Jump to content


Photo

Bill Simpich's State Secret

Oswald Mexico City Angleton JMWAVE Morales Harvey Mole hunt CIA Goodpasture Moskalev

  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#21 Tom Scully

Tom Scully

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 38 posts

Posted 20 April 2014 - 01:02 PM

Huh???   :wacko:

 

Maybe I am just making excuses for my disorganized and often lengthy posts. I don't have control over where searches take me. Enthusiasm influences me often to post too soon and the content is raw. The other point I was attempting to make was that I think it is premature to dismiss Bill Simpich's sincerity or decide on his motives.

 

Continuing from my last post...
 

 

https://www.theatlan...ug/arlen-p1.htm

by Michael J. Arlen

I went to work for Life in the summer of 1952. I was twenty-one years old, just out of college (where I had majored indistinctly in Greek and Latin, and had stumbled my way through the usual writing courses), and felt that it was about time I had a job. It was June....

....Sid picked up a couple of wire-service pictures off the Newsfront pile. "Hey," he said. "These ought to be going to Sports. They're doing a big takeout on politicians and athletes." "They are?" I said. "Sure," said Sid. "Kauffman is shooting in California." He gathered up the pictures and sauntered off. "Hi, Mait!" he called to an older rather distinguished-looking man who was walking by. Maitland Edey was the assistant managing editor, I knew that much. "Hi, Sid," said Mait.

Life was a friendly, first-name sort of place, whose physical layout then was somewhere between that of a well-scrubbed newspaper office and a conservative ad agency. The Newsfront reporters worked in an open area, a "bullpen," as did the reporters in a few of the larger departments, such as Foreign and Entertainment. Writers and editors had small, wood-desk, linoleum-floor offices, which were virtually never kept closed. Sometimes, on a deadline night, a Newsfront writer might close his door. But that was only in an emergency. For the most part, the doors were always open. Everyone sauntered in and out. Everyone was pals....

...."'Spellbinders' is closing tomorrow," said Thornton one afternoon. Casual. Very professional. The captain takes command of his ship. Gone were the vagueness and disorder—only to be replaced, I discovered, by a gentle malaise of anxiety and worry. The next morning we were scheduled to show pictures—with a commentary by the reporter, me—to Ed Thompson, the managing editor. Big Ed. The brusque, roughhewn managing editor from the Midwest, who had been hired a few years back to rescue Life from its too extensive dabblings in Culture and move it into News. Ed Thompson didn't give a damn about the Renaissance Man series. Ed Thompson smoked cigars all day long. He swore aloud. He had been a colonel in the Air Force. He was the best damn picture man in the country, said hotshot Newsfront reporters admiringly......

 

 

 

Impact: the Army Air Forces' confidential picture history ...

books.google.com/books?id=pHzxAAAAMAAJ

Air Force Historical Foundation - 1980 - ‎Snippet view - ‎More editions

How Impact Began, Was Edited and Used During World War II By James Parton The Development and Application of Air Power Essays by Lieutenant ... He was Edward K. Thompson, subsequently Managing Editor and Editor of Life and currently Editor of the distinguished ... Thompson signed up two Life veterans, Lieutenant (later Major) Maitland A. Edey and Lieutenant (later Captain) Tom Prideaux.

 

 

A love affair with Life & Smithsonian - Page 129 books.google.com/books?id=H8tmAAAAMAAJ
Edward K. Thompson - 1995 - ‎Snippet view - ‎More editions
person I was trying to dismiss would come over, put an arm around my shoulder, and say, "Don't take it so hard, Ed." I had sense ... of Time Inc., wrote, "Thompson would brighten perceptibly when there was any prospect of a late-breaking story turning a long day's work into a longer night's. ... Edey had worked on Impact with me earlier, and later became editor of the highly successful Time-Life Books.

 

http://educationforu...ic=3234&p=22493

Lee Forman Posted 22 February 2005 - 07:22 PM

Shanet - I believe the letters spell 'Kodak' -- Kodakchrome or Cinechrome or something similar. I do not know whether or not they are consistent throughout the film....

.....
Using the 'primary' layer of the Zapruder film to establish much of anything, IMO, is highly suspect - as will one day be seen when one of the other films emerges - despite the predictable efforts by the disinformationists to discredit entire as a hoax.

There is another section which IMO appears to be a view from behind the picketfence, focused on the action behind the retaining wall. Inconclusive, but would a highly sophisticated computer program be able to separate the cross-talk using some serious algorithms and photogrammetery? I'll offer that one - I may animate it to gauge movement.

Also - don't know if you ever saw my piece on the Shaneyfelt exhibit? I'll post it here, as it may be connected. Edward K. Thompson had a hand in 'filling in the cracks' in the backyard photo. Thompson was C.D. Jackson's editor and apparently had some skill at creating composites. There's a basement/garage I would like to root through. Maybe he has some kin that can be contacted.

