered in <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent>.</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>ald <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>aldson's Disappearance</p>

<p> General <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>ald <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>aldson, alias <ent type='PERSON'>Dimitri Dimitrov</ent> alias Jim
Adams, was intimately acquainted with the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> people who planned
JFK's assassination. He was in <ent type='GPE'>Holland</ent> to tell his story to <ent type='ORG'>NOS</ent>-TV
and <ent type='PERSON'>Willem Oltmans</ent>. He told <ent type='NORP'>Oltmans</ent> that <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Allen</ent> <ent type='GPE'>Dulles</ent></ent> was the key
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> man in planning JFK's assassination. (<ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>aldson had been
brought to the U.S. as a double agent during <ent type='EVENT'>World War</ent> II by
<ent type='PERSON'>Franklin</ent> Roosevelt.) He held back his knowledge of the
assassination conspiracy until the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> was formed. He
then took his information to <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent>, who brought him to President
<ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> rather than having him questioned by the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> or
the <ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent> sub-committee. <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>aldson had a
meeting in which <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent> talked both of them into keeping <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>aldson's
information under wraps.
When de Mohrenschildt was killed, <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>aldson decided it was time
to make his information public and to offer it to the Select
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>. He approached <ent type='NORP'>Oltmans</ent>, asked that his identity be kept
secret, told <ent type='ORG'>NOS</ent> his story, and then remained in <ent type='GPE'>Holland</ent> while
<ent type='NORP'>Oltmans</ent> attempted to tell the story to President <ent type='PERSON'>Carter</ent>. <ent type='NORP'>Oltmans</ent>
revealed <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>aldson's identity on <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n TV and to the Select
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> when <ent type='PERSON'>Carter</ent> refused to listen to the story. <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>aldson
then moved to <ent type='GPE'>England</ent>, and subsequently disappeared from a <ent type='GPE'>London</ent>
hotel, leaving large unpaid bills at both his <ent type='GPE'>London</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>Amsterdam</ent>
hotels. The possibility is very good that he has gone the same
route as de Mohrenschildt, murdered by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>.</p>

<p> Attacks on the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent></p>

<p> One of a series of attacks on the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> in November
and December, leading up to the December vote on the 1978 budget,
took place in the form of an article by probable <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agent George
<ent type='PERSON'>Lardner</ent>, Jr., one of the Select Committee's biggest enemies. He is
one of the PCG's stable of reporters. <ent type='PERSON'>Lardner</ent> wrote an article for
the <ent type='LOC'>Sunday</ent> "<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>" on November 6, 1977, portraying the
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> as engaging in random, uncoordinated activity,
interrogating witnesses from the <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> investigation (which
<ent type='PERSON'>Lardner</ent> labelled, "the zany <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> investigation", and "the
fruitless investigation"). The "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Times," "<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Star</ent>"
and other media can be expected to open up all barrels under <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>
direction. The general theme will no doubt be that <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>
has done nothing at all and that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> acted alone.[15]
If <ent type='PERSON'>Council Blakey</ent> or Chairman <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent>, or <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> subcommittee
Chairman <ent type='PERSON'>Preyer</ent> try to respond to these attacks they will be ripped
to shreds by the PCG's media people. As the author pointed out in
part I of this chapter, the only chance <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>
have to keep the investigation going is to expose the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> and their
media control, from the top down. Otherwise <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> cannot
win the battle.</p>

<p>____________________</p>

<p> [1] <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> (<ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>) defined in prior articles and one book
by the author, as follows:</p>

<p> The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> includes all organizations and individuals who
knowingly participated in any of the domestic political
assassinations or attempted assassinations, or in any of the
efforts to cover-up the truth about those assassinations. This
includes a large number of murders of witnesses and participants.
The assassinations involved include, but are not necessarily
limited to the following:</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent>, George
<ent type='PERSON'>Wallace</ent> and Mary Jo Kopechne.</p>

<p> The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> is a much larger group than just the clandestine parts
of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>, or the <ent type='ORG'>Secret Team</ent> as defined by L.
Fletcher Prouty. It would however, include all those members of
the <ent type='ORG'>Secret Team</ent> or the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> or the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> falling under the
definition.</p>

<p> [2] The author's contentions about media control by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> have
appeared in one self-published book and several articles:</p>

<p> (a) Book: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3," R.E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>,
self-published, <ent type='ORG'>Hartsdale</ent>, N.Y., 1976. (First Edition. This
Third Edition contains chapters 15-17 plus the Appendix which
were written after 1977. --Editor)
(b) Articles: "The <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n News Media and the Assassination of
President <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>: Accessories After <ent type='ORG'>Fact</ent>," R.E.
<ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, "<ent type='ORG'>Computers and Automation</ent>," June, July, 1973.
(c) "The <ent type='ORG'>Central <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Agency</ent></ent> and the 'The <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>
Times,'" R.E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>. (Using pseudonym <ent type='PERSON'>Samuel</ent> F. <ent type='ORG'>Thurston</ent>)
"<ent type='ORG'>Computers and Automation</ent>," July, 1971. Republished in "People
and the Pursuit of <ent type='ORG'>Truth</ent>," May, 1977.
(d) "<ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>ional Investigation of Political <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> in
<ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States: The Two Approaches: From the Bottom Up vs.
From the Top Down," R.E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, "<ent type='ORG'>People and the Pursuit</ent> of
<ent type='ORG'>Truth</ent>," May, 1977.</p>

<p> [3] The two official investigations of the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> assassination
referred to here are:</p>

<p> (a) The investigation by the office of the district attorney of
<ent type='GPE'>Orleans</ent> <ent type='GPE'>Paris</ent>h, <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent>, La. 1966 to 1969 (<ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>).
(b) The investigation by the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>
of the U.S. <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives 1976-1977.</p>

<p> The investigations by the <ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent>-Hart subcommittee of the
<ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> committee and the Ervin <ent type='EVENT'>Watergate</ent> committee were never
really approved by <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>, and so lacked the power and
influence to become a threat to the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>.</p>

<p> [4] "The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>Press</ent>," Carl <ent type='PERSON'>Bernstein</ent>, "Rolling <ent type='ORG'>Stone</ent>," October
4, 1977. A copy of the full unedited manuscript of this article
was also made available to the author. The "Rolling <ent type='ORG'>Stone</ent>"
version had selected names omitted.</p>

<p> [5] Bernstein's article also describes the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> influence over several
other media organizations without naming the top executives.
These are:
"<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent> Tribune"
"Saturday <ent type='ORG'>Evening Post</ent>"
"<ent type='ORG'>Scripps Howard</ent> Newspapers"
"Associated <ent type='ORG'>Press</ent>"
"<ent type='ORG'>United Press</ent> International"
"<ent type='GPE'>Reuters</ent>"
"<ent type='GPE'>Miami</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Herald</ent>"
And a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> official told <ent type='PERSON'>Bernstein</ent>, "that's just a small part of
the list."</p>

<p> [6] The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> document was obtained by <ent type='PERSON'>Harold Weisberg</ent> under the
Freedom of Information Act. It is dated 4/1/67 and labelled
"<ent type='ORG'>Dispatch</ent> to Chiefs, Certain Stations and Bases." Document
Number 1035-960 for "FOIA Review" on September 1976. Object:
Countering Criticism of the "<ent type='ORG'>Warren Report</ent>."</p>

<p> [7] "The Scavengers and Critics of the <ent type='ORG'>Warren Report</ent>," Lawrence
<ent type='PERSON'>Schiller</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Dell Publishing</ent> Co., <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>, 1967.</p>

<p> [8] "The Big If," "<ent type='GPE'>London</ent> <ent type='LOC'>Sunday</ent> Times," September 18, 1977.</p>

<p> [9] "<ent type='LOC'>Marina</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Lee</ent>," <ent type='PERSON'>Pat</ent>ricia McMillan, Harper &amp; Row, 1977.</p>

<p>[10] A review of the McMillan book appeared in the "<ent type='LOC'>Sunday</ent> <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>
Times" book review section on November 6, 1977. It praised the
book to the skys, backed up <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>, and severely
attacked the researchers and the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>.</p>

<p>[11] "Coincidence or Conspiracy," <ent type='PERSON'>Bernard Fensterwald</ent>, Jr., Zebra
Books, <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>, 1977.</p>

<p>[12] (a) "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3," <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>,
self-published, 1976.</p>

<p> (b) "The Assassination of President <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>: The
Involvement of the <ent type='ORG'>Central <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Agency</ent></ent> in the Plans
and the Cover-Up", <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> -- "People and the
Pursuit of <ent type='ORG'>Truth</ent>," May, 1975.</p>

<p>[13] "Appointment in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>," Hugh C. <ent type='PERSON'>McDonald</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Zebra Books</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>,
1975.</p>

<p>[14] "George de Mohrenschildt," <ent type='PERSON'>Willem Oltmans</ent>, Published in The
<ent type='GPE'>Netherlands</ent>, Unpublished in <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States.</p>

<p>[15] This chapter originally appeared as the article "<ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>ional
Investigation of Political <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States:
The Two Approaches: From the Bottom Up vs. From the Top Down,"
by the author in "<ent type='ORG'>People and the Pursuit</ent> of <ent type='ORG'>Truth</ent>," May, 1977.
Since the original article was written, in November 1977 the
Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> decided that the budget money approved in 1977
was sufficient to carry over a few months into 1978. No budget
request was made in December 1977. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> can now be expected
to continue its attacks until the spring of 1978 when the
budget request will be made. (January 4, 1978)</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p>--
daveus rattus </p>

<p> yer friendly neighborhood ratman</p>

<p> KOYAANISQATSI</p>

<p> ko.yaa.nis.qatsi (from <ent type='EVENT'>the Hopi Language</ent>) n. 1. crazy life. 2. life
in turmoil. 3. life out of balance. 4. life disintegrating.
5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.</p>

<p>From dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com Wed Jun 17 07:55:35 1992
Received: by icaen.uiowa.edu ( 5.52 (84)/1.1) id AA07136
on Wed, 17 Jun 92 07:55:31 CDT.
Received: from pl122c.eecs.lehigh.edu by ns-mx.uiowa.edu (5.64.jnf/920408)
on Wed, 17 Jun 92 07:57:09 -0500 id AA07930 with SMTP
Received: from SGI.COM by PL122c.EECS.Lehigh.EDU (5.61/1.34)
id AA29041; Wed, 17 Jun 92 08:43:40 -0400
Received: from [192.102.132.11] by sgi.sgi.com via SMTP (911016.SGI/910110.SGI)
for <ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122C.EECS.LEHIGH.EDU id AA13139; Wed, 17 Jun 92 05:46:23 -0700
Received: by ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (920110.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
for @sgi.sgi.com:<ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122C.EECS.LEHIGH.EDU id AA07406; Wed, 17 Jun 92 05:46:21 -0700
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 92 05:46:21 -0700
From: dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (dave "who can do? ratmandu!" ratcliffe)
<info type="Message-ID"> 9206171246.AA07406@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com</info>
To: <ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122c.EECS.Lehigh.EDU
Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (9/11)
Status: RO</p>

<p>Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (9/11)
Summary: we were robbed of our capability of electing a president we wanted
Keywords: part 9 of 11: chapter 16
Lines: 867</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> 1979: The <ent type='ORG'><ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent></ent> (1)</p>

