Skip to comments.JFK Assassination: One Month After JFK’s Murder, Former President Truman Called For Abolishing CIA
Posted on 01/15/2014 10:24:56 AM PST by RetiredArmy
JFK Assassination: One Month After JFKs Murder, Former President Harry Truman Called For Abolishing The CIA
One month to the day after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dealey Plaza in Dallas, Texas, former President Harry Truman recommended that the U.S. abolish the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA).
In an op-ed column published in the Washington Post on Dec. 22, 1963, Truman never linked the CIA to President Kennedys murder, but the timing of the explicit and strongly worded column and complaint implied a connection.
For some time I have been disturbed by the way the CIA has been diverted from its original assignment, Truman wrote. It has become an operational and at times a policy-making arm of the Government. This has led to trouble and may have compounded our difficulties in several explosive areas.
This quiet intelligence arm of the President has been so removed from its intended role that it is being interpreted as a symbol of sinister and mysterious foreign intrigue -- and subject for cold war enemy propaganda, the former president wrote.
Truman: No Distant Observer
Truman was no distant, uninformed public policy professional when it came to the CIA: In July 1947, then-President Truman signed into law the legislation that created the agency, which replaced the former U.S. Office of Strategic Services (OSS).
In 1944, William J. Donovan, the OSS creator, suggested to President Franklin D. Roosevelt that the nation should create a new, centralized organization/agency directly supervised by the president -- "which will procure intelligence both by overt and covert methods and will at the same time provide intelligence guidance, determine national intelligence objectives, and correlate the intelligence material collected by all government agencies."
Donovan also proposed that the new agency should have authority to conduct subversive operations abroad.
In December 1963, Truman articulated in no uncertain terms what he thought of the CIAs covert operations dimension:
Truman said they should be terminated.
Later, in 1964, Truman would reiterate his call for removing covert operations from the CIA in a letter to Look magazine -- underscoring that he never intended the CIA to get involved in strange activities when he signed the legislation creating the institution.
Further, Truman is not the only high-profile U.S. public official to call for the abolition of the CIAs operational activities. Former U.S. Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, D-N.Y., wanted to abolish the agency and transfer its intelligence functions to appropriate existing U.S. government departments. For example, weapons intelligence would be under the U.S. Department of Defense, political intelligence under the State Department and non-public economic intelligence under the Commerce Department.
Whats more, placing intelligence gathering and covert operations in separate government institutions helps prevent the governments covert operations wing from influencing or distorting the intelligence-gathering wings reports to support its own goals. This separation addresses the inherent or at least potential conflict-of-interest problem that occurs when one institution is home to both research and operations functions.
Equally significant, placing the covert operations function in the U.S. Department of Defense would give the president more direct oversight of those operations than if they remain with the CIA. In other words, covert operations as part of the U.S. DOD -- whose secretary of defense regularly speaks with the president -- would improve their visibility and accountability via more-frequent policy reviews. It would also make it harder for an improvisational or rogue/unauthorized group in the department to create a shadow operation -- literally, an unauthorized covert foreign policy or para-military policy.
Truman: An Agency For Intelligence-Gathering Only
The risk of the potential creation of covert operations and para-military policies not authorized by and hidden from the U.S. president is at the core of Trumans Dec. 1963 complaint about the CIA: By that point, the CIA had created numerous covert operations, missions and projects -- the sort of strange activities in which Truman never intended the CIA to get involved.
In other words, to Truman in Dec. 1963, the CIA was an agency that had run amok, and although the former president could have called for the end of the CIAs operational duties at any time, the fact that he timed his complaint to be published one month after the JFK assassination is significant. At minimum, Trumans column is an expression of his concern about a CIA that had strayed far from its creators intent. At maximum, Trumans column -- published when a stunned nation was still grieving and exhibiting shock and confusion over JFKs death, and as suspicions of a plot reverberated across America -- is one of the earliest expressions of doubt concerning the government's official narrative that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone and unaided to assassinate President Kennedy.
Further, the year-later release of the Warren Commissions report on the JFK assassination -- which concluded that Oswald had acted alone in killing Kennedy with three rifle shots, and that Dallas nightclub owner Jack Ruby had acted alone in killing Oswald two days after Oswalds arrest -- did little to dispel public concern that the report was implausible and unconvincing. In the months and immediate years that followed, assassination researchers would rebuke the Warren Commission for its grossly slipshod investigation procedures -- particularly for failing to collect 100 percent of the evidence, and for failing to analyze evidence it had collected -- and for other serious violations of basic protocols for criminal investigations.