The attached from the Warren Report.

- lee

 

 

http://educationforu...ic=3234&p=22510

 

Sharp eye, Lee, as usual
Looks like the mattes had picked up some text along the way ...

Good stuff on Thompson, that guy was a ranking "lifer" in the agencies.
Edited the Army Intelligence Magazine and was in charge of intelligence
concerning the Luftwaffe....now that is just a good independent journalist, Lee...

dry.gif

This whole Zapruder / backyard / Life Magazine connection goes through
an intelligence agent, Thompson...very interesting...
Edited by Shanet Clark, 22 February 2005

 

.

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.nytimes.c...or-resigns.html

Digest Editor Resigns By DAVID E. SANGER Published: March 26, 1984

The editor in chief of Reader's Digest, Edward T. Thompson, resigned Friday because of what the company called ''fundamental differences of editorial philosophy'' with the magazine's board of directors.

His successor, effective immediately, will be Kenneth O. Gilmore, the magazine's executive editor and vice president of the Reader's Digest Association, the privately held parent company of the publication.

A spokesman for the association would not elaborate on the reasons for Mr. Thompson's sudden departure, other than to say that his differences were with ''representatives of Lila Acheson Wallace,'' who owns all of the voting shares in the company. There was no answer yesterday at Mr. Thompson's home in Bedford, N.Y. The spokesman said that Mr. Thompson, who is 56 years old and has edited the magazine for eight years, would take early retirement.....

 

http://www.nytimes.c...n-jacobson.html

E. T. Thompson Weds Susan Jacobson

Published: November 29, 1981

Susan L. Jacobson, a freelance editor, and Edward T. Thompson, editor in chief of Reader's Digest, were married yesterday at the home of the bridegroom in Bedford, N.Y. The ceremony was performed by the Rev. Stephen M. Bolle, rector of St. Luke's Episcopal Church in Katonah, N.Y.

The bride, who was until recently a senior editor at Reader's Digest, is a former associate editor at the Ladies' Home Journal. She was graduated from Wells College, where she was dean of students.

She is a daughter of Mrs. Allan C. Jacobson Jr. of Washington, N.J., and the late Mr. Jacobson. Her father was manager of the women's wear woolen division of J. P. Stevens & Company.

Mr. Thompson, whose previous marriage ended in divorce, is a member of the executive committee and a director of Reader's Digest. He is a former writer at Fortune magazine and at McGraw-Hill Publications. He is a graduate of the Lawrenceville School and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is a son of Edward K. Thompson of Mahopac, N.Y., and the late Marguerite Thompson. His father is a former editor and publisher of Smithsonian magazine and former editor of Life magazine.

 

 

Summary:  After WWII, two USAAF Intel. officers come together in high ranking Life Magazine editorial positions.

 Thompson's son rises to the top at Reader's Digest, Edey's son employs Robert E Webster for the remainder

of his working years, under this manager.:

 

http://www.southcoas...EWS03/912160346

 

NEW BEDFORD — David G. Davignon, 62, of Fairhaven, died suddenly on Monday, December 14, 2009, at St. Luke's Hospital in New Bedford. He was the husband of his high school sweetheart Susan (Barrow) Davignon, to whom he had been married for 41 years.

Born in New Bedford, the son of the late Philip and Marie E. (Picard) Davignon, he was a graduate of Fairhaven High School, class of 1965. He continued his education at Southern Arkansas University in Magnolia, Arkansas.

An avid boater, David began working with Edey & Duff in 1970, a boat building company located in Mattapoisett and Marathon, FL. In his 40 years with Edey & Duff, acting as President and General Manager, David endeavored many projects, two of his favorites being the Conch 27, a fishing boat aimed at the fishing guides in the Florida Keys, and the Sakonnet 23, a traditional double ended day sailor.....

 

 



#22 Tom Scully

Tom Scully

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 38 posts

Posted 20 April 2014 - 04:59 PM

http://www.edwardjay...ry/nosenko.htm 

Diary of Jay Edward Epstein

Entry dated :: March 4, 1976

 

I had no idea the maze within a maze I was about to enter with this interview. Some three months earlier, I had a drink at the University Club with two Reader's Digest editors, Fulton Oursler, Jr. and Edward Thompson. I had met Thompson when he offered to republish my New Yorker article on the Black Panthers and the Press (unfortunately, the New Yorker refused to then allow any of its writers to be excerpted in the Digest.) Both men impressed me with their political savvy, seriousness and charm. They proposed that I write a biography of Lee Harvey Oswald which the Digest would amply finance. I initially rejected the idea, explaining that the Warren Commission's documents had already been picked through by numerous writers and had not produced any new evidence.

Thompson replied, measuring his words carefully, that the Digest did indeed have new evidence. They could furnish me access to Yuri Nosenko, the KGB officer who had supervised Oswald's case in Moscow before himself defecting to the United States....