<p> Chapter 16
1984 Here We Come</p>

<p> George <ent type='PERSON'>Orwell</ent> undoubtedly did not realize how accurate his 1984
scenario would be by the year 1979. As 1978 drew to a close,
events in <ent type='GPE'>America</ent> made Orwell's descriptions of such concepts as
Newspeak and a supposedly open but actually closed society, very
close to reality. By 1984, now only five short years away,
Orwell's scenario will apparently be right on the nose.
Any doubts about who is in charge of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent> and how effective
they have become in creating our actual version of Newspeak,
disappeared as the <ent type='PERSON'>Carter</ent> administration, <ent type='ORG'>congress</ent>, the courts, and
the media, all combined their coordinated efforts to cover up and
distort our current history. The hopes of thousands of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>ns
that their only true representatives in government, the members of
the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>, would expose the fabric of lies about our recent history
and <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent>'s activities were dashed to smithereens
by the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representative's Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on
<ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>. The hopes that <ent type='PERSON'>Carter</ent> might be on our side, faded
away in 1978 and the intentions of the executive branch were made
quite clear by the new directors of the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>.
The murder incorporated group within <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent>
continued to murder people in 1978, with efficiency and dispatch.
The presidential race in 1980 has been foreclosed to <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
for a long time, but the chances that any candidate, not willing to
extend the assassination cover-ups, could be nominated and elected,
are close to zero.
The <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people, by and large, do not understand or
appreciate very much of this. The Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> teamed with the
media and by holding public hearings with almost no live coverage
they convinced the majority of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>ns that there was no
conspiracy in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case and that <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent></ent> shot Martin
Luther <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> although he might have had help from his brothers. The
public has never heard of most of the eight men assassinated in
1977 and 1978 by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, nor do they appreciate the fact that
future assassinations will be carried off by the same bunch.
How the hell did the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> control <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> and the Select
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>? It wasn't easy and they very nearly didn't.
There may also be another explanation about the committee's
actions in which the word "control" is too strong. Influence,
intimidation by throwing out implied warnings or threats, or just
plain making it obvious that personal danger could be involved,
might have been used. The process was very involved and it made
use of a number of techniques and approaches, including some we can
only guess at in 1979. However, a number of the PCG's methods are
known and will be described herein.
The executive branch control by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> was exposed even before
Carter's election by those whose eyes were open wide enough to see
it. This author frankly admits to partially closed eyes until
1978. The significance of <ent type='ORG'>the Bilderberg Society</ent> and the
Trilateral <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> was not obvious until <ent type='PERSON'>Carter</ent> had been in
office for a couple of years. Now, it is very obvious that he is
under the complete domination of the men who really run the U.S.A.,
and that he will never do anything to expose the truth about the
political assassinations or their cover-ups.
The latest indication of where the <ent type='PERSON'>Carter</ent> administration stands
was the testimony given by <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> director <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> H. <ent type='PERSON'>Webster</ent> to the
Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on December 11, 1978. He said that the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> would
freeze the scene and take full immediate control of the
investigation of any future presidential assassination or that of
any other elected U.S. leader.
In case anyone has any doubt about what he meant by "freeze the
scene", <ent type='PERSON'>Webster</ent> went on to say, "One purpose of the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>
investigation would be to lay to rest untrue conspiratorial
questions that have a way of rising, and avoid the sort of mistakes
that followed the assassination of President <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>."[1] In other
words, the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> will suppress or destroy any evidence of conspiracy
even if they were not involved in the assassination itself. One
such "mistake" in the <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> murder surfaced in December 1978 when
<ent type='PERSON'>Earl Golz</ent> of the "<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> Morning News" found a movie that the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>
failed to "freeze". It was taken by a man named <ent type='PERSON'>Bronson</ent> and it
shows two men, not one, in the sixth floor window of the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent> just
five minutes before the shots were fired. One of the men is
wearing a red shirt. That filmed evidence matches the still photo
taken by an unknown photographer earlier that morning, and
developed at a <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> photo lab by Ed <ent type='PERSON'>Foley</ent>, the lab owner. The
author found the photo and obtained a print of it in 1967. The
<ent type='PERSON'>Foley</ent> photo, as it became known, shows two men in the sixth floor
window, one with a black shirt and one with a bright red shirt.
Mr. red shirt matches the description of the man in the <ent type='PERSON'>Bronson</ent>
film. He is not <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>. Neither is the man in the
black shirt. He was most probably Buel <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Wes</ent>ley <ent type='PERSON'>Frazier</ent></ent>, the man who
drove <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> to work on November 22, 1963. The facial profile and
black shirt match photos of <ent type='PERSON'>Frazier</ent> and another man entitled to be
on that sixth floor, were there around 10 AM and at 12:25, five
minutes before the shots were fired. Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Webster</ent> has in mind
rounding up all such evidence and destroying it right away in the
next assassination.
The evidence discussed in earlier chapters of this book, also
not "frozen" by the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>, proves that the "snipers nest" was no
snipers nest at all, but just an area where workers on that floor
were piling cartons to allow the floor laying crew at the west end
of that floor to do their job.
<ent type='PERSON'>Webster</ent> would like the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> to grab such evidence the next time,
and destroy it before "conspiracy rumors" get started. The <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>
came much closer to doing this in <ent type='GPE'>Memphis</ent>, but after all, they were
involved directly in the planning and execution of the
assassination of Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent>. They had a much greater incentive for
cover-up in that murder. <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> Sullivan's Division Five, at the
behest of J. <ent type='PERSON'>Edgar Hoover</ent>, carried out the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> assassination using
<ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Youngblood</ent></ent> plus others.
Returning to the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, I must switch over to a more
personal tone because of my direct involvement with the group from
its inception. I helped <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent> in the early days of 1975
and 1976 when the committee was just a wild dream for most people.
I made a presentation to <ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Downing</ent>'s staff members who
eventually became part of the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> staff. <ent type='PERSON'>Mark Lane</ent>
arranged that in the summer of 1976. The photographic evidence of
conspiracy in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case was as overwhelming to them and to <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent>
as it was to anyone who has taken the five or six hours or so to
look at it. I then became an advisor to <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent> when the committee was formed and spent the months from
November 1976 to July 1977 helping them with the photographic
evidence and with evidence collected by <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> to
Investigate <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> including <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>'s evidence.
If <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent> or <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, or <ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Downing</ent> had
stayed with the committee their work would not have been
controlled. Sprague's loyal deputy counsels, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent></ent>, in
charge of the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> investigation and <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Lehner</ent></ent> in charge of the <ent type='PERSON'>MLK</ent>
investigation had already begun to get at the real evidence of the
<ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and CIA's involvement in the two
cases and in the cover-ups. The committee members were already
becoming very suspicious of the two agencies. <ent type='PERSON'>Walter Fauntroy</ent>,
chairman of the <ent type='PERSON'>MLK</ent> sub-committee, even dared to speak out about
the CIA's influence. He was beaten into the ground by the PCG's
members in the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>.
So <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Lehner</ent> and others who dared
take on the intelligence portions of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, had to go. They were
forced out by one of the ancient techniques employed by the <ent type='NORP'>Romans</ent>
known as divide and conquer. Once <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent> became convinced
that <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> was working for the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, he
attacked <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> bitterly. <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> knew there was a <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> and he knew
who had murdered <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and why. <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> had to go. He was
made to look like a paranoid fool and forced out by the key <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>
members of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>. Two <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> agents, Mr. Z and Harry <ent type='PERSON'>Livingston</ent>e,
helped convince him that <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> was a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> man.
Mr. Z was brought in by <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> as a lawyer for his committee and
worked on Henry's beliefs about <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>. Over some
weeks he convinced <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> that <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> was a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
operative. He was supported in this activity by Harry <ent type='PERSON'>Livingston</ent>e
(later author of "High Treason"). Harry <ent type='PERSON'>Livingston</ent>e engaged in
various plagiaristic activities and scams, and over quite a period
of time he worked on <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> to convince him that <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>
was a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> operative. At the same time <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> was developing his
beliefs with the help of Mr. Z and Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Livingston</ent>e, <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A.
<ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and his staff were developing skepticism about Henry's
integrity. The net result was both men resigned. In the next
year, 1978, the author appeared with <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> on a cable
television broadcast hosted by <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> Gandolfo in <ent type='GPE'>New York City</ent>,
named "Assassionation <ent type='GPE'>USA</ent>," and the three of them had a detailed
discussion about Sprague's reasons for resigning from the
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>. To some extent his thinking was influenced by his
skepticism about <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent>'s integrity.
Once <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent> took over as chairman, Sprague's men were
gradually calmed down, and the so-called search for the right chief
counsel was underway. It is difficult to detect what was going on
during that spring of 1977. Suffice it to say that the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> was
undoubtedly pulling out every stop to get their own chief counsel
into the committee and to build up the case for getting rid of
<ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Lehner</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>ovan <ent type='PERSON'>Gaye</ent>, and others who knew too much or
who had the gall to go up against the agencies.
The result of all this hard work by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> was the installation
in July 1977 of Dr. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent></ent> as chief counsel. <ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent>
resigned almost immediately, making Blakey's job a little easier,
but <ent type='PERSON'>Lehner</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Gaye</ent> had to be fired by <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent>. Many others were
also weeded out. We may never know exactly what they all knew or
how they were forced out, because of the use of one of the PCG's
cleverest techniques and one of the most insidious.
Each committee staff member, each consultant and each committee
member was required to sign, as a condition of continuing
employment or membership on the committee, a nondisclosure
agreement. Now, nondisclosure agreements are nothing new,
especially in classified situations or in sensitive or patent or
copyright situations. The committee's nondisclosure agreement was
however, very unusual. Many well-known attorneys have pronounced
it illegal. <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> saw it and said he would absolutely
never have required the staff to sign anything like it. He said it
was illegal and unenforcable in several of its clauses. The worst
thing about it, or the best thing, from the viewpoint of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>,
are the paragraphs giving control over the committee to the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and
the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>.[2]
The committee, under <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, planned to investigate the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and
the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> in regard to both assassinations and the cover-ups. In
fact, <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> had put both agencies on notice to that effect.
Subpoenas were being prepared for access to all of their withheld
information. Investigations of the CIA's role in the <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City
part of the assassination conspiracy, as well as Oswald's and
Ruby's connections with both agencies were under way.
The <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> agreement automatically put a stop to all of that.
Here is one excerpt from the agreement.
"I (the staff member, committee member, or consultant) hereby
agree never to divulge, publish or reveal by words, conduct or
otherwise, . . . any information pertaining to intelligence sources
or methods as designated by <ent type='ORG'>the Director</ent> of Central <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent>,
or any confidential information that is received by the Select
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> or that comes into my possession by virtue of my position
with the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, to any person not a member of the Select
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, or, after the Select Committee's termination, by such
manner as the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives may determine or, in the
absence of a determination by the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>, in such manner as the
<ent type='ORG'>Agency</ent> or <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> from which the information originated may
determine."
In other words if the committee or an individual staff member,
or a consultant discovered that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> or part of it, was involved
in the assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, or that the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> was in part
or in whole responsible for the death of <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent>, or
that either agency was guilty of covering up the conspiracies in
both cases, the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> would have the right to prevent
these findings from being revealed to anyone outside the committee.
Furthermore, those agencies are still in existence today while the
Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> is not, so that the nondisclosure agreement which
goes on in perpetuity, gives both the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> continuing
complete control over the individuals who signed it.
Another excerpt reads as follows:
"The Chairman of the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> shall consult with the
Director of Central <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> for the purpose of the Chairman's
determination as to whether or not the material (any material
obtained by the signer of the agreement) contains information that
I pledge not to disclose." If that sounds like Catch-22, it is.
The interpretation that could be placed on that clause is that the
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> has the right to decide what evidence in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>MLK</ent>
assassinations should be withheld on grounds that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> itself
determines.
How could the committee possibly have investigated the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> under
those terms and conditions? The answer is, they could not and did
not.
Can anyone doubt that the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> prepared the agreement, implanted
<ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent>, and coerced or blackmailed or threatened the Chairman and
the rest of the committee until they agreed to have everyone sign
it!
The most insidious part of the agreement is the clause that
could be described as the threat, or blackmail clause. It is
perhaps this clause that has closed the mouths and pens of all the
ex-staff members who knew what was going on, but who signed the
agreement. That clause reads as follows:
"In addition to any rights for criminal prosecution or for
injunctive relief <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> Stated Government may have for
violation of this agreement, <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States Government may file
a civil suit in an appropriate court for damages as a consequence
of a breach of this agreement. The costs of any civil suit brought
by <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States for breach of this agreement, including court
costs, investigative expenses, and reasonable attorney fees, shall
be borne by any defendant who loses such suit." . . . "I hereby
agree that in any suit by <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States Government for
injunctive or monetary relief pursuant to the terms of this
agreement, personal jurisdiction shall obtain and venue shall lie
in <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States District Court for <ent type='GPE'>the District</ent> of <ent type='GPE'>Columbia</ent>,
or in any other appropriate United States District Court in which
<ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States may elect to bring suit. I further agree that
the law of <ent type='GPE'>the District</ent> of <ent type='GPE'>Columbia</ent> shall govern the interpretation
and construction of this agreement."
Those readers who have followed the performance of the U.S.
courts in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>MLK</ent> cases through the years, will recognize
the trap in those last two sentences. Any ex-staffer or
consultant, or even a <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>man would have about as much chance
against a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>/<ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>-directed suit in a court of their choice, as the
man in the moon. <ent type='GPE'>The United</ent> States Government, in this clause, is
not your government or mine. It is <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='ORG'>Power</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent></ent>. You
can bet they would select a court already programmed for decision.
The clause is incredible on the face of it.
This was a mighty powerful weapon and the committee used it to a
maximum extent in carrying out a masterful job of continuing the
two cover-ups. It was masterful in the sense that they were not as
bold and bald about it as <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> or the <ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> or the Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> and the courts have been in
the <ent type='PERSON'>MLK</ent> case. Their conclusions are inconclusive; sort of. They
say that to determine whether or not there really were conspiracies
in the two cases was beyond their means and the time they had
available. Nevertheless, the preponderant weight of the public
testimony before the committee was toward no conspiracy in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
case and a, "<ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> shot him, but might have been helped," conclusion
in the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> case. But the hold they exercised over the staff and
consultants in directing their investigations away from conspiracy
was very smoothly done, with the nondisclosure agreement always
lurking in the background as a possible threat.
The agreement was used as an excuse by the committee to avoid
answering questions. For example, I wrote to <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent> on April
5, October 30, and November 24, 1978 asking why the committee had
not called several important witnesses in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case, including
<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Case <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> had told me in a letter written on May
15, 1978, that the suggestion that <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent> be called was being
followed and that the staff was being alerted about him. <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent>
took no action and did not contact <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent> or <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Russell</ent>, the
only person who knew where <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent> was to be found.[3]
<ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> sent me this reply to my inquiries about the witnesses on
December 41978.</p>

<p> "Dear Mr. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>:
Thank you for your letter of November 24, 1978. I am aware of
the amount of time you have spent analyzing the assassination of
President <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and your interest in the work of the
Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> since its inception. However, I
regret that *under our Rules*, it is impossible for us to respond
to your letter in a manner which would reveal the substance or
procedure of our investigation, or the names of those persons who
will be called to testify before the committee. The committee is,
of course, grateful for your suggestions and those of the many
other concerned citizens who have taken the time to write."
(Underlining for emphasis is the author's)
Sincerely,
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent>
Chairman</p>

<p> "The Rules" <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> refers to include the nondisclosure
agreement. This letter implies that subsequent to December 4,
1978, the committee might be calling more <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> witnesses. Of
course, that didn't happen. Except for some high level <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>, Secret
Service and other government officials testifying about
Presidential safety and future assassination investigations, the
committee's show was already over, and <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent> was well aware
of that. I'm sure <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent> had his own personal reasons, not
necessarily sinister, for making that reply.
The committee had no intention of risking the appearance of any
of the more knowledgeable or involved witnesses whose names I had
given them in October 1978 as well as in May 1978 and November
1978. A list of these names appears later in this chapter.
<ent type='ORG'>The <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> proved how easy it is to avoid finding a
conspiracy if you don't look for one, even one that seems to jump
up and smack you in the face. The Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> did this in
spades. The procedure was orchestrated by <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent></ent> by various
means. One of his methods was to split up the hard core Dealey
Plaza evidence and investigations into sections. He formed an
advisory panel of outside "experts", for each section; one on
medical evidence, photographic evidence, ballistics evidence,
trajectory evidence, etc. Then he made sure there was almost no
coordination, cross talk, or feedback among the panels or even
among the staff members assigned to each section, except at his
level.
There was a great amount of internal complaining about this, but
to no avail. Again, the nondisclosure agreement worked wonders.
An investigating team, in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>, headed by the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
task force leader <ent type='PERSON'>Cliff Fenton</ent>, was never allowed to surface either
publicly or internally to other staff people or the committee.
Their findings alone would have blown Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> and his <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>/<ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>
friends right out of the water. They spent a lot of time with Jim
<ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>, and with many of the witnesses and the assassination
participants described in Chapter 5 of this book. The public does
not even know who these staffers are, and undoubtedly will not hear
or see what they discovered either in the committee's final report
or in the public hearings.
The separation of assignments worked wonders in explaining away
much of the hard evidence of conspiracy. Some of it during the
public hearings was like watching a magic show, for knowledgeable
researchers. For example, the medical panel and staff members
determined that the path of bullet 399 through JFK's body rear to
front was slightly upward, given that he was sitting erect. But
since the medical panel and the photographic panel were never
permitted coordination, the medical panel never realized that <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
was sitting erect at the time bullet 399 supposedly struck.
Neither panel was allowed to communicate with the trajectory panel,
so that their representative <ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Canning</ent> testified that bullet
399's trajectory backward from JFK's body, passed through the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent>
sixth floor window. That erudite gentleman, a government employee
from <ent type='ORG'>NASA</ent>, was forced to make up his own medical evidence, which he
proceeded to do. He merely moved the exit wound in JFK's throat
down somewhat and the back of the neck wound up somewhat from where
Dr. <ent type='GPE'>Baden</ent> of the medical panel had placed them. He then tilted <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
forward at about 17 or 18 degrees based on his personal observation
of one photograph, rather than on the photographic panel's
conclusions. <ent type='ORG'>Presto</ent>; the trajectory tilted upward and leftward
enough to pass through the sixth floor window.
Another bit of magic was presented by <ent type='PERSON'>Canning</ent> to support the
single bullet theory. He drew a straight line between governor
Connally's back entry wound position and JFK's back entry wound
position and found that the line also passed through the sixth
floor window. To do this he moved Connally on the seat to his left
and <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> to his right, and lifted <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> up a bit on the rear seat.
Again he did this without consultation with the photographic panel.
Some hard evidence was not dealt with at all and other hard
evidence of conspiracy was presented without identifying it as such
and then just left dangling. An example of the former is all of
the photographic evidence cited earlier in this book and in my
"<ent type='ORG'>Computers and Automation</ent>" magazine articles, showing that the
sniper's nest was not a sniper's nest, that no one was in the
window, and that no one could have fired shots from that position
that day. I showed pictures of the nest from the inside and the
window from the outside to the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> sub-committee in July 1977 and I
reviewed them at length for their evidenciary value with the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
staff, notably <ent type='PERSON'>Ken Klein</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Cliff Fenton</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Jackie</ent> Hess,
<ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>ovan <ent type='PERSON'>Gaye</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Pat</ent> Orr, <ent type='PERSON'>Chellie Mason</ent>, and <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>.
So <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> cannot claim they didn't know about these
photos. They saw the <ent type='PERSON'>Foley</ent> photo over a long period of time, and
were no doubt quite embarrassed by the unexpected appearance of the
<ent type='PERSON'>Bronson</ent> film. Not one word about the sixth floor window, the
cartons, the planted shells, the planted rifle, and the extra rifle
found on the roof, the impossible shot, no one in the window when
the shots were fired; not one word was mentioned in the public
hearings about the photos and other evidence. Where was the
photographic panel? Asleep? Frightened by the agreement they
signed?
An example of evidence of conspiracy left dangling was the
testimony given by the photographic panel spokesman, Calvin S.
McCamy. The panel examined all of the photos of <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> during the
early part of the shot sequence, and took a vote on when the first
shot struck <ent type='ORG'>the President</ent>. It came out as around Z189 to Z196.
Perfect. That matches. But no one asked the trajectory panel or
the ballistics spokesman how <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> was able to fire bullet 399
right through the center of that big oak tree at Z189-Z196. Not
even <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> would make that claim, preferring to put
the timing at Z210 or later after <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> came out from behind the
tree.
There were some anxious moments for the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, even
as well orchestrated as the whole farce was. Dr. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Cyril</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Wecht</ent></ent> was
his usual grand self. He blasted the committee. They said he was
part of the medical panel and therefore was asked to present a
minority view. <ent type='PERSON'>Cyril</ent> said they weren't planning to call him until
he demanded to be allowed to testify. They tried to bamboozle him,
to discredit him (a tough assignment), to attack him and to knock
down his testimony. Lawyer <ent type='PERSON'>Gary Cornwell</ent> was particularly
obnoxious in his questioning of Dr. <ent type='ORG'>Wecht</ent>. Favorable witnesses
testifying to no conspiracy were handled with kid gloves and
treated politely or dragged through an obviously rehearsed series
of questions. It was <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> revisited. Two
witnesses they couldn't mistreat were Governor and Mrs. Connally.
They politely and calmly presented believable testimony destroying
the single bullet theory. That didn't bother the committee any
more than it bothered <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>. They resurrected the
theory a few days later when the trajectory panel testified.
Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>Barger</ent> of <ent type='PERSON'>Bolt Baranek</ent> &amp; <ent type='ORG'>Newman</ent> shook them up a little with
his acoustical analysis of the police radio tape that reveals the
sounds of four, not three, shots. If Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>Barger</ent> had been given all
of the facts initially, he probably could have helped prove where
the shots came from. Except for the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> position behind
the fence and the sixth floor <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent> window, he was not told about
any other possible firing points. For example, he knew nothing
about the <ent type='ORG'>Dal Tex</ent> building, the west end roof or high floor of the
<ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent>, or other positions on the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>. In fact, <ent type='PERSON'>Barger</ent> did
not know the location of the motorcycle where the microphone had
been left open, picking up the sound of the shots. His assignment
included a determination of where the motorcycle was, from the
sounds on the tape and sounds made during a re-enactment of the
firing in Dealey Plaza. The only test shots <ent type='PERSON'>Barger</ent> had fired were
from the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent> sixth floor window and from behind the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>
fence. The net result was that he decided the motorcycle was
trailing <ent type='ORG'>the President</ent>ial limousine by 120 feet. No one on the
committee or the photographic panel ever showed <ent type='PERSON'>Barger</ent> the <ent type='PERSON'>Altgens</ent>
photo, the <ent type='ORG'>Hughes</ent> film, the Martin, Nix, Couch, <ent type='NORP'>Weigman</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Bell</ent> or
<ent type='PERSON'>Muchmore</ent> films or any other pictures showing there was no
motorcycle anywhere near 120 feet behind the limousine.[4] Again,
<ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> divided and conquered. <ent type='PERSON'>Barger</ent> told me that if he had known
about the motorcycle trailing the limousine by a few feet, driven
by policeman D.L. <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent>son, who disappeared completely after the
assassination, he could have altered his analysis completely. The
sounds of the last two shots may well have been from the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>
behind the wall, and from the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent> roof or the <ent type='ORG'>Dal Tex</ent> second
floor. Barger's analysis shows that the last shot sound, made by a
rifle occurred just a faction of a second after the next to the
last shot, possibly made by pistol. This would fit a pistol shot
from behind the fence fired almost simultaneously with a rifle shot
from either the <ent type='ORG'>TSBD</ent> west end or <ent type='ORG'>Dal Tex</ent>. The delay of the sound
traveling from <ent type='ORG'>Dal Tex</ent> is about right so that the <ent type='ORG'>Dal Tex</ent> shot
would strike at Z312 and the pistol or rifle shot from the right
front would strike at Z313. Prof. <ent type='PERSON'>Mark Weiss</ent> of <ent type='ORG'>Queens College</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>Barger</ent> were called into an executive session on December 20 after
the hearings were finished. They testified that there were
definitely four shots fired, at least one of which was from the
<ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>.
This new analysis was conducted by <ent type='ORG'>Weiss</ent> independently from the
one done by <ent type='PERSON'>Bolt Baranek</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Newman</ent>. <ent type='ORG'>Weiss</ent> said that his work
proved to a 95% certainty that the third shot was a rifle shot from
a position on the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>. He said the data pinpointed the position
to within two feet. The position was behind the fence, which
eliminates man number two at the corner of the wall and also
eliminates a pistol. However, the photos show man number two did
make a puff of smoke, whether or not he fired a shot.
<ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>man <ent type='PERSON'>Sawyer</ent> broke the news about <ent type='ORG'>Weiss</ent>' testimony during
a radio broadcast in <ent type='GPE'>Michigan</ent>, his home state. A furor broke
loose. The committee went into an executive session Friday
December 22 to discuss what to do since there were only nine days
left to the end of their existence. The radio tape and the <ent type='PERSON'>Bronson</ent>
film seemed to shake them up considerably. Or was it all rehearsed
and planned this way by the committee. It seems incredible that
the 12 members of the committee would be shaken by the sounds from
a tape when they weren't bothered at all by photos of the <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>
window showing that no one was there when the shots were fired.
The committee members could see those photos with their own eyes.
They had to take the word of experts about the sounds on the tape,
which cannot be heard because of the noise of the engine of the
policeman's cycle where the microphone was stuck open.[4] This was
the most blatantly dishonest stunt pulled by <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> during
the <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> period. Yet, the research community cannot complain too
much because it did produce a conspiracy conclusion.
The committee's distortions and omission respecting the hard
Dealey Plaza evidence is overshadowed by the key witnesses that the
committee did not call. None of the players listed in Chapter 5
were called, nor ever mentioned. One key witness, <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Hosty</ent>,
insisted that he testify about Oswald's <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> involvement, but was
turned down. <ent type='ORG'>Hosty</ent> told the "<ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> Morning News," "They don't
want to hear what I have to say."
He might have told them the same story he told the author,
through an intermediary in 1971. Namely, that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> was reporting
to <ent type='ORG'>Hosty</ent> on the assassination plans of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> group based in
<ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City. <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> agent witness, Regis <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> might have given
private interview evidence, but he was killed the day before he was
to meet with the committee.
<ent type='PERSON'>Gordon Novel</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ronald Augustinovich</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Case <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent>, Mary
Hope, Guy Gabaldin, Manuel Garcia <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent>, Emilio
<ent type='ORG'>Santana</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Victor Marchetti</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> Lawrence, Major L.M. <ent type='GPE'>Bloomfield</ent>,
<ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Sergio Arcacha Smith</ent>, Harry <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent>s, <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Hicks</ent>, Sylvia
Odio, <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Braden</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Hosty</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> Du Brueys, <ent type='PERSON'>Louis Ivon</ent>, E.
Howard Hunt and <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent> were not called and no interest was
shown in having them as witnesses. Some key witnesses who were
called were not asked any important questions, or cross examined at
all. <ent type='LOC'>Marina</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> Porter was one of these. Another was Gerald
<ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent> told his standard lies, and no one asked him
about <ent type='PERSON'>Victor Marchetti</ent>'s statement about <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent> protecting Clay
<ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent>, or about E. Howard Hunt and Guy Gabaldin in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City in
October, 1963, or about Harry William's statement that he, <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent>,
Hunt, and <ent type='PERSON'>Lyman Kirkpatrick</ent> were reconsidering another <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>n
invasion at the moment <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> was shot, in a <ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>, D.C., <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
location.
With respect to the assassination of Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent>, the committee
also performed admirably for the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, in this case, the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> wing.
They failed to deal with the important evidence of conspiracy,
failed to call the prime witnesses, and distorted or omitted
evidence. They spent a great amount of time trying to prove,
rather unsuccessfully except for media accounts, that <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl
<ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> was guilty and that he had help from his family and was
possibly financed by some wealthy sountherners.
Briefly, here is the evidence they did not cover. The witnesses
who saw a man in the rooming house--all of whom said it was not
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent></ent>--were not called. <ent type='PERSON'>Charles Stephens</ent>, who was bribed
and coerced by the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> into identifying the man as <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent>, but who was
dead drunk, and saw nothing, was not put on the stand with his
common law wife <ent type='PERSON'>Grace</ent> and a cab driver who saw how drunk he was.
Confronting his testimony by cross examination and by using counter
witnesses should have been done.
The three bar maids in <ent type='GPE'>Montreal</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>Atlanta</ent> who saw <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent> together were not called. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> Bradford <ent type='ORG'>Huie</ent></ent> found them
and <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> knew where they were. The committee didn't look for them.
<ent type='ORG'>Huie</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Foreman</ent> were not put on the stand and asked all of the key
questions about why <ent type='ORG'>Huie</ent> changed his entire approach toward <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> as
soon as I showed him the <ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent>-<ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> photos. Foreman's role was
never explored under fierce cross examination as it would be if
<ent type='PERSON'>Mark Lane</ent> were able to get a new trial for <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent>. He should have
been asked why he told <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> he got the <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> photos from the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>
when he actually got them from me!
The <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>-<ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent> sketch comparison, made by <ent type='PERSON'>Bill Turner</ent> and I
in the summer of 1968, should have been produced and shown to
<ent type='PERSON'>Foreman</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Huie</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> and other witnesses.
The complete list of witnesses who saw <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent> together,
as well as the complete list who saw <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> at the gasoline station a
few blocks away from the crime at the time the shot was fired, were
not called. The committee adopted the stance that it was up to
<ent type='PERSON'>Mark Lane</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> to produce those witnesses, as though the
investigation of the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> killing was a trial instead. The
committee, not <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent>, had the responsibility of investigating and
locating those witnesses. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Lehner</ent></ent> wanted to do that, but he was
fired.
The evidence about the rooming house bathroom window as an
impossible firing point, presented so well in <ent type='PERSON'>Harold Weisberg</ent>'s
book "Frame-Up: The <ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent>/<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent></ent> Case," was
either ignored or distorted. The evidence about the trajectory of
the shot was completely distorted. The ballistics, medical and
trajectory panels discussed the vertical angle of difference
between the "grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>" firing point and bathroom window firing
point trajectories to the Lorraine Motel balcony. They stated that
the differential angle between the two trajectories was too small
to determine, from the medical evidence, whether the shot came from
the window or the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>.
But, they failed to discuss the horizontal differential angle
between the two trajectories which was much larger, large enough to
determine the firing point.
They also failed to present a number of witnesses who saw the
actual assassin, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Youngblood</ent></ent>, both before and after he fired
from the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Wayne</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Chastain</ent></ent> should also have been called to
testify about this evidence and those witnesses.
The evidence concerning who <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Youngblood</ent></ent> and <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>-<ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent>
worked for, and their involvement, was not dealt with at all. The
committee should have presented the photographic evidence showing
<ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent> was <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>, and should have asked <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent> and the witnesses who
saw <ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent> to identify him from the <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> photos. <ent type='PERSON'>Jeff</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Paley</ent>
actually showed Frenchy's photo to witnesses in 1968 while Raoul's
face was still fresh in their minds. They recognized the face.
They certainly should have since the sketch of <ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent> was made from
their recollections. They should have called <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> as a witness
in both <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> &amp; <ent type='PERSON'>MLK</ent> cases. I know from an inside source on the
committee that they found <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> alive in 1978. They certainly
knew about <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Youngblood</ent></ent> because they read <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Wayne</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Chastain</ent></ent>'s
series of articles in "Computers and People."
In summary, the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> performed reasonably well on
behalf of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>. There are no public outcrys over what they did
because the media wouldn't air them. <ent type='PERSON'>Mark Lane</ent> held a number of
press conferences during the committee's life span, and no media
organization reported on any of them. The media, of course, were
quite willing servants of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, as they always have been since
1963. The combination of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>, the Select
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> spokesmen for the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> and the cooperative
media is really nearly unbeatable.
Some researchers hoped against hope that the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>,
under <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Preyer</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>Fauntroy</ent>, would still unveil the
truth, as the public hearings began in August. The hopes
disappeared during the first week of hearings on the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> case as
the committee demonstrated quite clearly that they were going to
continue the cover-ups and to get <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> Earl <ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent></ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Mark Lane</ent> in
the bargain. Still, the hopes would not quite die. The letters I
wrote to <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent> in the fall of 1978, expressed the last ditch
thought that maybe they were conducting a charade designed to fool
the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and the rest of the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> into believing they were going
to cover-up the truth. It turned out be for real, no charade.
The eight people assassinated by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> in 1977-78 during the
Select Committee's life span are probably the best proof of who is
in charge of the U.S. and what their intentions are. The murders
are all part of the cover-up efforts and were all successfully
carried out, a la The Parallax View, with very few suspicions
raised on the part of the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n media or the public. They
included <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Sullivan</ent>, Regis <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, George de Mohrenschildt,
<ent type='PERSON'>Sam Giancana</ent>,[5] <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Roselli</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Carlos Prio Socarras</ent>, Thomas
<ent type='NORP'>Karamessines</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Rolando Masferrer</ent>, and an attempt on the life of
<ent type='PERSON'>Larry Flynt</ent>.
Each of these murders was carried out with great success and for
varying reasons. One common thread connects them all. Each man
knew too much about the assassinations of President <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> or
<ent type='PERSON'>Martin Luther King</ent> and the subsequent cover-up conspiracies. All
but <ent type='PERSON'>Flynt</ent> were witnesses to be called by the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> or
ones that had given some information and were scheduled to give
more. Of the nine people including <ent type='PERSON'>Flynt</ent>, the two most important
were <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Sullivan</ent> and Regis <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>.
Regis <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> was one of two <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> agents in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> assigned
as contact men for <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent> in his role as <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> informer.
The other agent was <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> du Brueys. <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Hosty</ent> was his contact
agent in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> knew a lot, but was under strict orders
from the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> not to reveal any of it. He was called as a witness
at the trial of <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> and asked by <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent> whether he
hadn't been searching for <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> under the name <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Bertrand</ent>,
before it was known that <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Bertrand</ent> wanted to hire a lawyer for
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> took executive privilege, a popular
dodge at that time with the <ent type='PERSON'>Nixon</ent> administration. When the judge
pressed him, he said he would have to check with the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and the
attorney general, <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Mitchell</ent>, in <ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>, D.C. Word came
through that he could answer that one question, so he said yes it
was true. He went no further however. The significance is that
the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> knew all about <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent>'s involvement in the assassination
because <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> was reporting back to them as a paid infiltrator of
Shaw's team. There is a distinct possibility that <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> was sent
by <ent type='PERSON'>Hoover</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Sullivan</ent> to <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent> immediately after the
assassination, to help coordinate the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>/<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> cover-up. <ent type='GPE'>Beverly</ent>
Oliver, the Babushka lady, whose film was confiscated by three
government agents on <ent type='LOC'>Sunday</ent> November 24, 1963 at <ent type='ORG'>the Carousel Club</ent>
owned by <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent></ent>, made a tentative identification of Regis
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> from his photograph as one of those three agents. The film
has never surfaced. It should show the assassins on the grassy
<ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> quite clearly since <ent type='GPE'>Beverly</ent> was much closer than either
<ent type='PERSON'>Orville Nix</ent> or <ent type='PERSON'>Marie Muchmore</ent> and had her camera trained on <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> all
the way down Elm Street.
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> died of a supposed heart attack the day before he was to
meet with the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> staff. Heart attacks, as most
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>ns know by now from watching the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> hearings,
and seeing the Parallax View, are easily induced by a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>-developed
pill, which leaves no trace in the autopsy, if there is one.
<ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Sullivan</ent> was eliminated by a clever, but simple
technique. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> agents who killed him knew about his hunting
haunts in New <ent type='GPE'>England</ent>. They also knew about a teenage son of a
state policeman living near Sullivan's country place who liked to
hunt in the same area. Two of them intercepted <ent type='PERSON'>Sullivan</ent> early one
morning as he set out for a walk in the woods. They shot him with
a deer rifle and took his body to a spot in the woods where they
knew the boy would be. They carried a decoy inflated to the shape
resembling a deer and probably acted like one. The boy shot at him
and thought he hit a deer. The agents dropped Sullivan's body at
that spot and left. They accidentally left the pair of gloves one
of them was wearing. The boy went over to the spot in the early
morning semi-darkness, found Sullivan's body, and thought he had
killed him by mistake. He still thinks so. There was no
investigation and no questions asked.
Why was <ent type='PERSON'>Sullivan</ent> killed? As mentioned before, <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Sullivan</ent>
was J. <ent type='PERSON'>Edgar Hoover</ent>s' right hand man in charge of Division Five,
the FBI's clandestine domestic operation that included an
assassination squad. Every likelihood exists that <ent type='PERSON'>Hoover</ent> ordered
Sullivan's division to kill <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> and that <ent type='PERSON'>Sullivan</ent> used
<ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>/<ent type='PERSON'>Raoul</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Youngblood</ent></ent> to do the job. <ent type='PERSON'>Sullivan</ent> was also
due to meet with the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> within a day or two after the
day he was shot. Whether he would have talked or not probably
makes little difference. The <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> couldn't take the chance.
<ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Karamessines</ent> died of an apparent heart attack at the age
of 61 on September 4, 1978 at his vacation home in <ent type='LOC'>Grand Lake</ent>,
<ent type='GPE'>Quebec</ent>. He headed the covert operations part of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> after
<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent> was promoted from that position to head of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>David Phillips</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> dirty tricks operative who is making public
speeches supporting the Deputy Director of Plans (dirty tricks)
function, worked for <ent type='NORP'>Karamessines</ent>. His knowledge of the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
assassination and the CIA's cover-up role was undoubtedly complete
since he inherited the whole thing from <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent>.
The other dead people were bumped off figuratively, on the very
doorstep of the committee. <ent type='PERSON'>Roselli</ent> was killed and dumped into
<ent type='GPE'>Miami</ent> Bay. <ent type='PERSON'>Giancana</ent> was shot full of holes in his <ent type='GPE'>Chicago</ent>
residence. De Mohrenschildt was shot with a shotgun in his
daughter's friends house in <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent>. All three were scheduled to
meet with the committee. <ent type='ORG'>Socarras</ent> was killed in a garage in
<ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Masferrer</ent> was blown up in his car in <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Flynt</ent> was
shot on the street in <ent type='GPE'>Georgia</ent>.
<ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent>. Why does it keep popping up in these cases? Bay of
Pigs, No Name Key <ent type='ORG'>Group</ent>, anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> forces, <ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent> operations; it
all fits together somehow. <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>'s first real breakthrough
came when he found <ent type='PERSON'>Masferrer</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent> through Manuel Garcia
<ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>. That led him and <ent type='GPE'>the District</ent> Attorney in <ent type='GPE'>Dade County</ent>,
<ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent>, to <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Emilio Santana</ent>, Howard, Hall, <ent type='ORG'>Hemming</ent>
and <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>, all part of <ent type='ORG'>Socarras</ent>' and Banister's <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent>-based, No
Name Key anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> operations. It figured that some of them
would die in their own backyard when the committee was getting too
close. <ent type='PERSON'>Gaeton Fonzi</ent> can personally vouch for that. He was the
committee's <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent> investigator.
Why wouldn't men like <ent type='ORG'>Fonzi</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Fenton</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Fauntroy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Preyer</ent>,
and a woman like <ent type='PERSON'>Yvonne Burke</ent>, tell us the truth. I spent a lot of
time with all of them and got to know some of them very well. They
all impressed me as being very honest and dedicated people.
There may be another explanation, as I mentioned in the
beginning of this last chapter. A committee, is, after all, made
up of a bunch of individuals. So is a staff. Now, except for
<ent type='PERSON'>Cliff Fenton</ent>, Ed <ent type='PERSON'>Evans</ent> (<ent type='PERSON'>MLK</ent> investigator) and one or two others,
these people were not professionals in the investigations and
certainly none of them had been involved in the really big game of
espionage and clandestine operations. They were, and still are,
ordinary mortals, like you and me, with fears and cautionary
attitudes toward personal safety and danger. They also have
families.
Not even <ent type='PERSON'>Cliff Fenton</ent> had ever been involved with the kind of
monstrous game played by the spooks of the world. It is a game for
keeps, of life and death, mostly death. Let's look at it from the
viewpoint of <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent>, just to take an example. He took over
the chairmanship of the committee with the following knowledge.
He suspected there was a conspiracy in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case and at least
wanted to find out whether the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> were involved in
covering it up. He may not have known all of the details, but he
was aware of the fact that many people had died. He knew that
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent> had nearly been killed by a rifleman while driving
through a <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> desert with his wife. This occurred just after
<ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> made public statements about all four political
assassinations being related and the intelligence agencies possibly
being involved. <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> saw how the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> swung their weight around
in the Rules <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> and on the floor of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> when the
Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> in January and February 1977, asked for a new
budget and a reconstituted authority to subpoena records and
continue the investigation. He also knew that something strange
had happened to <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent>. He told me so in a luncheon
meeting on May 10, 1977. He said <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> had cut off all
communications with him and other committee members just as he had
with me. I told <ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> that I believed <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> had purposefully been
fed information by the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent> that I, <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, and some of
the committee members were working for the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>. Otherwise, why
would he have instructed the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> to close access to their
files to the committee staff, just after he had won the fight he
fought so hard to get the subpoena power back.
<ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> agreed it must have been something like that. <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent>
also must have had a frightened reaction during 1977 and 1978 to
these eight bodies dumped on his doorstep. As in the scene in "The
Godfather", it only takes one horse's head in your bed to get the
idea you should keep your mouth closed and play it cool.
Given all of this, each committee member may have reached his or
her decision that this game was not for <ent type='ORG'>congress</ent>men. In April 1977
it is possible that all of those executive sessions the committee
held were partially devoted to a discussion of the personal safety
of each member, each staffer, and all of their families. They may
have reached unanimous agreement that the only safe approach would
be to avoid sensitive areas, and not to attack the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> or <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>, and
certainly to avoid going after any of the dangerous guys in both
assassination cases.
Yet, to keep an honest approach going they would have to listen
to any credible hard evidence of conspiracy, comment on it, but
refrain from taking a stronger course than just listening. As Dr.
<ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> told me more than once, "I'm just going to let the facts
speak for themselves." This is somewhat like the position the
<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> took when <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Russell</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Hale Boggs</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent>
Sherman <ent type='PERSON'>Cooper</ent> refused to sign the draft of the <ent type='ORG'>Warren Report</ent> until
a qualifying statement was inserted. The statement read, "Because
of the difficulty of proving negatives to a certainty the
possibility of others being involved with either <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> or <ent type='PERSON'>Ruby</ent>
cannot be established categorically but if there is any such
evidence it has been beyond the reach of all the investigative
agencies and resources of <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States and has not come to the
attention of this <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>."
The committee has, in its final report, taken a stronger
position than that by saying, in effect, that new evidence of
conspiracy has surfaced and that the <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> should turn the job
of pursuing that evidence and a continuing investigation over to
the executive branch. The recommendation is for the Justice
<ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> to determine whether further investigations are
warranted. Thus <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> members would be off the hook and,
more importantly, still alive and safe. They can claim that the
funds they had and the time they had were not enough. Whose fault
was that? Certainly not the committee's, they can claim.
This scenario, if true, is really the only hope, though very
slim, any of us have left. All other avenues have been closed.</p>