 



#23 Charles Drago

Charles Drago

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,116 posts
  • LocationWherever I am observed by myself.

Posted 20 April 2014 - 07:41 PM

The other point I was attempting to make was that I think it is premature to dismiss Bill Simpich's sincerity or decide on his motives.

 

Given Simpich's Morales assessment, it is most decidedly NOT premature to dismiss his conclusion as the product of a fatally flawed intellect and/or a hostile operation.


"[Y]ou can't blame the innocent, they are always guiltless. All you can do is control them or eliminate them. Innocence is a kind of insanity." -- Graham Greene, The Quiet American

"If an individual, through either his own volition or events over which he had no control, found himself taking up residence in a country undefined by flags or physical borders, he could be assured of one immediate and abiding consequence. He was on his own, and solitude and loneliness would probably be his companions unto the grave." -- James Lee Burke, Rain Gods

a wind has blown the rain away and blown
the sky away and all the leaves away,
and the trees stand. i think i too have known
autumn too long
-- e. e. cummings

#24 Bill Simpich

Bill Simpich

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 21 April 2014 - 02:39 AM

Let me introduce myself to those of you that I haven't met.

 

The main reason that I wrote State Secret was to study the impersonation of Oswald in Mexico City and its implications.  The building blocks of that study was the wiretap operations in Mexico City, the double agents in play during 1959-1963, and the framing of Oswald.  I started off with the intention of focusing on the cover-up of the assassination - and placed that work in Chapter 6 - but concluded that the impersonation question was critical and a good way to tell the story. 

 

On solving the assassination, I stand by what I wrote:  "The best insights are usually obtained when you are looking for something else."  I stumbled across some evidence that I couldn't ignore, which I used for the last chapter of the book.  Now I'm looking for feedback.

 

I am still studying how Staff D used its wiretaps and other listening devices to provide communications intelligence to the NSA in 1963.  That was the beginning of the enormous surveillance state we see all around us today.  Since I finished the book, I've learned that Staff D even had its own "special center" communications line to the Mexico City CIA station, quite apart from the normal traffic directed by CIAHQ.  (See this 10/11/63 message, NARA # 104-10150-10001 - I'm still having problems using the link tool on this forum).  Unlike the CIA and FBI, the NSA and military intelligence have provided very little assassination-related material pursuant to the JFK Act, and have never been challenged for their failures.

 

So don't pigeonhole me too quickly in favor of one theory versus another.  I am a student of the case like everyone else.  I wrote that my observations about Harvey and Morales and their buddies was a "hypothesis" - not yet a theory, much less a fact.  One of the people I believe was in the thick of it was Col. Hal Feeney, who had his own Castro assassination plot going when he was with ONI and worked with Morales and the Miami station in Cuba operations during the autumn of 1963.  I have written that any theory of the case should examine the role of the military and private economic interests.

 

I would enjoy fielding any questions you have about my research, and only ask that we approach the subject with mutual respect and minimal assumptions.



#25 Phil Dragoo

Phil Dragoo

    Founding Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 585 posts

Posted 21 April 2014 - 03:24 AM

Bill, do you refer to this cable:

 

http://www.maryferre...273&relPageId=2

 

I see Harvey as a facilitator due to his creation and expertise in special teams, Mongoose, Task Force W, executive action, ZRRIFLE, and Morales because he was exceptional at assassination.

 

Sponsorship resides in an unseen cabal making its wishes known to key facilitators who in turn will communicate through the standard compartmentalized chain down to the mechanics.

 

In the Evica/Prouty/Scott model of Sponsor-Facilitator-Mechanic, Harvey and Morales would be in the Facilitator range.  If Morales were a shooter or tactical team leader he would be a mechanic.

 

To place Angleton who created the patsy, whom Newman assigns file manipulation as a key of maneuvering this patsy into position without alarm, in any but a key facilitator position would be illogical.

 

 

 

Do you see Oswald in Mexico City?  After all the grand kabuki which you chronicle, it still seems possible he's merely a bus ticket Ruth Paine "found" conveniently post mortem.

 

 



#26 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,070 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 21 April 2014 - 09:43 AM

Welcome to the Forum, Bill. I can assure you that your "theories" will be challenged here, but not without cause nor without due respect. The issue becomes not so much

hinged on the possibility of your scenario being true, but the improbability. Attendant to that improbability does the question as to motivation arise. I am encouraged that

you are a self-described student of the case as opposed to an oracle.

 

CIA_Mexi.png


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#27 Guest_Linda OHara_*

Guest_Linda OHara_*
  • Guests

Posted 21 April 2014 - 09:55 AM

Mr. Simpich, you say "I have written that any theory of the case should examine the role of the military and private economic interests."

 

That having been stated so clearly, I'm on board the theory 100% assuming that it designates Harvey, Morales (and other individuals not being discussed here) as both 'Facilitators and Mechanics' in the sense that there is still a tier between them and the Sponsors whom I consider to be secondary to the 'Deciders' - I believe there is a distinction.  I believe that the actual shooters are the wild card, essential but not pivotal … there were hundreds to select from.