<p>____________________</p>

<p>[1] "<ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> Daily News" -- Tu<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>ay, December 12, 1979.</p>

<p>[2] See the letters in the Appendix for a copy of the nondisclosure
agreement itself as well as correspondence between the author
and <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent>.</p>

<p>[3] See copies of this correspondence in the Appendix.</p>

<p>[4] Following the December 22 executive session a public hearing was
held on December 29, the last weekday of <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>'s
existence. <ent type='ORG'>Weiss</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Barger</ent> presented the acoustical evidence
proving four shots, one from the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>, thereby causing the
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> to conclude there was a probable conspiracy.
But, the fact that the Couch and <ent type='NORP'>Weigman</ent> films prove the
acoustical analysis was incorrect because there is no motorcycle
where there was supposed to be one, was completely covered-up by
<ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> staff. Why? The answer obviously is that the
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> wanted to close shop with a conspiracy conclusion but
one that wouldn't shake up the intelligence community and the <ent type='ORG'>PCG</ent>
too much. If the correct acoustical analysis had been presented,
with the motorcycle directly behind the presidential limousine,
the net result would have been the elimination of that 6th floor
window as the source of the shots. <ent type='ORG'>Eliminate</ent> that window and you
eliminate <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> and open up a can of worms with a completely
different kind of conspiracy. One with a patsy and intelligence
ramifications, written all over it.
So <ent type='PERSON'>Cornwell</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent>, and perhaps the entire <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> decided
to prove by implication that the motorcycle was 120 feet behind
the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> car at the time of the shot from the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>. They showed
publicly frames from the <ent type='ORG'>Hughes</ent> film which shows the motorcycle
they fudged, somewhat more than 120 feet behind the limousine.
But the <ent type='ORG'>Hughes</ent> film ends with the cycle on <ent type='GPE'>Houston</ent> Street. The
cycle can be seen in the <ent type='ORG'>Hughes</ent> film trailing Couch's camera car.
Couch took film all the way down <ent type='GPE'>Houston</ent> and around the turn onto
Elm Street. The limo can be seen in all of this footage. The
cycle can not. The cycle finally catches up to Couch and passes
him after the limo is beyond the triple overpass. Couch is, at
all times including the time of the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> shot, more than 200 feet
behind the limousine. <ent type='ORG'>Ergo</ent>, the cycle is more than 200 feet
behind at the critical point.
<ent type='PERSON'>Cornwell</ent> presented the cop driving the <ent type='GPE'>Houston</ent> Street cycle and
attempted to elicit testimony from him that it was his microphone
that was open.</p>

<p>[5] <ent type='PERSON'>Giancana</ent> actually died in 1975 before testifying to the Schweicker
<ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination subcommittee of the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>.</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p>--
daveus rattus </p>

<p> yer friendly neighborhood ratman</p>

<p> KOYAANISQATSI</p>

<p> ko.yaa.nis.qatsi (from <ent type='EVENT'>the Hopi Language</ent>) n. 1. crazy life. 2. life
in turmoil. 3. life out of balance. 4. life disintegrating.
5. a state of life that calls for another way of living.
From dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com Thu Jun 18 09:38:16 1992
Received: by icaen.uiowa.edu ( 5.52 (84)/1.1) id AA10172
on Thu, 18 Jun 92 09:38:11 CDT.
Received: from pl122c.eecs.lehigh.edu by ns-mx.uiowa.edu (5.64.jnf/920408)
on Thu, 18 Jun 92 09:39:52 -0500 id AA04694 with SMTP
Received: from SGI.COM by PL122c.EECS.Lehigh.EDU (5.61/1.34)
id AA04846; Thu, 18 Jun 92 10:25:52 -0400
Received: from [192.102.132.11] by sgi.sgi.com via SMTP (911016.SGI/910110.SGI)
for <ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122C.EECS.LEHIGH.EDU id AA23140; Thu, 18 Jun 92 07:28:19 -0700
Received: by ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (920110.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
for @sgi.sgi.com:<ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122C.EECS.LEHIGH.EDU id AA10904; Thu, 18 Jun 92 07:28:15 -0700
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 92 07:28:15 -0700
From: dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (dave "who can do? ratmandu!" ratcliffe)
<info type="Message-ID"> 9206181428.AA10904@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com</info>
To: <ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122c.EECS.Lehigh.EDU
Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (10/11)
Status: RO</p>

<p>Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (10/11)
Summary: we were robbed of our capability of electing a president we wanted
Keywords: part 10 of 11: chapter 17
Lines: 769</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> 1985: The <ent type='ORG'><ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent></ent> (2)</p>

<p> Chapter 17
THE FINAL COVER UP: How The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent>led
The <ent type='ORG'><ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent></ent> On <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent></p>

<p> Introduction</p>

<p> The final report of the <ent type='ORG'><ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent></ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>
(HSCA), issued in 1979, concluded that a conspiracy existed in the
assassination of President <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>. This news should have
delighted hundreds of researchers who had disagreed with the no-conspiracy finding of <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>. The fact that it did
not, is due to <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent> conspiracy being a simple one, with <ent type='PERSON'>Lee</ent>
Harvey <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> still firing all but one of the shots from the sixth
floor window of the <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> School Book Depository Building. The
existence of another shooter and another shot, from the grassy
<ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>, was "proved" by <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent>, based primarily on acoustical
evidence presented in the very last month of their public hearings.
Dr. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent></ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Billings</ent>, chief counsel and report
editor for <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent>, co-authored, in 1981, a book, "The Plot to
Kill <ent type='ORG'>the President</ent>," following the publication of <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent>'s final
report. The book claimed that the other shooter and <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> were
part of a <ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent> plot to kill <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>.
To over simplify the current (1985) situation, most <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
researchers feel that the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n public had been deceived once
again. The HSCA reaffirmed all but one of <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>'s
findings, including even the famed single bullet theory. The
simplified conspiracy finding is now subject to review by the
Justice <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> because it is based on very
questionable acoustical evidence. Justice commissioned the so-called <ent type='ORG'>Ramsey Panel</ent>[1] to review this evidence, in 1981, under the
auspices of <ent type='ORG'>the National Academy</ent> of Sciences. It found no evidence
from the acoustics that a grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent> shot was fired. So, we are
back to no-conspiracy and <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> being the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent>. And even
if there was a conspiracy, <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> claims it involved the <ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent> and
not the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>. The HSCA report and all of its volumes of evidence
omitting any reference to <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> involvement, concluded that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
was not involved, and did not reveal any evidence that <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent>
staff had collected showing that <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> people murdered <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>, and that
the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> has been covering up that fact ever since.
Any followers of <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> activities connected with the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>
assassination, since 1963, must ask the question, how did they do
it? How did the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> turn things completely around from the 1976
days when <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Downing</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Cliff Fenton</ent> and others were pursuing the truth
about the assassination, to essentially the same status as when the
<ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> finished its work? How did they produce the
final cover-up? The answer is that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> controlled <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent> and
its investigation and findings from the early part of 1977,
forward. The methods they used were as clever and devious as any
they had used previously to control <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>, the
<ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>, the <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> Investigation, the
<ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent>/Hart <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>[2] and the efforts of independent
researchers.</p>

<p> The Situation in 1976</p>

<p> In 1976, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent>, member of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> from <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent>, and
<ent type='PERSON'>Thomas Downing</ent> from <ent type='GPE'>Virginia</ent>, were both convinced there was a
massive conspiracy in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination. They introduced a
joint bill in the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> which resulted in the formation of <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent>
and an investigation of the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> assassinations. <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>
believed there were at least four conspiracies in the
assassinations of <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>MLK</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> and in the attempted
assassination of <ent type='PERSON'>George Wallace</ent>. He introduced an original bill to
have the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> investigate all four and the cover-ups and links
among them. <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> was primarily interested in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case and
his original bill dealt only with that conspiracy. <ent type='PERSON'>Mark Lane</ent> and
his committee members and supporters around the country joined
forces with Coretta <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>the Black Caucus</ent> in the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> to
pressure <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>men and Tip O'<ent type='PERSON'>Neill</ent> to investigate the <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent> and
<ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> assassinations. The net result was a merging of the
<ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> bills into a Final HSCA bill dealing with only
two of the cases.
In the fall of 1976, with <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> as chairman, <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent> selected
<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, from the <ent type='GPE'>Philadelphia</ent> District Attorney's
office, to be chief counsel. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> hired four professional
investigators and criminal lawyers from <ent type='GPE'>New York City</ent>. They were
very good and completely independent of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>, having
been trained by one of the best professionals in the business, D.A.
<ent type='PERSON'>Frank Hogan</ent> of <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>.
<ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and his <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> team, headed by <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent></ent>, attorney, and
<ent type='PERSON'>Cliff Fenton</ent>, chief detective, were going after the real assassins
and their bosses, whether this led them to the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> or <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> or
anywhere else. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> had already made it clear to <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent> that
he would investigate <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> involvement, and subpoena <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> people,
documents and other information, whether classified or not. He had
also had meetings with several researchers, including the author,
and made it known privately that he was going to use the talent and
knowledge of every reliable researcher on a consulting basis. He
had contacted <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> and informed him he would
be following up on all of his information and leads. He had
initiated an investigation of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> activities in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City
connected with the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination, including information
supplied to <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> by the author.[3]
R.A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent> were aware of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> connections of
the individuals involved in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination in Dealey Plaza,
in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City, in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> and in the <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent> Keys. They had,
in November 1976, exposed the entire HSCA staff to all of the
photographic evidence showing these people in Dealey Plaza and
elsewhere. They were aware of the assassination planning meetings
held by <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> people in <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City and knew who the higher level
conspirators were. They had initiated searches for the real
assassins; <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Emilio Santana</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent>
Lawrence, <ent type='PERSON'>Fred <ent type='PERSON'>Lee</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Crisman</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Braden</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Hicks</ent>, et al. They
were planning to interview <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> contract agents, <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Case
<ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Harry Dean</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Gordon Novel</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ronald Augustinovich</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Mary Hope</ent>
and Guy Gabaldin. <ent type='PERSON'>Cliff Fenton</ent> had been appointed head of a team
of investigators to follow up on the <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> part of the
conspiracy which had included <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agents and people; <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>David Ferrie</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Guy Banister</ent>, Manuel Garcia <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>, Sergio Arcacha
Smith, <ent type='PERSON'>Gordon Novel</ent> and others. They were going to contact people
who had attended assassination planning meetings in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent>.
From the photographic evidence surrounding the sixth floor
window, as well as the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent> and most of
the staff knew <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> had not fired any shots, knew no shots came
from the sixth floor window, and knew there had been shots from the
<ent type='ORG'>Dal Tex</ent> Building and the <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>. They knew the single bullet theory
was not true, and knew there had been a well-planned crossfire in
Dealey Plaza. They were not planning to waste a lot of time
reviewing and rehashing the Dealey Plaza evidence, except as it
might lead to the real assassins.
They had set up an investigation in <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent> and the Keys, of the
evidence and leads developed in 1967 by <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Gaeton Fonzi</ent> was
in charge of that part of Sprague's team. They were going to check
out the people in the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> that had been running and funding the No
Name Key group and other Anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> groups. <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Santana</ent>,
Manuel Garcia <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>, Jerry <ent type='PERSON'>Pat</ent>rick <ent type='ORG'>Hemming</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Loran Hall</ent>, Lawrence
Howard, <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>ns <ent type='PERSON'>Rolando Masferrer</ent> and Carlos Prio
<ent type='ORG'>Socarras</ent> were to be found and interrogated.
<ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent> and his research team had seen the photo collection of
<ent type='PERSON'>Dick Billings</ent> from "<ent type='ORG'>Life Magazine</ent>" which was, by 1976, deposited in
<ent type='ORG'>the Georgetown University Library</ent>'s <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination collection.
The No Name Key people and others showing up in Garrison's
investigation appeared in these photos with high level <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agents.
In 1977, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent>, who was far more supportive of a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
conspiracy idea than Tom <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent>, was to become chairman of the
HSCA. <ent type='PERSON'>Downing</ent> did not run for re-election in 1976 and was
retiring. At that point, December 1976, <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> and <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> were
of the same mind and getting along fine. Researchers were very
pleased with the way things were going and believed <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> would
expose the CIA's involvement in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> cover up.</p>

<p> The CIA's problem</p>

<p> Given this background of <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent> status in late 1976, it can
easily be seen that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> was up against much more serious
opposition than it ever had been before in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> murder and
cover-up. They had ruined <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>'s reputation and curtailed
his investigation by various dirty trick means. They had been in
solid control of <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> by the simple expedient of
having four of the <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent>ers belonging to them; <ent type='GPE'>Dulles</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>Ford</ent>,
McCloy and <ent type='PERSON'>Russell</ent>. They were also able to kill enough people who
knew the truth, to slow down any truth-seeking that might have
taken place. They also hid documents, destroyed and altered
evidence, lied about other evidence, and bald facedly (<ent type='GPE'>Dulles</ent>)
admitted that they wouldn't tell <ent type='ORG'>the President</ent> or the <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> if
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent> had been a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agent (which he had been). In the
<ent type='PERSON'>Rockefeller</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> situation they were in complete control of
that attempt to reinforce <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>'s findings. And in
the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> investigation, the <ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent>/Hart subcommittee
on the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case was very limited and controlled in what they could
do.
But in the new situation, in <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and his
professionals with so much knowledge of the CIA's role in the
murder and the cover-up, they faced a crisis. They knew they had
to do several things to turn it around and to continue to keep the
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n public from realizing what was happening. Here is what
they had to do:</p>