 

I believe that those elements within the CIA who acted as the Facilitator-Mechanic team had allegiances (both financial and ideological) outside the agency and used their official intelligence credentials to maneuver things into position; perhaps even to end up as fall guys some decades later in a form of falling on their collective sword if necessary.   That was my concern with Bill Simpich's preliminary hypothesis.

 

 

I see Angleton as the perfect schill and in that sense among the Facilitators along with the aforementioned even though they were subordinate to him; he could not have authorized nor could he have covered up in the broadest sense of those terms.   I see Helms moving behind the scenes in a private sense, and certainly not willing or able to authorize without someone’s blessing.  I see him more aligned with Dulles whose fundamental allegiances had always been to the commercial interests of the United States - his role in the agency was symbiotic with but secondary to those goals.   I view him as a conduit between the Sponsors and the Deciders all of whom now have layer upon layer upon layer of deniability.

 

Which leads to those 'Sponsors' found among certain individuals within "the military, overlapping with private economic interests and vice versa."  Significant individuals had to have something to gain (or lose) to warrant the risk, and that risk had to be minimized  - otherwise the entire military would have been expected to go in search of the murderers of their Commander in Chief, and industry/finance would have to have risen up to quell an attempted overthrow of their democratic government.  Neither of those events happened.  Instead, with a lone nut, all goals were accomplished:  Kennedy was dead and could no longer threaten to dismantle The Complex; the blame immediately centered on one lonely Marine, Lee Harvey Oswald; two days later, Oswald was dead.  The balance of interests was preserved, the risk was worth it. The cover up began.    

 

Full Circle.  Who in the collective had the power to decide to assassinate the leader of the free world, and who had the power to cover that murder up?  



#28 Bill Simpich

Bill Simpich

    Newbie

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 3 posts

Posted 23 April 2014 - 02:51 AM

Intriguing comments.   I would challenge a few assumptions being made - here's one for openers.

 

I enjoy the discussions Phil Dragoo offers and have great respect for his many insights into this case.  I disagree with him about his notion that Harvey and Morales are automatically "facilitators" and not "sponsors".  I don't think anyone can offer telling evidence to make such an assertion.  It's speculation - nothing more.  Of course, he's entitled to his opinion, but it's not evidence.  It's my opinion that these men and others were either sponsors or facilitators - and that's based solely on their high positions within the agency, their skill sets, and their avowed hatred of JFK.  That's not enough evidence to make any clear conclusions.

 

Phil then says that Angleton was a "key facilitator", and any other opinion is "illogical".   Here, there is some strong evidence to the contrary. 

 

Like Phil, Newman's cogent thinking fascinated me with the possibility that Angleton might be the "mastermind" of the assassination.  After I did my own research, my current opinion is that Angleton was in a sense blackmailed by the assassination and was forced into playing a major role in the cover-up.  As I say throughout my book, this all remains a hypothesis and is not conclusive.  I am seeking out the feedback of other researchers precisely so that we can move closer to the truth. 

 

I think most of us who have read the documents agree that Angleton's people were watching Oswald very closely and on a continual basis from 1959 to 1963 - there's more than a dozen documents showing CI-SIG analyst Ann Egerter as the one who handled the Oswald file when he was in the USSR and afterwards.

 

If you read my book - particularly Chapters 2 and 5 - you'll see a pattern where Egerter is apparently using Oswald's file as a tool in a molehunt.  Both Angleton and CI-SIG were well known for conducting molehunts designed to ferret out spies trying to infiltrate the CIA.  As Paul Grabler, the CIA's first station chief in Moscow, said to a researcher, "You know what CI-SIG was?  Find the mole.  That's all they had to do." 

 

I believe these molehunts were done by referring to "Lee Henry Oswald" and similar errors such as inaccurately referring to Oswald as "5 foot 10"/165 pounds", and then tracking the trail of internal Agency communications and seeing where these errors popped up.  When these errors were found in the hands of unauthorized personnel - then you had a strong lead as to who might be a mole.  Angleton had a very strong reputation of being fond of molehunts.  For more information on molehunts, see my book and Peter Dale Scott's essay Oswald and the Hunt for Popov's Mole. 

 

In Chapter 5, I get into a study of two memos sent out on October 10 by Jack Whitten's aide Charlotte Bustos, after Mexico City reported that a man named Lee Oswald had visited the Soviet consulate on October 1, and described him in a manner matching the well-known "Mystery Man".  Bustos says that she relied on Egerter and chief Soviet counterintelligence analyst Stephan Roll for the information in these two memos.  I think these two memos are among the important evidence in this case. 