<p> 1. Get rid of <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>.</p>

<p> 2. Get rid of <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent>.</p>

<p> 3. Get rid of Sprague's key men or keep them away from <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
evidence or keep them quiet.</p>

<p> 4. Install their own chief counsel to control the
investigation.</p>

<p> 5. <ent type='ORG'>Elect</ent> a new HSCA chairman who would go along, or who
could be fooled.</p>

<p> 6. Cut off all Sprague's investigations of <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> people.
Make sure none of the people were found or bury any
testimony that had already been found, or murder <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
people who might talk.</p>

<p> 7. Keep the committee members from knowing what was
happening and segregate the investigation from them.</p>

<p> 8. Create a new investigative environment whose purpose
would be to confirm all of the findings of the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> and divert attention away from the who-did-it-and-why approach.</p>

<p> 9. <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> the committee staff in such a way as to keep
any of them from revealing what they already knew about
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> involvement.</p>

<p> 10. <ent type='ORG'>Control</ent> committee consultants in the same way, and
staff members who might leave or who might be fired.</p>

<p> 11. Continue to control the media in such a way as to
reinforce all of the above.</p>

<p> 12. Continue to murder witnesses or assassins in emergency
situations if necessary.</p>

<p> The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> successfully did all twelve of these things. The
techniques they used were much more subtle and devious than those
they had used before, although they did continue with murders of
potential HSCA witnesses and with media control.</p>

<p> How The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> Did It</p>

<p> The first step taken by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> was to use the media they
control, along with some members of <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent> they control, and two
planted agents on the staff of and consulting for, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent>,
to get rid of both <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>. In taking this
step, they used the old <ent type='NORP'>Roman</ent> approach of divide and conquer. They
made <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> and his closest staff assistant, <ent type='PERSON'>Gail Beagle</ent>, believe
that <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> was a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agent and that <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> must get rid of him.
They also made <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> believe that some of his other associates,
both in <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent> and outside, were <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agents. At the same time,
they used the media to attack <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> mercilessly. The key people
in doing this attack on <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> were three <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> reporters, George
<ent type='PERSON'>Lardner</ent> of the "<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Post</ent>," Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Burnham</ent> of "The <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent>
Times," and Jeremiah O'<ent type='PERSON'>Leary</ent> of the "<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Star</ent>." In all HSCA
committee meetings and in Rules <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> and Finance <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>
meetings, these three reporters sat next to each other, passed
notes back and forth, and wrote articles continually attacking and
undermining both <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>, as well as the entire
committee. The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> had the support of top management in all three
news organizations in doing this.
<ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent> eventually tried to fire <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, was over-ruled by the
committee, and then resigned from the committee. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>
eventually resigned, because it became obvious that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
controlled members of the Finance and Rules <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>s and other
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> allies in the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>, were going to kill the committee unless he
resigned. There are many more details to this story, which
requires a book to describe. Suffice it to say, the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
accomplished their first two goals by March 1977. The next steps
were to install a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>-controlled chief counsel and to get a
chairman elected who could be fooled or coerced into appointing
such a counsel. Lewis <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> was a perfect choice for chairman.
He was, and probably still is, a good and honest man. But he was
completely bamboozled by what the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> did and is still doing. The
selection and implementation of a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> man as chief counsel had to
be done in an extremely subtle manner. It could not be obvious to
anyone that he was a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> man. <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> and the other committee
members had to be fooled into believing *they* had made the choice,
and had picked a good man. Professor <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent></ent>, an apparently
scientifically oriented, academic person, with a history of work
against organized crime, was the perfect <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> choice. Once Dr.
<ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> took over as chief counsel, he accomplished goals numbered
3, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 very nicely. The fourth and fifth goals
having been achieved, <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> set about the other parts of his
assignment very rapidly after he arrived. For Goal 3, he fired <ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Lehner</ent></ent>, and <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>ovan Gay, three loyal <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>
supporters, quickly.</p>

<p> The Nondisclosure Agreement</p>

<p> The most important weapon used by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> to pursue
goals 9 and 10 was instituted within one week after <ent type='PERSON'>Blakely</ent>
arrived. It is by far the most subtle and far reaching technique
used by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> to date. It is called the "Nondisclosure
Agreement" and it was signed by all members of the committee, all
staff members including <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent>, all consultants to the committee,
and several independent researchers who met with <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> in 1977.
Signing the agreement was a condition for continued employment on
the committee staff or for continuing consulting on a contract
basis. The choice was, sign or get out. The author signed the
agreement in July 1977, without realizing its implications at the
time, in order to continue as a consultant. The agreement is
reproduced in full in the Appendix and is labelled "Exhibit A."
The author's consulting help was never sought after that and the
obvious objective was to silence a consultant and not use his
services.
This <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> weapon has several parts. First, it binds the signer,
if a consultant, to never reveal that he is working for the
committee (see paragraph 13). Second, it prevents the signer from
ever revealing to anyone in perpetuity, any information he has
learned about the committee's work as a result of working for the
committee (see paragraphs 2 and 12). Third, it gives the committee
and the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>, after the committee terminates, the power to take
legal action against the signer, *in a court named by the
committee* or the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>, in case the committee believes the signer
has violated the agreement. Fourth, the signer agrees to pay the
court costs for such a suit in the event he loses the suit (see
paragraphs 14 and 15).
These four parts are enough to scare most researchers or staff
members who signed it into silence forever about what they learned.
The agreement is insidious in that the signer is, in effect, giving
away his constitutional rights. Some lawyers who have seen the
agreement, including <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, have expressed the opinion
it is an illegal agreement in violation of the Constitution and
several Constitutional amendments. Whether it is illegal or not,
most staff members and all consultants who signed it *have*
remained silent, even after three and a half years beyond the life
of the committee. There are only two exceptions, the author and
<ent type='PERSON'>Gaeton Fonzi</ent>, who published a lengthy article about <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent>
cover-up in the "<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>ian" magazine in 1981.
The most insidious parts of the agreement, however, are
paragraphs 2, 3 and 7, which give the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> very effective control
over what the committee could and could not do with so-called
"classified" information. The director of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> is given
authority to determine, in effect, what information shall remain
classified and therefore unavailable to nearly everyone. The
signer of the agreement, and remember, this includes all of the
<ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>man and women who were members of the committee, agrees not
to reveal or discuss any information that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> decides he should
not. The chairman of the committee supposedly has the final say on
what information is included, but in practice, even an intelligent
and gutsy chairman would not be likely to override the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>. Lewis
<ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> did not attempt any final decisions. In fact, the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> did
not have to do very much under these clauses. The fact that <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent>
was their man and kept nearly all of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> sensitive information,
evidence, and witnesses away from the committee members was all
that was necessary. <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> never knew what he should have argued
about with the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> director. It is this document which proves
beyond doubt that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> controlled <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent>.
The author attempted to point out to <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> in a letter dated
February 10, 1978, "Exhibit B," the type of control the agreement
gives the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> over <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> replied in a March 16, 1978
letter, "Exhibit C," that he retained ultimate authority and was
not bound by the opinion of the Central <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> Director. He
also claimed that paragraphs 12 and 14, on extending the agreement
in perpetuity and giving the government the right to file a civil
suit in which the signer will pay all costs, were legal. He said
in the letter that the purpose of the agreement was to give the
HSCA control over the conduct of the investigation including
*control over the ultimate disclosure of information to the
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n public*. That is a key admission about what has actually
happened. The only question is, who is controlling the information
in the heads of the staff investigators who discovered <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
involvement? Was <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent> working for the public or for the
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>?</p>

<p> Examples of <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>-<ent type='ORG'>Control</ent></p>

<p> Some specific examples will serve to illustrate how well the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
techniques have worked and are still working.</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> Evidence and Witnesses Example</p>

<p> As mentioned earlier, when <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> arrived, an investigating team
headed by <ent type='PERSON'>Cliff Fenton</ent>, reporting to <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent></ent>, had already
been hard at work tracking down leads to the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> conspirators
generated by <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>'s investigation in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent>. This
team eventually had four investigators, all professionals, and
their work led them to believe that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> people in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent>
had been involved in a large conspiracy to assassinate <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>. As
<ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> told <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> Gandolfo, a <ent type='GPE'>New York City</ent> researcher, the <ent type='PERSON'>Fenton</ent>
team went much further than <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>, in locating witnesses and
other evidence of assassination planning meetings held in New
<ent type='GPE'>Orleans</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City and <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>. In fact, they found a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> man who
attended those meetings, and who was willing to testify before the
committee. The evidence was far more convincing than the testimony
presented at the trial of <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent>. In the <ent type='PERSON'>Shaw</ent> Trial, <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> people
were involved in meetings in addition to the one brought out in the
trial. <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>David Ferrie</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent> and others were
involved. Fenton's team discovered a lot of other facts about how
the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> people planned and carried out the assassination. Their
report about the conspiracy was solid and convincing and they were
convinced. The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>, through <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent></ent>, buried the <ent type='PERSON'>Fenton</ent>
report. <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> members were not told about the team's findings.
The evidence was not included in <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent> report, nor was it even
referred to in the volumes. The witnesses in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> were
never called to testify. That included the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> man at the
meetings. <ent type='PERSON'>Fenton</ent> and the other three members of his team, having
signed the nondisclosure agreement, were legally sworn to secrecy,
or at least they thought so. To this day they refuse to discuss
anything with anybody.
There may also have been threats of physical violence against
them. There is no way to determine this. However, <ent type='PERSON'>Fenton</ent> and the
others are well aware of the witnesses that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> murdered just
before they were about to testify before <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent>. These included:
<ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Sullivan</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> deputy under J. <ent type='PERSON'>Edgar Hoover</ent>, who headed
Division V, the domestic intelligence division; George de
Mohrenschildt, Oswald's <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> contact in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>; <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Roselli</ent>, the
<ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent> man involved in the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> plots to assassinate <ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent>; Regis
<ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> agent who knew a lot about <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent>, alias Clay
Bertrand, in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> and who was one of <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>'s <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>
contacts; <ent type='PERSON'>Rolando Masferrer</ent>, an anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent> <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>n murdered in
<ent type='GPE'>Miami</ent>; and <ent type='PERSON'>Carlos Prio Socarras</ent>, former <ent type='GPE'>Cuba</ent>n premier, killed in
his garage in <ent type='GPE'>Miami</ent>.
With the knowledge of these murders, <ent type='PERSON'>Fenton</ent> and his team would
not have required any more than a gentle hint, to keep quiet.</p>

<p> <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> Example</p>

<p> The "tramp," <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>, who appears in seven photos taken in
Dealey Plaza, is one of the most important <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> individuals in the
<ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination. Researcher <ent type='PERSON'>Bill Turner</ent> discovered that <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>
had been in the <ent type='GPE'>Florida</ent> Keys working with <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> sponsored anti-<ent type='PERSON'>Castro</ent>
groups. <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent></ent> knew about his role,
and intended to go after him when <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent> restored its subpoena
power and obtained enough money. They were aware of the evidence
that <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent> fired the fatal shot from the grassy <ent type='ORG'>knoll</ent>. They had
assigned a team of investigators to follow a lead to <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>
provided by the author in the early part of 1977.
Unfortunately, the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> managed to keep both the subpoena power
and the funds away from the committee until after they had forced
the resignations of <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent>. The power and
funds were restored after <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> was elected and after they
installed their own man, <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent>. The investigative team remained,
however, and they did search for and find <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>. But <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> and
the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> suppressed that fact, and suppressed anything they may have
learned from <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>. He is not mentioned in the report and was
not called as a witness. The author dares not reveal the source of
the above information because of the danger to staff people from
the nondisclosure agreement.</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Dean</ent>, Novel, and <ent type='ORG'>Augustinovich</ent></p>

<p> The <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> investigation and a subsequent series of
investigations by the author and other members of <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> to
Investigate <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> in 1967 to 1973, turned up several
witnesses who were willing to talk privately about the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
assassination team that murdered <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Harry Dean</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Case
<ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent> had been <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>'s <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> contacts while he was in
<ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City and knew about assassination planning meetings held in
Guy Gabaldin's apartment. <ent type='PERSON'>Dean</ent> knew about <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent>, <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
contract agent, attending those meetings and how <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent> had been
pretending to be <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> on many occasions. <ent type='PERSON'>Gordon Novel</ent> knew how
the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> had covered up the truth about the assassination and how
they went to extreme lengths to ruin <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent> and his
investigation. Novel had been employed by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> in this effort.
<ent type='PERSON'>Ronald Augustinovich</ent> and his friend, <ent type='PERSON'>Mary Hope</ent>, had attended some
of the <ent type='GPE'>Mexico</ent> City meetings.
<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Russell</ent> and the author tracked down all four of these
witnesses prior to the arrival of <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent></ent> at <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent>.
<ent type='PERSON'>Russell</ent> interviewed them and knew they would be willing to talk,
given protection and some form of immunity. The author presented
their names and their involvement to <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>, Lewis <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent> in the fall of 1976.
This was done as part of the author's consulting assignment for the
HSCA. The names were in a memorandum to <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, which outlined
the overall <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> conspiracy and the CIA's role, along with a
recommendation of the sequence in which witnesses should be called.
The idea was to base each witness interrogation on what had been
established from interviewing prior witnesses, working slowly from
cooperative witnesses, to non-cooperative witnesses, to actual
assassins, to higher level <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> people.[4] The highest level
people, E. Howard Hunt and <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent>, would be faced with
accusers.
As indicated earlier, <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent> could do nothing and
did nothing up to the day they left. By early 1978 it became
obvious that <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> had done nothing about calling these <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
witnesses. The author initiated a series of letter exchanges with
<ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent>, reminding them of these witnesses, and the
possibility that their lives could be in danger prior to their
being interviewed by HSCA. <ent type='PERSON'>Dick Russell</ent> had obtained an agreement
from <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent> to meet with the committee, but no contact had been
made up to April 5, 1978, the date of the author's first letter to
<ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> on this subject, "Exhibit D." <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent> was hiding in fear of
his children's lives, not so much his own life. He was a real <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
agent and knew how they operated. <ent type='PERSON'>Russell</ent> was the only person who
knew where <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent> was. In the April 5th letter, a recommendation
was given to <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> that the committee contact <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent> through
<ent type='PERSON'>Russell</ent>, and contact the other witnesses on the original list.
<ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> wrote on May 15, 1978, "Exhibit E," that the <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent> matter had
been referred to <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> for follow-up. <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> never mentioned it
by telephone or by letter.
By September 1978, when the public hearings had begun, there was
no indication that <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> was going to call the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> witnesses.
<ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent> was standing by but had not been contacted. The published,
intended witness list did not contain any of these <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> names. The
author wrote to <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> and Representative <ent type='PERSON'>Yvonne Burke</ent> on September
22 and 23, 1978, "Exhibits F," expressing dissatisfaction with
the committee's failure to call the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> witnesses, and suggesting
that if they did not not, history would eventually catch up with
them. The names were repeated in the letter to <ent type='PERSON'>Burke</ent>, and specific
mention made that the committee had never contacted <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Case
<ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent> sent back a letter dated October 10, 1978,
"Exhibit G." It is what one might call a non-answer, stating "that
the committee will make every effort to tell the whole story to the
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people." Seven years later (1985) it can be said that the
committee did not make an effort to call the most important
witnesses and therefore did not tell the whole story. Nor did
their report even mention these witnesses or any of the evidence
exposed earlier by the <ent type='ORG'>CTIA</ent> or <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent> was
either totally fooled or he is part of the CIA's cover-up.
The author responded to <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent>' non-answer letter of October
10th with two more letters, dated October 30, 1978 and November 24,
1978, "Exhibits H &amp; I." <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> finally answered them on December
4, 1978 with another non-answer letter, "Exhibit J." He says the
committee cannot reveal the procedure of the investigation or the
names of those persons who will be called to testify before the
committee. This implies they were planning to call more witnesses
in December 1978. The committee's life ended on January 1, 1979.
The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> witnesses were never called nor ever mentioned right up to
the very end and the report was silent about them.</p>