 

One of the memos went to the Mexico City station, describing "Lee Henry Oswald" as "5 foot 10, 165 pounds" that matched the Robert Webster-like description of Oswald used by Egerter and the FBI for molehunting purposes during Oswald's days in the Soviet Union. (A CIA note from the 70s confirms that the Agency knew that there was confusion in identifying the two men.)

The station was told that they were free to circulate the Robert Webster-like description among the local officers of the FBI, State, and Navy in Mexico City.

 

The other memo went to the national headquarters of the FBI, State and Navy in Washington DC.  This memo contained a description of "Lee Henry Oswald" as 6 feet tall, athletic  build, and 35 years old.  A deliberate lie, in my book.  This description was a good match for the Mystery Man, and it looks like it came right off a file card for KGB officer Yuri Moskalev (who many CIA officers believe was probably the Mystery Man). 

 

I believe that the plan was for the Oswald description in one of these memos to wind up in the wrong hands in the midst of this Egerter-created clash between these agencies' headquarters and the local offices of these agencies.  When Egerter was questioned by Congress about these two descriptions, she testified that she couldn't explain how it had happened.

 

When Angleton's CI liaison was questioned by John Newman and Jeff Morley about these two memos many years later, her audiotaped response was that this was "indicative of a keen interest in Oswald (within the Agency), held very closely on the need to know basis."

 

My point is that if Angleton was running a molehunt with the Oswald file, and creating a paper trail with these two memos that cited Egerter by name and led right back to information provided by her to Bustos, he was left holding the bag on November 22.  If the American public in 1963 had learned about all of the information that I have just recounted, the reaction would have been outrage.  Angleton would have lost his job.  The CIA's very future might have been called into question. 

 

Is it any surprise that Angleton was the key man keeping just about all the information I've just recounted away from the Warren Commission itself?

 

So I think it's a worthwhile exercise to expand our horizons and consider the possibility that some of the players closest to Oswald might have felt set up when Oswald was named on day one as the lone assassin.  Even if you disagree with my analysis of Angleton as molehunter, it's unquestioned that it was his people that had their names all over the Oswald files.   On November 22, Angleton was in a very compromised position.   I have a few other comments - but wanted to focus on this one for the moment.  I thought this might move the conversation in a good direction.

 

Bill

 

(My sources here can be found at http://www.maryferre...Secret_Chapter5 - Phil and Greg, thanks for helping me out with that previous hyperlink - I wanted to add more here, but for some reason, my screen freezes up when I add a hyperlink and then click on it while writing a post)



#29 Charles Drago

Charles Drago

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,116 posts
  • LocationWherever I am observed by myself.

Posted 23 April 2014 - 10:23 AM

Mr. Simpich,

 

So as to avoid unnecessary confusion and attendant contretemps stemming from semantics-based misunderstandings, I hope you will address the following::

 

Since, when discussing the Sponsor/Facilitator/Mechanic matrix we commonly refer to the Evica-Drago JFK Conspiracy Model, it would behoove us to know if in fact you are familiar with the model and to what extent you accept its basic premise.

 

Also, I would ask you to think very carefully about the liabilities inherent in using the term "mastermind" when describing key planners of the JFK assassination.

 

Thank you.


"[Y]ou can't blame the innocent, they are always guiltless. All you can do is control them or eliminate them. Innocence is a kind of insanity." -- Graham Greene, The Quiet American

"If an individual, through either his own volition or events over which he had no control, found himself taking up residence in a country undefined by flags or physical borders, he could be assured of one immediate and abiding consequence. He was on his own, and solitude and loneliness would probably be his companions unto the grave." -- James Lee Burke, Rain Gods

a wind has blown the rain away and blown
the sky away and all the leaves away,
and the trees stand. i think i too have known
autumn too long
-- e. e. cummings

#30 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,070 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 23 April 2014 - 11:18 AM

You're welcome, Bill.

 

I echo Charles' concern regarding the need to mitigate the potential for semantics based pitfalls to arise.  The assurance that we are "on the same page" semantically--even if

not ideologically--will be a good first step toward unambiguous communication. Once we're sure that we're all "using the same terms to refer to the same things" can we begin

to further extrapolate on their relevance.


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#31 Stan Wilbourne

Stan Wilbourne

    Founding Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 161 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 12:09 AM

Bill, I very much appreciate you being here and answering questions about your work.

 

To make certain I understand what you are saying:  It is your hypothesis that Harvey and Morales existed on the sponsorhip level of this crime?  Is that what I hear you saying?  Meaning that without them, the assassination does not happen???

 

That, these two men, however connected, conspired to kill JFK and fifty years after the fact they have baffled us all?  Harvey?  Morales?

Were these not company men?  Doing a company job?  Loyal to a fault?  Serving a master.  If not, we get into this whole "rogue" thing, which, I must say fifty years after the fact, just keeps us spinning in the same tired circles of understanding. 

 

Which keeps us going with:

 

The system works, it's just that these two men were able to circumvent it all.  The autopsy?  The motorcade route?  The SS standdown?  The White House Situation Room?  Harvey and Morales???