<p> The <ent type='ORG'>Umbrella</ent> Man</p>

<p> One last example illustrates the way the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> worked
together to cancel-out any evidence linking the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> people and/or
techniques used in the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> assassination. For may years, various
researchers, including <ent type='PERSON'>Josiah Thompson</ent>[5] and the author, had
speculated about the role of a man appearing in the photographs in
Dealey Plaza with an open umbrella. He became known as "The
<ent type='ORG'>Umbrella</ent> Man," or <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent> for short. <ent type='ORG'>Thompson</ent> speculated that <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent> had
been giving the various shooters in Dealey Plaza visual signals
with the umbrella, and the author agreed this could have been true.
In *1976*, the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> committee took the public testimony of
Charles Senseney, a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> contract weapons employee at the <ent type='ORG'>Army</ent>
Chemical Center in Ft. Detrick, MD. Senseney described a system
used by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Vietnam</ent> and elsewhere, for killing or paralyzing
people with poisons carried in self-propelled <ent type='PERSON'>Flechette</ent> darts. The
darts were self-propelled like solid fuel rockets and launched
silently and unobtrusively from a number of devices, including an
umbrella. A <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> catalog of available secret weapons shows a
photograph of the umbrella launching device and photos of the
<ent type='PERSON'>Flechette</ent>s which were self-propelled from one of the hollow spokes
of the umbrella. They could even be launched through soda straws.
Researcher <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Cutler</ent>, former <ent type='ORG'>Air Force</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Liason</ent> officer, L.
Fletcher Prouty, and the author did some additional research on the
photographic evidence and the weapon system, especially research on
the movements of <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> in the <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent> film and various photos of <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent>
and a friend he had with him in Dealey Plaza. The friend had a
two-way radio device. As a result of this research, an article was
published in "Gallery" magazine in June, 1978. The article
presented the hypothesis that <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent> launched, from his umbrella, a
poison <ent type='PERSON'>Flechette</ent> at <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>, which struck him in the throat at <ent type='PERSON'>Zapruder</ent>
frame 189, causing complete paralysis of his upper body, hands,
arms, shoulders and head, in less than two seconds. The photos
show this paralysis and the timing matches the testimony given by
Senseney about how fast the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> poison works and what its
paralyzing effects look like.
Whether one agrees with this hypothesis or not is incidental to
what <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent> did in reaction to it. Until the summer
of 1977, official investigators for <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent>, or any of its
predecessors, had shown no more than passing curious interest in
<ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent>. They just paid no attention and did not take the researcher's
ideas seriously. On August 8, 1977, the author informed <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent>, in a letter of that date, about the <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent> hypothesis. The
letter concerned a discussion the author and <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> had on July 21,
1977, two days after the nondisclosure agreement had been signed.
<ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> had said that if there was a conspiracy it would not have
involved a very large number of people. He was probably already
laying the foundation for a small, <ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent> type, conspiracy involving
<ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> and a <ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent> friend, backed by a few <ent type='ORG'>Mafia</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Don</ent>s.
The August 8th letter maintained that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> had been involved
and that it had been a massive intelligence operation, rather than
a conspiracy in the sense <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> was using the term. The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Flechette</ent>, umbrella launching weapons system, if indeed it had been
used by <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent>, the letter pointed out, would be solid proof of high
level <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> involvement, since that system would not have been
available to lower level agents or contract people.
<ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> did not respond right away to this letter and the author
decided to make the <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent> hypothesis public by publishing it with
<ent type='PERSON'>Cutler</ent> as co-author, in the spring of 1978, in "Gallery" magazine.
Contact was also made with Senator <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent> who had been
the member of the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> responsible for interrogating
Charles Senseney. <ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent> agreed to try and find out from
Senseney what had happened to the umbrella launchers he had
constructed for the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>; that is, who in the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> had had access to
a launcher.
The information to be published in "Gallery" had been generated
by <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Cutler</ent></ent> and the author independently of any information
obtained from <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent>, but the safest approach seemed to be an
application to them for permission to print the article under the
terms of the nondisclosure agreement. So, on January 9, 1978, the
author submitted a draft of the "Gallery" article to <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> and, on
January 16, 1978, he wrote back stating that publishing the article
would not violate the terms of the nondisclosure agreement, "Exhibit
K." The article was published in the June 1978 issue of "Gallery"
which actually appeared in May 1978. <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> knew in advance when
it would appear.
On August 3, 1978, the author wrote to <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> stating that
photographic evidence showed a high probability that <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent> was
actually <ent type='PERSON'>Gordon Novel</ent>, the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> contract agent from <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent>, who
had been hired to ruin the <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent> investigation, "Exhibit L."
The reason that some new photo evidence was just then coming to
light was that the committee had discovered a never-before seen
film of <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent> and had released a frame from this film to the press in
July 1978. Shortly after the <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent> photo was released by <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent>,
with an appeal to him to come forward, an unknown caller contacted
<ent type='PERSON'>Penn Jones</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>Texas</ent> to tell him he knew who <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent> was. <ent type='ORG'>Penn</ent> visited
<ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Witt</ent>, having been given his address, and upon seeing him,
jumped to the conclusion that he *was* <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent>. This led to Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Witt</ent>
appearing before the committee in their televised hearings and
making the claim he was <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent>. He showed the umbrella on TV that he
claimed he used.
It was immediately obvious to <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Cutler</ent></ent> and the author that
<ent type='PERSON'>Witt</ent> was not <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent>. He displayed the umbrella he said he had used in
Dealey Plaza and *it contained the wrong number of spokes*. His
height, weight and facial appearance did not match TUM's, and his
description of his actions did not match at all the actions <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent>
took, as shown in the photos. On November 24, 1978, the author
wrote to <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> telling him he had been fooled by a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> plant, or
by his own staff, planting Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Witt</ent>, and that he should call Gordon
Novel as a witness because it was likely that Novel was <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent>. HSCA
never did call Novel as a witness. Novel had visited <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent>
during the days <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> was still there, but he had not
mentioned being in Dealey Plaza or that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> had hired him to
ruin <ent type='PERSON'>Garrison</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> avoided contacting Novel.
Now, the important thing to focus on, in this example, is the
sequence of events. The HSCA had done nothing about <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent> until they
were faced with the possibility of a public article linking <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent> to
the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> through a <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> weapons system and through <ent type='PERSON'>Gordon Novel</ent>.
They also found out that Senator <ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent> was looking into the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>
end of it. At about the time the "Gallery" article was being
widely read, <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent> suddenly released to the press a photo of <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent>
and asked that people identify him or that he come forward. The
photo did not show his umbrella or where he was sitting in Dealey
Plaza, nor did the release mention the umbrella or the theories
about it. Just his photo. An earlier photo used by <ent type='PERSON'>Cutler</ent> and the
author to identify Novel as <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent> was not released.
In a surprisingly short time after the photo appeared, an
unknown person calls a well-known researcher and leads him to <ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Witt</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Witt</ent> in turn lies about who he was and where he was, by
claiming to be <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> and the committee put <ent type='PERSON'>Witt</ent> on center
stage as though it was a play, and eliminate the <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent> problem by
pulling off a charade. The fine hand of the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> can be seen in
this whole series of linked events. <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> had to have known what
was going on, and he knows today that <ent type='PERSON'>Witt</ent> was not <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent> and the high
probability that <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent> was <ent type='PERSON'>Gordon Novel</ent>, <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agent.
The extreme lengths that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> went to in this
charade, made one believe that the umbrella probably *was* the
Charles Senseney weapon. Otherwise, why bother with <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent>?</p>

<p> Goal Number Eight</p>

<p> What has been presented so far in this article represents direct
actions by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> to cover-up <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> involvement. <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> played
another important role and that was to achieve the eighth goal on
the list, namely to change the public impression of HSCA's main
effort. Researchers who concentrated on attacking the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
Commission's Dealey Plaza or <ent type='PERSON'>Tippit</ent> shooting findings had created
a big problem. If <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> had fired no shots, then he must have
been framed. If <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> was framed, the evidence against him was
planted, and multiple gunmen were involved. All of this line of
reasoning would point to a very well-organized and very well-planned conspiracy, which would in turn point to an intelligence
style involvement.
So, <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> set out from the beginning to create an investigative
environment and image that appeared to be based on a *highly
scientific, objective study of the Dealey Plaza evidence*. The
overall objective of this approach was to prove "scientifically"
that <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent> was right, and that <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent>
fired all the shots that had struck <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, Governor Connally
and policeman <ent type='PERSON'>Tippit</ent>. That required scientific proof of the
single bullet theory, among other things. <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> did just that.
Right up to the moment when the acoustical evidence on the <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>
police tape reared its ugly head, only one month from the end of
the life of the committee, <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> managed to control and manipulate
the Dealey Plaza evidence to back up <ent type='ORG'>the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent></ent>
completely. The author described how <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> did this in chapter
16. One of his "magical" methods was to split up the scientific
work into subcommittees or panels of advisors, and various staff
groups, and keep them all from communicating with each other.
*Thus, even though the medical panel gave testimony showing an
upward trajectory of the single bullet (399) shot*, the trajectory
panel turned it into a downward trajectory. The photographic panel
was so isolated they never did see the most important evidence of
the sixth floor window, inside and outside.
The photo panel had a number of government and military people
on it, as did all of the other panels. Thus it was not surprising
that they testified that the fake photos of <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> holding a rifle
were not fakes. <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> rode roughshod over the evidence that these
photos were fakes, presenting only one witness, <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> White, to show
why they were fakes, and giving him a very rough time. Other
researchers, like <ent type='PERSON'>Fred Newcomb</ent> and the author, who had done a lot
of work on the fake photos, were not called and not consulted by
the photo panel or <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> and his staff. There are many more
examples of how <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> managed this magic show on public TV, too
numerous to describe here.
One important result of this drastic change of investigative
environment compared to that existing under <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, was
to draw the attention of the public during the hearings away from
the evidence and the witnesses pointing to the real assassins, and
to the fact that <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent> was framed and did not fire any shots. It
thus provided an additional shield for the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and in effect,
completed the cover-up.</p>

<p> Summary</p>

<p> Now, in the spring of 1985, the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> appears to have under
control the final cover-up engineered by <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent></ent> with the
support of a few murders of key witnesses and the existence of the
insidious, illegal, nondisclosure agreement silencing <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent>
staff, committee members, and consultants. The situation for the
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n public appears to be hopeless. The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> effectively
controlled all three branches of government when the chips were
down, and have had no problems controlling the fourth estate, the
media, or the independent researchers. By what means could the
<ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n public combat this awesome power? It is hard to see that
there is any means available. And we have now reached and passed
1984. Would an election of Edward <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> to the presidency in
1988 change anything? If he lived through a presidency following
an election campaign, it probably would. Most <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>ns react to
that by saying, "he would be assassinated." Somehow they have
received the messages about what has gone wrong with <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent>
States.</p>

<p>____________________</p>

<p>[1] Chaired by Prof. <ent type='PERSON'>Norman Ramsey</ent> of M.I.T.</p>

<p>[2] Senators <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Schweiker</ent> of <ent type='ORG'>Penn</ent>. and <ent type='PERSON'>Gary Hart</ent> of <ent type='ORG'>Colo</ent>. formed
a sub-committee of the <ent type='ORG'>Church</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>.</p>

<p>[3] The author became an advisor to <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> as soon as he
was appointed counsel to <ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent>.</p>

<p>[4] The names of the witnesses in the memo were:
<ent type='PERSON'>Cooper</ent>ative Witnesses:
<ent type='PERSON'>Louis Ivon</ent> (<ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>'s chief investigator), <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Case
<ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Harry Dean</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Hosty</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Carver Gaten</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> du Bruys,
Regis <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Victor Marchetti</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Gordon Novel</ent>, Manuel Garcia
<ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>, Harry <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent>s, <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>, George de
Mohrenschildt, Charles Senseney, <ent type='PERSON'>Mary Hope</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Hicks</ent>.</p>

<p> Non-<ent type='PERSON'>Cooper</ent>ative Witnesses or Assassins or Planners:
<ent type='PERSON'>Ronald Augustinovich</ent>, Guy Gabaldin, <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Emilio Santana</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> Lawrence, <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Braden</ent>, Sergio Arcacha
Smith, <ent type='PERSON'>Fred <ent type='PERSON'>Lee</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Crisman</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Sullivan</ent>, Carlos Prio
<ent type='ORG'>Socarras</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Rolando Masferrer</ent>, Major L.M. <ent type='GPE'>Bloomfield</ent>, E. Howard
Hunt, and <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent>.</p>

<p>[5] In his book, "Six Seconds in <ent type='GPE'>Dallas</ent>," <ent type='ORG'>Thompson</ent> showed photos of
<ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent>.</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<div>--</div>

<p> I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes
me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . Corporations have been
enthroned, an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the
money-power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working
upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in a few
hands and the Republic is destroyed.</p>

<p> --- <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Abraham</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Lincoln</ent></ent> (quoted in <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> London's "<ent type='ORG'>The Iron Heel</ent>").</p>

<p>From dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com Fri Jun 19 09:59:20 1992
Received: by icaen.uiowa.edu ( 5.52 (84)/1.1) id AA12962
on Fri, 19 Jun 92 09:59:15 CDT.
Received: from pl122c.eecs.lehigh.edu by ns-mx.uiowa.edu (5.64.jnf/920408)
on Fri, 19 Jun 92 10:00:55 -0500 id AA28160 with SMTP
Received: from SGI.COM by PL122c.EECS.Lehigh.EDU (5.61/1.34)
id AA10490; Fri, 19 Jun 92 10:44:51 -0400
Received: from [192.102.132.11] by sgi.sgi.com via SMTP (911016.SGI/910110.SGI)
for <ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122C.EECS.LEHIGH.EDU id AA21909; Fri, 19 Jun 92 07:47:33 -0700
Received: by ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (920110.SGI/920502.SGI.AUTO)
for @sgi.sgi.com:<ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122C.EECS.LEHIGH.EDU id AA14482; Fri, 19 Jun 92 07:47:30 -0700
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 92 07:47:30 -0700
From: dave@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com (dave "who can do? ratmandu!" ratcliffe)
<info type="Message-ID"> 9206191447.AA14482@ratmandu.<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>.sgi.com</info>
To: <ent type='ORG'>PML</ent>3@PL122c.EECS.Lehigh.EDU
Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (11/11)
Status: RO</p>

<p>Subject: "The Taking of <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>, 1-2-3" (11/11)
Summary: we were robbed of our capability of electing a president we wanted
Keywords: part 11 of 11: Appendix
Lines: 1151</p>

<div> * * * * * * *</div>

<p> Appendix</p>

<p> The Secrecy Oath the Author signed after <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent></ent> took over
<ent type='ORG'>the HSCA</ent>, and correspondence between the author and various
committee members.</p>

<p> Exhibit A
____________________________________________________________</p>

<p> Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> Nondisclosure Agreement


[<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>]
I, ____________________, in consideration for being
employed by or engaged by contract or otherwise to perform
services for or at the request of the <ent type='ORG'><ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent></ent>
on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>, or any Member thereof, da hereby make the
representations and accept the obligations set forth below as
conditions precedent for my employment or engagement, or for
my continuing employment or engagement, with the <ent type='ORG'>Select Com</ent>-mittee, <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives, or the
United States <ent type='ORG'>Congress</ent>.

1. I have read the Rules of the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, and I
hereby agree to be bound by them and by the Rules of the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>
of Representatives.

2. I hereby agree never to divulge, publish or reveal by
words, conduct or otherwise, any testimony given before the
Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> in executive session (including the name of any
witness who appeared or was summoned to appear before the Select
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> in executive session), any classifiable and properly
classified information (as defined in 5 U.S.C. Section 552(b)(1)),
or any information pertaining to intelligence sources or methods
as designated by <ent type='ORG'>the Director</ent> of Central <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent>, or any con-fidential information that is received by the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>
or that comes into my possession by virtue of my position with
the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, to any person not a member of the Select
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> or its staff or the personal staff representative of
a <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> Member unless authorized in writing by the Select
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, or, after the Select Committee's termination, by
such manner as the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives may determine or,
in the absence of a determination by the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent>, in such manner
as the <ent type='ORG'>Agency</ent> or <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> from which the information origin-ated may determine. I further agree not to divulge, publish
or reveal by words, conduct or otherwise, any other information
which is received by the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> or which comes into
my possession by virtue of my position with the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>,
for the duration of the Select Committee's existence.

3. I hereby agree that any material that is based upon or
may include information that I hereby pledge not to disclose,
and that is contemplated for publication by me will, prior to
discussing it with or showing it to any publishers, editors or
literary agents, be submitted to the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> to deter-mine whether said material contains any information that I
hereby pledge not to disclose. The Chairman of the <ent type='ORG'>Select Com</ent>-mittee shall consult with <ent type='ORG'>the Director</ent> of Central <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent>
for the purpose of the Chairman's determination as to whether
or not the material contains information that I pledge not to
disclose. I further agree to take no steps toward publication
until authorized in writing by the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, or after
its termination, by such manner as the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives
may determine, or in the absence of a determination by the
<ent type='ORG'>House</ent>, in such manner as the <ent type='ORG'>Agency</ent> or <ent type='ORG'>Department</ent> from which
the information originated may determine.

4. I hereby agree to familiarize myself with the Select
Committee's security procedures, and provide at all times the
required degree of protection against unauthorized disclosure
for all information and materials that come into my possession
by virtue of my position with the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>.

5. I hereby agree to immediately notify the <ent type='ORG'>Select Com</ent>-mittee of any attempt by any person not a member of the Select
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> staff to solicit information from me that I pledge
not to disclose.

6. I hereby agree to immediately notify the Select
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> if I am called upon to testify or provide information
to the proper authorities that I pledge not to disclose. I
will request that my obligation to respond is established by
the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, or after its termination, by such manner
as the <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives may determine, before I do so.

7. I hereby agree to surrender to the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>
upon demand by the Chairman or upon my separation from the
Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> staff, any material, including any classified
information or information pertaining to intelligence sources
or methods as designated by <ent type='ORG'>the Director</ent> of Central <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent>,
which comes into my possession by virtue of my position with the
Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>. I hereby acknowledge that all documents
acquired by me in the course of my employment are and remain the
property of <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States.

8. I understand that any violation of the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>
Rules, security procedures or this agreement shall constitute
grounds for dismissal from my current employment.

9. I hereby assign to <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States Government all
rights, title and interest in any and all royalties, remunera-tions and emoluments that have resulted or may result from any
divulgence, publication or revelation in violation of this
agreement.

10. I understand and agree that <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States Government
may choose to apply, prior to any unauthorized disclosure by
me, for a court order prohibiting disclosure. Nothing in this
agreement constitutes a waiver on the part of <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States
of the right to prosecute for any statutory violation. Nothing
in this agreement constitutes a waiver on my part of any defenses
I may otherwise have in any civil or criminal proceedings.

11. I have read the provisions of the Espionage Laws,
Sections 793, 794 and 798, Title 18, United States Code, and
of Section 783, Title 50, United States Code, and I am aware
that unauthorized disclosure of certain classified information
may subject me to prosecution. I have read Section 1001, Title
18, United States Code, and I am aware that the making of a
false statement herein is punishable as a felony. I have also
read Executive Order 11652, and the implementing National
Security Council directive of May 17, 1972, relating to the
protection of classified information.

12. Unless released in writing from this agreement or any
portion thereof by the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, I recognize that all
the conditions and obligations imposed on me by this agreement
apply during my <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> employment or engagement and continue
to apply after the relationship is terminated.

13. No consultant shall indicate, divulge or acknowledge,
without written permission of the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, the fact
that the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> has engaged him or her by contract
as a consultant until after the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> has terminated.

14. In addition to any rights for criminal prosecution or
for injunctive relief <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States Government may have for
violation of this agreement, <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States Government may
file a civil suit in an appropriate court for damages as a
consequence of a breach of this agreement. The costs of any
civil suit brought by <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States for breach of this
agreement, including court costs, investigative expenses, and
reasonable attorney fees, shall be borne by any defendant who
loses such suit. In any civil suit for damages successfully
brought by <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States Government for breach of this
agreement, actual damages may be recovered, or, in the event
that such actual damages may be impossible to calculate, liquidated
damages in an amount of $5000 shall be awarded as a reasonable
estimate for damages to the credibility and effectiveness of the
investigation.

15. I hereby agree that in any suit by <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States
Government for injunctive or monetary relief pursuant to the
terms of this agreement, personal jurisdiction shall obtain and
venue shall lie in <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States District Court for the
District of <ent type='GPE'>Columbia</ent>, or in any other appropriate United States
District Court in which <ent type='GPE'>the United</ent> States may elect to bring
suit. I further agree that the law of <ent type='GPE'>the District</ent> of <ent type='GPE'>Columbia</ent>
shall govern the interpretation and construction of this
agreement.

16. Each provision of this agreement is severable. If a
court should find any part of this agreement to be unenforceable,
all other provisions of this agreement shall remain in full force
and effect.

I make this agreement without any mental reservation or
purpose of evasion, and I agree that it may be used by the
Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> in carrying out its duty to protect the security
of information provided to it.






[July 19, 1977] [<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E., <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>]
Date: _____________________ _________________________________


[ I am submitting a list of
material and information
which has already been _________________________________
given to the committee, <ent type='GPE'>LOUIS</ent> STOKES, Chariman
or which I intend to Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>
give to the committee in
the near future. I intend
to publish some of this
information.]</p>

<p> Exhibit B
____________________________________________________________</p>

<p> 193 Pinewood Road
<ent type='ORG'>Hartsdale</ent>, NY 10530</p>

<p> February 10, 1978</p>

<p> Mr. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent>
Chairman, Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>
U.S. <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives
<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>, D.C. 20515

Dear <ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent>:

As I am sure you know, I signed a non disclosure agreement for the
Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, given to me on July 19, 1977 by <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent></ent>. Not
being a lawyer, I did not really appreciate some of the provisions of
that agreemont at the time I signed it, even though some things in it
seemed strange to me.

In the last fow months I have gone over the agreement several times,
with particular attention to those strange portions. The more I re-read the agreement, the more puzzled I have become.

I was finally triggered into writing you this letter by a conversation
I had with <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>. As you may recall I helped him and <ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent> from November 1976 forward with the photographic evidence in
the <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent> case, and several other areas derived from my relationship with
<ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent> and <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> to Investigate <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>. I had no
written agreement with <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> at that time and did not ask for
compensation for the work I had been doing. I had signed no non dis-closure agreement and such an agreement had never been mentioned.

The first time I had any idea that <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> would want to pay me
for my assistance was some time after Dick <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> resigned, when Mr.
<ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> approached me about it through <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Tanenbaum</ent></ent>, shortly before
<ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> resigned. My recent meeting with Dick <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> naturally led to
discussion about my continuing work for <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>. He raised the
subject of the non disclosure agreement signed by each staff member,
saying that he would never have enforced such a document while he was
chief counsel because he believes it gives the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> and other agencies
too much power to control the activities of <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>. It was
because of that statement that I read the agreement again in the
light of what he said.

I know that you had a lot of faith in <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and did not
personally want him to resign. For that reason I'm writing to you
rather than Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent>, seeking answers to my questions.

Encloged is a copy of the agreement with my signature. I have circled
on it the paragraphs in question, and underlined the key words. My
questions, Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> are as follows:

1. Are paragraphs 2, 3 and 7 inserted for the purpose of giving the
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> power over the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> to investigate the CIA's
role in the assassinations or the cover up crimes following the
assassinations of President <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> or Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>King</ent>? I believe those
paragraphs could be so interpreted, especially if each committee
member and each staff member signed a similar agreement.

2. If the purposes of paragraphs 2, 3 and 7 are not as questioned
above, then how can the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, its staff or its con-sultants, *ever* discover whether the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> was involved in the
assassinations or whether the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>, as I maintain, is *still*
involved in covering up the conspiracies?

For example, paragraph 3 states that you as chairman, shall con-sult with <ent type='ORG'>the Director</ent> of Central <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent>--to determine
whether or not the material I might receive contains information
that I pledge not to disclose.

Assuming that all committee staff people signed that paragraph,
it would seem to me that you would really be hamstrung in investi-gating the CIA's possible role. Your staff could not be working
with any documents or other materials pointing toward <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agents'
involvement in the assassinations, without you personally having
to show those documents to <ent type='ORG'>the Director</ent> of Central <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent>
and to obtain his agreement to disclose the information to the
public.

The <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> Director has the power of judging what can be released.
Obviously, anything incriminating to the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>, especially higher
level people who may have been involved, would be judged unreleas-able.

None of this would take on the significance that it does, were it
not for my belief that the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> itself has continued to cover up
the original conspiracy and that several <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> agents or contract
employees carried out the murder.

3. Is paragraph 12 really logical, or even legal? Can an agreement
with a body be extended ad <ent type='ORG'>infinitum</ent> after the body has dissolved?

4. Paragraph 14 bothers me. It seems to say that I agree to allow
the government to sue me and to bear the expenses of such a suit.
Is it really legal to ask me to agree to be sued as a condition
of my consulting contract? Couldn't the government sue me and
collect expenses anyway if I did something wrong, without such a
clause? Paragraph 16 seems to anticipate that Paragraph 14 may
not stand up in court. (Or some other paragraph.)

I want to make it clear that my concerns in this matter are not related
to any obligation I may have. Rather, I am concerned about the
purposes of those clauses in the agreement, as they affect the
investigations. I believe every staff member signed them.

I would appreciate hearing directly from you on these questions Mr.
<ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent>, rather than referring this letter to Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent>.

Yours sincerely,


<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent></p>

<p> Exhibit C
____________________________________________________________</p>

<p> <ent type='GPE'>LOUIS</ent> STOKES, <ent type='GPE'>OHIO</ent>, CHAIRMAN</p>

<p>RICHARDSON <ent type='NORP'>PREYER</ent>, N.C. SAMUEL L. DEVINE, <ent type='GPE'>OHIO</ent>
WALTER E. FAUNTROY, D.C. STEWART B. <ent type='PERSON'>MCKINNEY</ent>, CONN.
YVONNE BRATHWAITE BURKE, <ent type='GPE'>CALIF</ent>. <ent type='GPE'>CHARLES</ent> THONE, NEBR.
<ent type='PERSON'>CHRISTOPHER</ent> J. DODD, CONN. HAROLD S. SAWYER, MICH.
HAROLD E. <ent type='ORG'>FORD</ent>, TENN.
FLOYD J. FITHIAN, <ent type='GPE'>IND</ent>.
ROBERT W. EDGAR, PA.
------------
(202) 225-4624</p>

<p> Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>
U.S <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives
3331 <ent type='ORG'>HOUSE</ent> OFFICE BUILDING, ANNEX 2
<ent type='GPE'>WASHINGTON</ent>, D.C. 20515</p>

<p> MAR 16 1978</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, Esq.
193 Pinewood Road
<ent type='ORG'>Hartsdale</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> 10530</p>

<p> Dear Mr. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>:</p>

<p> In response to your letter of February 10, 1978
concerning the non-disclosure agreement which you signed
with <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>, I wish to first remind you that the
agreement was explicitly explained to you provision by
provision by Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent>, and that you were given the
opportunity to ask any questions that you desired prior
to your signing the agreement. I want to assure you that
the intent of the agreement is not to prevent information
from ultimately being disclosed to the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n public.
The non-disclosure agreement only governs the timing of
disclosure of information to the public. In response to
your specific questions:

I. Paragraphs 2, 3 and 7 obviously are not for
the purpose of giving the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> power over the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>
to investigate the CIA's role in the assassination. If
you read these paragraphs carefully, they clearly provide
that the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>, during its existence, will be in
full control and have access to all information. The paragraphs
do prevent you from disclosing the information, without the
authorization of the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>.

Paragraph 3 does state that I, as Chairman, will
consult with <ent type='ORG'>the Director</ent> of Central <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> to determine
whether or not material contains information which you pledge
not to disclose. I, however, retain ultimate authority and
I only consult with <ent type='ORG'>the Director</ent> of Central <ent type='ORG'>Intelligence</ent> -
I am not bound by his opinion.

II. Paragraphs 12 and 14 are indeed legal. Should
you have any specific questions concerning the legality of
any of the provisions, I suggest you consult your own attorney.</p>

<p> I assure you that the very purpose of the non-disclosure agreement is to give the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> full
control over the conduct of the investigation, including
the ultimate disclosure of information to the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n
public. In no manner should it be construed as <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent>
being restricted in its investigation by the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> or any other
federal agency or department.

In closing, I remind you of paragraph 13 of the
non-disclosure agreement which provides that you may not
"indicate, divulge or acknowledge" the fact that you have
been retained as a consultant until after the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>
has been terminated. I have seen a press release concerning
yourself issued by Mr. Altmans in conjunction with a new article
in Gallery magazine. I note that while you technically did
not violate the non-disclosure agreement which you signed,
by carefully wording the release to describe the work you
had done for <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> in the past, this is the exact
kind of exploitation of a consultant relationship that the
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> desires to avoid during its existence.

If you have any other questions or comments on the
non-disclosure agreement, they should be addressed to Mr.
<ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> as Chief Counsel.</p>

<p> Sincerely,</p>

<p> [<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent>]</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent>
Chairman</p>

<p> LS:jwc</p>

<p> Exhibit D
____________________________________________________________</p>

<p> 193 Pinewood Road
<ent type='ORG'>Hartsdale</ent>, NY 10530</p>

<p> April 5, 1978</p>

<p> Representative <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent>
U.S. <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives
<ent type='PERSON'>Ray</ent>bur <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Office Building
<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>, D.C. 20515

Dear <ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent>,

Thank you for your most reassuring letter of March 16, 1978.
As you know I have great faith in your own personal integrity
and your goals as discussed with you at lunch nearly a year
ago. I understand the necessity for non disclosure and
sensitive discretion in the way the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> is pro-ceeding. I believe I understand it more than most researchers
because of my close working relationship with the staff and the
committee ever since it started.

You can rest assured that it is my intention to continue to
assist you and to support your efforts right up to the finish
line. I want to avoid as much as you do any exploitation of my
relationship to the committee that would cause problems for you
or for me, especially with the media.

In this regard, the press release you mentioned in your letter
from Gallery magazine was initially prepared by their public
relations department, and included a statement taht I am a
consultant to the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>. I asked them to delete the
statement and they insisted on retaining something about my
assistance to the committee in order to help establish my
credibility with their readers. After some discussion I was
able to get them to modify the statement to apply to the past
work for <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent>.

There will be another article in the June 1978 issue using this
same statement. I believe I mentioned the article to you several
months ago. It is about the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> weapon system developed by
Charles Senseney at <ent type='PERSON'>Fort Detrick</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Maryland</ent> using rocket propelled
flechettes carrying paralyzing poison launched by an umbrella.
I described in the article the evidence pointing toward the use
of this weapons system in Dealey Plaza. The article will appear
on May 2 on the newsstands.

I read your March 16 letter, on March 22, upon my return from a
trip to <ent type='GPE'>Japan</ent> and a vacation. I contacted Gallery asking them to
delete entirely the statement about me and the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>.
They told me it was too late, that the issue had already gone to
press. However, they did agree to delete the statement from any



[the remainder of this letter was missing from the copy of the
edition used to make this on-line version. --Editor]</p>

<p> Exhibit E
____________________________________________________________</p>

<p> <ent type='GPE'>LOUIS</ent> STOKES, <ent type='GPE'>OHIO</ent>, CHAIRMAN</p>

<p>RICHARDSON <ent type='NORP'>PREYER</ent>, N.C. SAMUEL L. DEVINE, <ent type='GPE'>OHIO</ent>
WALTER E. FAUNTROY, D.C. STEWART B. <ent type='PERSON'>MCKINNEY</ent>, CONN.
YVONNE BRATHWAITE BURKE, <ent type='GPE'>CALIF</ent>. <ent type='GPE'>CHARLES</ent> THONE, NEBR.
<ent type='PERSON'>CHRISTOPHER</ent> J. DODD, CONN. HAROLD S. SAWYER, MICH.
HAROLD E. <ent type='ORG'>FORD</ent>, TENN.
FLOYD J. FITHIAN, <ent type='GPE'>IND</ent>.
ROBERT W. EDGAR, PA.
------------
(202) 225-4624</p>

<p> Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>
U.S <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives
3331 <ent type='ORG'>HOUSE</ent> OFFICE BUILDING, ANNEX 2
<ent type='GPE'>WASHINGTON</ent>, D.C. 20515</p>

<p> May 15, 1978</p>

<p> Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>
193 Pinewood Road
<ent type='ORG'>Hartsdale</ent>, NY 10530

Dear Mr. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>:

Thank you for your thoughtful letter of April 5
and I hope that you will excuse my delay in responding.

I appreciate your expression of confidence in me
and your reassurance of your continued support. With
regard to the matter of the press release, I understand
your situation and it was most thoughtful of you to
advise me in advance about the article in the June issue
of Gallery magazine.

Your letter has been sent on to <ent type='ORG'>the Committee</ent> staff
in order that they might share your recommendations about
<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Case <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent>.

Thank you again for your continuing support.

Sincerely,


[<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent>]

<ent type='GPE'>LOUIS</ent> STOKES
Chairman

LS:thn</p>

<p> Exhibit F
____________________________________________________________</p>

<p>
193 Pinewood Road
<ent type='ORG'>Hartsdale</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> 10530

September 22, 1978


Representative <ent type='PERSON'>Yvonne Burke</ent>
U.S. <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives
<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>, D.C. 20515

Dear Mrs. <ent type='PERSON'>Burke</ent>:

I don't know whether you recall our meeting on
July 21, 1977 when <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> White, <ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> Groden and I
made presentations to the J.F.K. subcommittee of the
Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>. You may
remember my showing a summary of photographic evidence
of conspiracy in the <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> assassination. You asked
some very pertinent questions which I answered about
how to obtain films and photos from media organizations
that were stonewalling at the time.

I am truly sorry that you have missed the first
three weeks of the J.F.K. hearings because I feel that
your presence would have created at least a minority
of one against the carefully orchestrated cover up that
is now takinq place. I had great faith in the committee,
especially after a luncheon meeting with <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent>
in 1977 and after the presentation to you.