Whether or not Angleton was involved in this up to his furry eyebrows - and we can go back and forth on this until the cows have come home and died - there is an indication of a true source of power that may or may not have used James Angleton.  Used Harvey and Morales as well.  Like pieces on a chess board.  Knowing there was never going to be consequence for this crime.  Which, as it as turned out, has been the truth.  This power flirts with us.  Gives us bit and pieces.  I'm a long way from high school, but there's term for this particular tease that comes to mind.

Bill, we've got to move on this case.  We've got to bring some creativity to this - heaven forbid - and begin to tell a different story.

 

I don't have to prove this to a court of law - good gawd - or to a panel on Fox News, but Harvey and Morales were not on the "sponsorship" level of this crime.  Phil Dragoo is not only eloquent, he is insightful and courgaeous enough to give us his perception of the truth.  I share his perception.  Harvey and Morales were tools in a tool box. If we are to rely on the paradigm of "prove it," we might as well go home and let these fuckers get away with it.

 

Who has the power to ultilize all of these assests for a benefit?  And, could it be that President Kennedy himself was used in ways he and his brother never comprehended?

 

The country where we live, the world where we reside, is a lie.  The system is a lie.  Turning on the news, endlessly reading respected research, is never going to give us the answers we crave.  The responsbiility for understanding resides in each of us.  There is no authority that is going to bring us to understanding.

 

There is an understanding of this case if we don't get lost in the details.  And, it isn't pretty.



#32 Jim Hackett II

Jim Hackett II

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 928 posts

Posted 24 April 2014 - 02:54 AM

Brainfood for breakfast.

 

Thanks ALL.

 

A fantastic thread folks.

 

From Calder's 'JFK vs CIA' I read Helms is the head turd. A disgusting jerk to be sure.

 

I do include him but not as big cheese - too visible, too known by the Beltway and aware the agency was going to be another patsy in turn.

 

From Kinser's 'The Brothers' JF and AWDulles should have been reined in by Eisenhower and indicted by the Justice Department by the next administration instead of fired.

 

JJAngleton is doomed by his own words.

 

Dulles/Angleton/Helms/Harvey I can accept as operatives. With others to be sure.

 

Morales is quite interesting as a soldier of fascism though.

 

Jim



#33 Charles Drago

Charles Drago

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,116 posts
  • LocationWherever I am observed by myself.

Posted 24 April 2014 - 06:44 AM

Bill, I very much appreciate you being here and answering questions about your work.

 

To make certain I understand what you are saying:  It is your hypothesis that Harvey and Morales existed on the sponsorhip level of this crime?  Is that what I hear you saying?  Meaning that without them, the assassination does not happen???

 

That, these two men, however connected, conspired to kill JFK and fifty years after the fact they have baffled us all?  Harvey?  Morales?

Were these not company men?  Doing a company job?  Loyal to a fault?  Serving a master.  If not, we get into this whole "rogue" thing, which, I must say fifty years after the fact, just keeps us spinning in the same tired circles of understanding. 

 

Which keeps us going with:

 

The system works, it's just that these two men were able to circumvent it all.  The autopsy?  The motorcade route?  The SS standdown?  The White House Situation Room?  Harvey and Morales???

Whether or not Angleton was involved in this up to his furry eyebrows - and we can go back and forth on this until the cows have come home and died - there is an indication of a true source of power that may or may not have used James Angleton.  Used Harvey and Morales as well.  Like pieces on a chess board.  Knowing there was never going to be consequence for this crime.  Which, as it as turned out, has been the truth.  This power flirts with us.  Gives us bit and pieces.  I'm a long way from high school, but there's term for this particular tease that comes to mind.

Bill, we've got to move on this case.  We've got to bring some creativity to this - heaven forbid - and begin to tell a different story.

 

Wonderfully stated.  Powerfully stated.

 

The notions that the likes of Harvey and Morales were the -- God save us -- "masterminds" of the JFK conspiracy and thus properly are placed on the Sponsor level of the Evica-Drago Conspiracy Model were examined and categorically rejected for not passing the laugh test nearly two decades ago.  George Michael Evica played the primary role in dismissing such nonsense.  I addressed the issue from JFK Lancer podiums beginning in the late 1990's.  There are enough nails in this rotten coffin to repair the HMS Bounty.

 

Thus the conclusion that Mr. Simpich would have us respectfully consider represents nothing more than retrograde motion of the most dangerous variety -- action that, either through ignorance or sinister intent, supports the main goal of the cover-up: to maintain doubt and the impotence it fosters.

 

Harvey and Morales?

 

But wait!  As I stipulated earlier in this thread, perhaps we are getting lost in semantical confusion.  And so I repeat my request to Mr. Simpich:

 

Since we are discussing the Sponsor/Facilitator/Mechanic matrix we commonly refer to the Evica-Drago JFK Conspiracy Model, it would behoove us to know if in fact you are familiar with the model and to what extent you accept its basic premise.