I want you personally to know that I have now lost
all of that faith. The farce that is going on is really
almost unbelievable to an honest researcher. All
witnesses (except <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Cyril</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Wecht</ent></ent>), all panels employed by
the committee, the staff and the committee members doing
the questioning, obviously made up their minds a long
time ago that <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Lee Harvey</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent></ent> was the <ent type='ORG'>lone assassin</ent>,
that there was no conspiracy and that the <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent>
<ent type='ORG'>Commission</ent> was right.

I cannot understand how this came about. As the
most likely committee member to still keep an open mind,
I would like to ask your opinion.

How did the committee staff ignore all of the
evidence of conspiracy. I am speaking not only
about the photographic evidence, but about the
information that Clifford <ent type='PERSON'>Fenton</ent> and his team
uncovered in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent>. I know you know about
that from my conversations with <ent type='PERSON'>Ted</ent> Gandolfo and
<ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>.

Do you believe there was a conspiracy? If you
do, will you say so when you return to <ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>?
Will you insist that the committee hear from the
important <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent> witnesses as well as the
others I recommended long long ago. Specifically,
will you insist that the committee call as witnesses:
<ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Hosty</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> du Bruys, Regis <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent>
Case <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Harry Dean</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ronald Augustinovich</ent>, Mary
Hope, Guy Gabaldin, <ent type='NORP'>Frenchy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent>, Emilio
<ent type='ORG'>Santana</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> Lawrence, <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Braden</ent>, E. Howard Hunt,
<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Helms</ent> and the others listed in the document
I gave <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent> in 1977. If you can't or won't,
God help this country.


Yours sincerely,


<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>



P.S. In the case of key witness <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Case <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent>,
Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent> assured me this spring that the committee
would contact him. As of this date, he has never
been contacted. He knows who killed President <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>.</p>

<p> Exhibit G
____________________________________________________________</p>

<p> <ent type='GPE'>LOUIS</ent> STOKES, <ent type='GPE'>OHIO</ent>, CHAIRMAN</p>

<p>RICHARDSON <ent type='NORP'>PREYER</ent>, N.C. SAMUEL L. DEVINE, <ent type='GPE'>OHIO</ent>
WALTER E. FAUNTROY, D.C. STEWART B. <ent type='PERSON'>MCKINNEY</ent>, CONN.
YVONNE BRATHWAITE BURKE, <ent type='GPE'>CALIF</ent>. <ent type='GPE'>CHARLES</ent> THONE, NEBR.
<ent type='PERSON'>CHRISTOPHER</ent> J. DODD, CONN. HAROLD S. SAWYER, MICH.
HAROLD E. <ent type='ORG'>FORD</ent>, TENN.
FLOYD J. FITHIAN, <ent type='GPE'>IND</ent>.
ROBERT W. EDGAR, PA.
------------
(202) 225-4624</p>

<p> Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>
U.S <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives
3331 <ent type='ORG'>HOUSE</ent> OFFICE BUILDING, ANNEX 2
<ent type='GPE'>WASHINGTON</ent>, D.C. 20515</p>

<p> October 10, 1978</p>

<p> Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>
193 Pinewood Road
<ent type='ORG'>Hartsdale</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> 10530

Dear Mr. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>:

I was greatly disturbed by your letter of September
23, 1978 in which you stated that, "I have one last hope
that what we are witnessing in your hearings is a charade
meant to fool the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> and the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent>. If it is, you have fooled
me. If it is not, your statements to me over the past year
about getting at the truth were all meaningless. I have
lost all faith in you and the committee."

I must say that I deeply regret the fact that you
have lost faith in the performance of my committee. We
have attempted to do a thorough, competent and professional
job which would be a source of pride for you and other
concerned <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>ns.

I should state here for the record, Mr. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, that
I find nothing inconsistent in my statements to you over the
year indicating that the committee would be seeking the truth
and nothing but the truth during the course of the investigation
and the testimony that the committee has received during its
public hearings. Perhaps you are confused because I did not
explicitly state that the truth the committee is seeking is
not your truth or my truth, but truth supported by the weight
of the evidence.

Thanks again for your past and current concerns. I
assure you that the committee will make every effort to tell
the whole story to the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n people.

Sincerely,

[<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent>]
Chairman


LS: icmj</p>

<p> Exhibit H
____________________________________________________________</p>

<p>

193 Pinewood Road
<ent type='ORG'>Hartsdale</ent>, NY 10530



October 30, 1978




Representative <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent>
Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>
U.S. <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives
3369 <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Office Building, Annex 2
<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>, D.C. 20515

Dear <ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent>:

I appreciate your responding to my September 23 letter.
I am truly sorry to be so disturbing to you concerning
the committee's hearings. I wish I could be more
complimentary and positive about your work.

I could not agree with you more that the "truth supported
by the weight of the evidence" is what we are all after.
I'm enclosing for your information one more copy of the
document I gave to <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Henry</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> A. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> Tannenbaum, and you in 1976 and 1977.

Unless you call the witnesses listed on pages 4-6 of this
document, <ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent>, you have not dealt with the most impor-tant evidence of all. How can you possibly claim to have
unearthed anything approximating the truth, unless you
and the rest of the committee interrogate with strength,
the following important witnesses that you missed:

<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Case <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> P. <ent type='ORG'>Hosty</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Louis Ivon</ent>, Victor
Marchetti, <ent type='PERSON'>Gorden Novel</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Ronald Augustinovich</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Mary Hope</ent>,
Manuel Garcia <ent type='PERSON'>Gonzalez</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>William</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Seymour</ent></ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>Emilio Santana</ent>,
Guy Gabaldin, Major L.M. <ent type='GPE'>Bloomfield</ent>, Harry <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent>s,
Sylvia Odio and <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>.

The document explains how each of these witnesses was
involved in the assassination of investigations of it.
It is based, not just on my research, but on painful
hours of investigative efforts of many, many people,
including <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>'s professional staff, the
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> to Investigate <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> and others.

I understand that <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> P. <ent type='ORG'>Hosty</ent> is finally ready to
tell his real story, at the risk of physical harm to
himself and his family. You have not called him.
<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Case <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent> has been ready to testify for a
long time. Despite my requests to Dr. <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent> and to
you, he has not been called and no effort has been
made to locate him through the only person who knows
where he is, <ent type='PERSON'>Dick Russell</ent>.

If you will pardon my saying so <ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent>, something about
just those two failures stinks, not to mention all of
the others.

It is not too late to save your reputations. You can
still call those witnesses in December. I hope you do.


Yours Sincerely,



Dick <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent></p>

<p> Exhibit I
____________________________________________________________</p>

<p>

193 Pinewood Road
<ent type='ORG'>Hartsdale</ent>, NY 10530

November 24, 1978




Representative <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent>
Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>
U.S. <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives
3369 <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> Office Building, Annex 2
<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>, D.C. 20515

Dear <ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent>:

I am still waiting for a reply to my letter of October 30,
1978. I thought I should write again to remind you that
the witnesses you should call in December are not going to
be around much longer. I'm afraid that <ent type='PERSON'>Gorden Novel</ent>,
<ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> Case <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Hosty</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> de Brueys, in
particular may go the same way that Regis <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, <ent type='PERSON'>William</ent>
<ent type='PERSON'>Sullivan</ent>, and George de Mohrenschildt went. You really
must call them before they die.

Regis <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> reportedly died of natural causes the day
before you were to talk with him. I do not believe that.
How many more key witnesses have to die before you would
be convinced? <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>, du Brueys and <ent type='ORG'>Hosty</ent> were Oswald's
points of contact in the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent>, receiving his reports on the
conspiratorial group planning JFK's assassination. I have
known this since 1971 directly from Hosty's own lips via
<ent type='PERSON'>Carver Gaten</ent> and <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Gochenaur</ent>. Regis <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> also knew
why the <ent type='ORG'>FBI</ent> was searching for <ent type='PERSON'>Clay Shaw</ent> under his alias
<ent type='PERSON'>Clay Bertrand</ent> in <ent type='GPE'>New Orleans</ent>, *before* <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Dean</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Andrews</ent></ent> received
that phone call from him about defending <ent type='PERSON'>Oswald</ent>. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
may also have been one of the three agents who took the
Babushka lady's film away from her. At least she told me
he was one of them from his photo.

So Regis <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent> had to die. So do <ent type='PERSON'>Warren</ent> du Brueys and
<ent type='PERSON'>James</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Hosty</ent>. If they die of "natural causes" in the next
month or two, don't say I didn't warn you.

<ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent> and Novel are in even greater danger. <ent type='PERSON'>Nagell</ent> may
now be safe. He fled the country recently. However, the
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> has tentacles everywhere, so he will not really be safe
wherever he is. Novel could easily be killed, since he is
in prison. That is one of the easiest places for the death
squad to catch up with him.

As I have had told you in previous letters, the reason you
*must* call Novel is that there is a very strong possibility
that he is the umbrella man. If you laugh at that and try
to tell me that you found the umbrella man, Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Witt</ent>, I'll
laugh right back at you and tell you that farce you put on
for the <ent type='GPE'>America</ent>n public didn't fool anyone with his eyes
even half way open. In addition to the obviously planned
sequence of events and the way in which Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Witt</ent> surfaced,
his umbrella was certainly not the one used in Dealey Plaza.
It was the wrong size, had the wrong number of ribs, and was
missing the two round white bulbs on either end when folded
up.

No, <ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent>, Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Witt</ent> was either planted upon you or else
your staff planted him. I'll give you the benefit of the
doubt for the moment and assume that you do not know he
was a plant. If you let it go as is, you and Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Preyer</ent>
and the rest of the committee are going to look pretty
silly.

You absolutely must call as witnesses, <ent type='PERSON'>Gorden Novel</ent>, and
at the other end, Charles Sensenay and the <ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> people asso-ciated with <ent type='PERSON'>Fort Detrick</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>Maryland</ent>, where that umbrella
launching system was made. Incidentally, two <ent type='NORP'>Bulgarian</ent>
intelligence agents have recently been assassinated in
<ent type='GPE'>England</ent> with an umbrella weapon using poison flechettes,
very similar to the one used on <ent type='PERSON'>JFK</ent>.

I would appreciate a response to this letter telling me
what you plan to do about those witnesses.


Best regards,



Dick <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent></p>

<p> Exhibit J
____________________________________________________________</p>

<p> <ent type='GPE'>LOUIS</ent> STOKES, <ent type='GPE'>OHIO</ent>, CHAIRMAN</p>

<p>RICHARDSON <ent type='NORP'>PREYER</ent>, N.C. SAMUEL L. DEVINE, <ent type='GPE'>OHIO</ent>
WALTER E. FAUNTROY, D.C. STEWART B. <ent type='PERSON'>MCKINNEY</ent>, CONN.
YVONNE BRATHWAITE BURKE, <ent type='GPE'>CALIF</ent>. <ent type='GPE'>CHARLES</ent> THONE, NEBR.
<ent type='PERSON'>CHRISTOPHER</ent> J. DODD, CONN. HAROLD S. SAWYER, MICH.
HAROLD E. <ent type='ORG'>FORD</ent>, TENN.
FLOYD J. FITHIAN, <ent type='GPE'>IND</ent>.
ROBERT W. EDGAR, PA.
------------
(202) 225-4624</p>

<p> Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>
U.S <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives
3331 <ent type='ORG'>HOUSE</ent> OFFICE BUILDING, ANNEX 2
<ent type='GPE'>WASHINGTON</ent>, D.C. 20515</p>

<p> December 4, 1978</p>

<p> Mr. Dick <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>
193 Pinewood Rqad
<ent type='ORG'>Hartsdale</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> 10530

Dear Mr. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>:

Thank you for your letter of November 24, 1978.

I am aware of the amount of time you have spent
analyzing the assassination of President <ent type='PERSON'>John</ent> F. <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>
and your interest in the work of the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on
<ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent> since its inception.

However, I regret that under our Rules, it is
impossible for us to respond to your letter in a manner
which would reveal the substance or procedure of our
investigation, or the names of those persons who will be
called to testify before the committee.

The committee is, of course, grateful for your
suggestions and those of the many other concerned citizens
who have taken the time to write.

Sincerely,

[<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent>]

<ent type='GPE'>LOUIS</ent> STOKES
Chairman



LS:jl</p>

<p> Exhibit K
____________________________________________________________</p>

<p> <ent type='GPE'>LOUIS</ent> STOKES, <ent type='GPE'>OHIO</ent>, CHAIRMAN</p>

<p>RICHARDSON <ent type='NORP'>PREYER</ent>, N.C. SAMUEL L. DEVINE, <ent type='GPE'>OHIO</ent>
WALTER E. FAUNTROY, D.C. STEWART B. <ent type='PERSON'>MCKINNEY</ent>, CONN.
YVONNE BRATHWAITE BURKE, <ent type='GPE'>CALIF</ent>. <ent type='GPE'>CHARLES</ent> THONE, NEBR.
<ent type='PERSON'>CHRISTOPHER</ent> J. DODD, CONN. HAROLD S. SAWYER, MICH.
HAROLD E. <ent type='ORG'>FORD</ent>, TENN.
FLOYD J. FITHIAN, <ent type='GPE'>IND</ent>.
ROBERT W. EDGAR, PA.
------------
(202) 225-4624</p>

<p> Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>
U.S <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives
3331 <ent type='ORG'>HOUSE</ent> OFFICE BUILDING, ANNEX 2
<ent type='GPE'>WASHINGTON</ent>, D.C. 20515
</p>

<p> JAN 16 1978
</p>

<p> <ent type='PERSON'>Richard</ent> E. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>, Esq.
193 Pinewood Road
<ent type='ORG'>Hartsdale</ent>, <ent type='GPE'>New York</ent> 10530

Dear Mr. <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>:

In response to your letter of January 9,
1978, I have reviewed your proposed article "The
<ent type='ORG'>CIA</ent> Weapon System Used in the Assassination of
President <ent type='PERSON'>Kennedy</ent>." It is my opinion that the article
is derived from your own sources of information, and
contains no information that has come into your
possession by virtue of your consulting work with the
<ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>. Accordingly, your proposed publication of
the article does not violate the terms of your non-disclosure agreement. As I am sure you can appreciate,
further comment by myself upon the article or its
proposed publication would be inappropriate, and
consequently I decline to express any review or
comment upon it.

Thank you for your continuing cooperation
with the Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent>.

Sincerely,

[G. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent></ent>]

G. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent></ent>

GRB:jwc</p>

<p> Exhibit L
____________________________________________________________</p>

<p> 193 Pinewood Road
<ent type='ORG'>Hartsdale</ent>, NY 10530</p>

<p> August 3, 1978</p>

<p> Mr. <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Robert</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Blakey</ent></ent>
Select <ent type='ORG'>Committee</ent> on <ent type='ORG'>Assassinations</ent>
U.S. <ent type='ORG'>House</ent> of Representatives
<ent type='GPE'>Washington</ent>, D.C. 20515

Dear <ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent>:

Following our telephone conversation on Tu<ent type='ORG'>esd</ent>ay August 1,
I checked with <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Cutler</ent></ent>, my co-author on the <ent type='ORG'>Umbrella</ent>
Weapon System article in Gallery June 1978. <ent type='PERSON'>Bob</ent> told me
he left with Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Preyer</ent> and with you, photographic material
showing that The <ent type='ORG'>Umbrella</ent> Man (<ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent>) was quite probably
J. <ent type='PERSON'>Gordon Novel</ent>.

Your news photo of him reinforces that belief for both of
us. I did not have that portion of the Couch film from
<ent type='ORG'>WFAA</ent> and so had never seen TUM's face as clearly as it
appears there. The <ent type='PERSON'>Bothun</ent> photo of him has a light
reflection around his nose, as I'm sure you know.

We have a 1962-3 photo of Novel taken from the same angle
as the Couch, film of <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent> and a photo comparison convinces
us more than ever that Novel is <ent type='ORG'>TUM</ent>. Mr. <ent type='PERSON'>Preyer</ent> no doubt
told you back in April that Novel is in a jail in <ent type='GPE'>Georgia</ent>,
framed for a crime he and <ent type='PERSON'>Jim Garrison</ent>, his former lawyer,
both claim he didn't commit.


Best regards,



Dick <ent type='GPE'>Sprague</ent>

DS/mc

P.S. I am still waiting for a response to my letters to
<ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Louis</ent> <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent></ent> about attending the hearings beginning
August 14.

cc: L. <ent type='PERSON'>Stokes</ent>
R. <ent type='PERSON'>Cutler</ent></p>

<div>--</div>

<p> I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes
me to tremble for the safety of my country. . . . Corporations have been
enthroned, an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the
money-power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working
upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in a few
hands and the Republic is destroyed.</p>

<p> --- <ent type='PERSON'><ent type='PERSON'>Abraham</ent> <ent type='ORG'>Lincoln</ent></ent> (quoted in <ent type='PERSON'>Jack</ent> London's "<ent type='ORG'>The Iron Heel</ent>").</p>

</xml>