 

I'll be in the waiting room with Adlai.


"[Y]ou can't blame the innocent, they are always guiltless. All you can do is control them or eliminate them. Innocence is a kind of insanity." -- Graham Greene, The Quiet American

"If an individual, through either his own volition or events over which he had no control, found himself taking up residence in a country undefined by flags or physical borders, he could be assured of one immediate and abiding consequence. He was on his own, and solitude and loneliness would probably be his companions unto the grave." -- James Lee Burke, Rain Gods

a wind has blown the rain away and blown
the sky away and all the leaves away,
and the trees stand. i think i too have known
autumn too long
-- e. e. cummings

#34 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,070 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:33 AM

 

I'll be in the waiting room with Adlai.

 

Having tea are we? I'll wait with you then, contemplating Stan's words of wisdom in the meantime.


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#35 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,070 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 24 August 2015 - 07:41 AM

My tea's turned bitter and cold, but Stan's comments kept the fire burning in the stove. Perhaps we can brew another pot?


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 

#36 Charles Drago

Charles Drago

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,116 posts
  • LocationWherever I am observed by myself.

Posted 24 August 2015 - 11:14 AM

It has been abundantly clear for some time that to raise serious objections to any segment of Mr. Simpich's work is to guarantee his retirement from the field.

 

So I reiterate:

 

The notions [promoted by Mr. Simpich] that the likes of Harvey and Morales were the -- God save us -- "masterminds" of the JFK conspiracy and thus properly are placed on the Sponsor level of the Evica-Drago Conspiracy Model were examined and categorically rejected for not passing the laugh test nearly two decades ago.  George Michael Evica played the primary role in dismissing such nonsense.  I addressed the issue from JFK Lancer podiums beginning in the late 1990's. There are enough nails in this rotten coffin to repair the HMS Bounty.

 

Thus the conclusion that Mr. Simpich would have us respectfully consider represents nothing more than retrograde motion of the most dangerous variety -- action that, either through ignorance or sinister intent, supports the main goal of the cover-up: to maintain doubt and the impotence it fosters.

 

Harvey and Morales?

 

But wait!  As I stipulated earlier in this thread, perhaps we are getting lost in semantical confusion.  And so I repeat my request to Mr. Simpich:

 

Since we are discussing the Sponsor/Facilitator/Mechanic matrix we commonly refer to as the Evica-Drago JFK Conspiracy Model, it would behoove us to know if in fact you are familiar with the model and to what extent you accept its basic premise.


"[Y]ou can't blame the innocent, they are always guiltless. All you can do is control them or eliminate them. Innocence is a kind of insanity." -- Graham Greene, The Quiet American

"If an individual, through either his own volition or events over which he had no control, found himself taking up residence in a country undefined by flags or physical borders, he could be assured of one immediate and abiding consequence. He was on his own, and solitude and loneliness would probably be his companions unto the grave." -- James Lee Burke, Rain Gods

a wind has blown the rain away and blown
the sky away and all the leaves away,
and the trees stand. i think i too have known
autumn too long
-- e. e. cummings

#37 Phil Dragoo

Phil Dragoo

    Founding Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 585 posts

Posted 25 August 2015 - 05:52 AM

Stephen Kinzer in The Brothers presents John Foster and Allen Dulles as raised by secretaries of state. 

 

Other boys had toy trains and six-shooters; the Brothers Dulles had countries under their tree, interned at Versailles.

 

Donovan sent Allen to Switzerland where the latter amassed caches of sniper rifles and silencers twenty years before Dealey Plaza.

 

Allen called in Hunt November 1963 the month of the forced resignation and the designation Mongoose

 

the overt op to cover the JFK hit

 

but Allen was always serving clients and our sponsors are clients unnamed, unknown, anonymous

 

Their spokesperson Rostow (with Acheson?) prevailed upon resistant Johnson and Hoover to create the Commission

 

Angleton was more than a mole-hunter.  He was accused of missing Philby.  Of torturing Nosenko because he swallowed Golitsyn

 

but actually wasn't Nosenko inconvenient?  How can you have a red plot if the Red isn't bought by the Reds?

 

Again, in the Agatha Christie fall of the Indians

 

Hoover in '72, Johnson '73, Nixon '74, Hoffa and Giancana '75, Harvey and Roselli '76, Nicoletti and DeMohrenschildt and Sullivan '77, Morales '78

 

Still standing: Helms.  Colby sailed off in a wooden shoe in '96 some say as Tenet's initiation

 

In my world Oswald didn't go to Mexico City and he wasn't simply watched--he was sliced, diced, meticulously formed into patsy-sushi

 

In the weather report of Douglass the storm clouds moved in to jeopardize Kennedy with the Bay of Pigs

 

Greg stipulates sabotage; I concur

 

Charles brings the conclusions of the Evica-Drago model to judge the quick and the dead

 

Thus we are freed of any ad hoc treatment or individual elevated to puppetmaster for a day

 

We are in the second Century of the Fed--recall how EO 11110 was born in June and died in the Fall

 

How comptroller of the currency James J. Saxon struggled in vain to reform the Fed represented by David Rockefeller now 99 on his 4th heart

 

Harvey set the tone when he hand-wrote the admonishment nothing on paper; thus did Hitler order Rommel to kill British Commandos

 

Thus did Himmler and Eichmann and the rest engineer their Unspeakable

 

We are in the era of 9/11.  I insist it was not as advertised.  Rather it was engineered, in the manner of the JFK hit

 

Casus belli, for in the post-Coolidge era, the business of America is war

 

We no more deadend with Angleton or Morales than we buy a War on Terror which arms some terrorists or a War on Drugs which supports El Chapo

 

Phillips wrote he'd trained Oswald to kill Castro, but inexplicably Oswald killed Kennedy--what crap:  Phillips didn't train Oswald to kill anybody

 

And Oswald didn't kill anybody.  Phillips was with Oswald in Dallas to reassure him.  When Oswald called Hurt, Marchetti called it a death warrant

 

The intel chain serves; it is intermediary, does not initiate.

 

There is a power which weeds the garden, removes the Patton, the Forrestal, the Kennedy

 

It dons work gloves of intel, miltary, Cuban, Mob, which may be doffed and offed and disavowed

 

It is the Unspeakable sponsor level



#38 Charles Drago

Charles Drago

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,116 posts
  • LocationWherever I am observed by myself.

Posted 25 August 2015 - 08:17 AM

To be precise: What is truly disturbing here is the disconnect between the high quality of research evident in the body of Mr. Simpich's work, and the simplemindedness and naivete on display in its deep politics-free conclusions.

 

If we assume, for the sake of argument, that Mr. Simpich has knowingly produced sophisticated disinformation, then the purpose driving its design could not be more clear.  The author's conclusions regarding the identities of assassination Sponsors, no matter how ludicrous, are protected/validated by the myriad strengths of the work on which they are counter-intuitively based.

 

Thus security measures protecting the true Sponsors are further strengthened.

 

The fact that I am at pains to discern an "innocent" explanation for the Simpich disconnect does not rise to the level of unimpeachable evidence for enemy action. Far from it.  But it nonetheless stands as a valid challenge to Mr. Simpich's high standing within the JFK research community and to his motives for burrowing so deeply and powerfully into it.

 

And it is now abundantly clear that any such challenge will be ignored not only by Mr. Simpich, but by his ardent admirers as well.

 

Have we learned nothing from our trevails?


"[Y]ou can't blame the innocent, they are always guiltless. All you can do is control them or eliminate them. Innocence is a kind of insanity." -- Graham Greene, The Quiet American

"If an individual, through either his own volition or events over which he had no control, found himself taking up residence in a country undefined by flags or physical borders, he could be assured of one immediate and abiding consequence. He was on his own, and solitude and loneliness would probably be his companions unto the grave." -- James Lee Burke, Rain Gods

a wind has blown the rain away and blown
the sky away and all the leaves away,
and the trees stand. i think i too have known
autumn too long
-- e. e. cummings

#39 Phil Dragoo

Phil Dragoo

    Founding Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 585 posts

Posted 25 August 2015 - 03:07 PM

Elevating Morales to sponsor level is akin to the Zirbel-McClellan-Nelson-Hunt-Stone LBJ cul de sac: Blame It on the Dead Guy.

 

Your question is, Is this a Linus Pauling Vitamin C moment, or an attempt to blame it on the man behind the curtain?

 

Given the enormity of the Pentagon-Langley-Fort Meade complex, and given that this Emerald City is in service to an off-site cabal

 

why then truncate causality to a field general terminated in 1978?



#40 Greg Burnham

Greg Burnham

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 3,070 posts
  • LocationSan Diego, CA

Posted 25 August 2015 - 11:23 PM

I truly enjoy reading this thread. Thank you, gentlemen.


_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/_/
 
Greg Burnham
Admin

 

 

"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- JFK

"It is difficult to abolish prejudice in those bereft of ideas. The more hatred is superficial, the more it runs deep."  -- Farewell America (1968) 

“The ancient Greek definition of happiness was the full use of your powers along lines of excellence."  -- JFK

"A wise man can act a fool, but a foolish man can never act wise."  -- Unknown

 

Website:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Main Page

 

Forum:

AssassinationOfJFK.net Research Forum

 
YouTube Channel:
 
GooglePlus:
 
Twitter:
 
Facebook:
 





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Oswald, Mexico City, Angleton, JMWAVE, Morales, Harvey, Mole hunt, CIA, Goodpasture, Moskalev

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Web Work by: XmasZen.com