Those doubts by the American people and by assassination researchers about the lone-gunman conclusion would increase in 1978, when a second investigation, the U.S. House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA), concluded that President Kennedy was very likely assassinated as a result of a plot/conspiracy. However, the committee was unable to identify the other gunmen or the extent of the conspiracy.
Making Public JFK Assassination Files Held By The CIA Would Clarify Much
Further, as noted, Trumans complaint is not an indictment of the CIA in the aftermath of the tragedy that occurred in Dealey Plaza on Nov. 22, 1963 -- one of the darkest and most ignominious days in the nations history -- a day that changed the trajectory of both U.S. domestic and foreign policy.
That said, the U.S. intelligence community in general, and the Central Intelligence Agency specifically, could resolve many of the questions/anomalies that form the mystery at the center of this case -- and fill in the dozens of gaps left by the Warren Commission -- by making public more than 1,100 classified files related to the JFK assassination.
In particular, when made public, the classified files -- of CIA Officer George Joannides; CIA Officer David Atlee Philips, who was involved in pre-assassination surveillance of Oswald; Birch D ONeal, who as counter-intelligence head of the CIA, opened a file on defector Oswald; and the files of CIA Officers Howard Hunt, William King Harvey, Anne Goodpasture, and David Sanchez Morales -- will help the nation determine what really happened in Dallas, who Oswald was and how the CIA handled Oswalds file.
However, the CIA says the Joannides files and the files of the CIA officers -- which the Agency said are not believed relevant to the JFK assassination -- must remain classified until at least 2017, and perhaps longer, due to U.S. national security. But the CIAs national security claim has never been independently verified, according to JFKFacts.org Moderator Jefferson Morley.
Morley v. CIA An Attempt To Obtain The Full Truth
Morley is the plaintiff in the ongoing Morley v. CIA suit, which seeks to make public Joannides classified files.
In Morleys suit, his attorney has responded to the CIAs latest brief, on the issue of court fees. Having won on appeal twice, Morley argued that the standard practice of the U.S government paying court fees for a successful appeal should apply. The CIA countered that the litigation has not generated any significant new information, and therefore the government should not have to pay the court fees. The issue is now in the hands of U.S. Judge Richard Leon.
It must be underscored that, to date, there is no smoking gun or incontrovertible evidence of a plot or conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy, but there is a pattern of suspicious activity, along with a series of anomalies and a commonality of interests among key parties, that compel additional research and the release of non-public documents.
Further, the CIA probably is not covering up some tectonic, systemic crisis-triggering secret about the assassination of President Kennedy, or even evidence of a colossal Agency operational failure that would prompt the American people to call for a dismantling of the national security state apparatus.
However, until all of the JFK assassination files are made public, the pattern of suspicious activity, anomalies, and commonality of interests, along with the observations of the investigators and public officials -- including former President Harry Truman's Dec. 1963 call for the elimination of the CIAs operational duties -- form a preponderance of evidence that strongly suggest that -- at minimum -- the American people do not know the full truth regarding the assassination of President Kennedy, and that the Agency is hiding something.
What was the CIA supposed to do/be as opposed to what it became (at that time) ?
Re the Kennedy assassination: The real story has yet to be told and is quite a way from the BS that has been put out so far. Just like Benghazi, IRS,NSA etc.
And there’s a new book that asks the question:
Who had the most to gain by JFK being dead, or the most to lose by him staying alive...
And je’accuse finger points directly to Lyndon B. Johnson...
There was a book published 15 or 20 years ago (forgot the title, but I have it at home) which claimed that at least one of Kennedy’s wounds was caused by an AR-15 round most likely fired accidentally by a Secret Service agent immediately after the first round from the Book Depository hit Kennedy.
M16. Just coming around for the military.
The fellow who wrote the book on LBJ was on BookTV last weekend. I thought I knew a lot about the assassination but this fellow (Roger Stone, I believe is his name) had me convinced on some new details and charges against LBJ. looks like a good read.
Think the author is Roger Stone, and his new book has pretty strong evidence it was LBJ.
He was under indictment in his own state, JFK was going to drop him form the ticket for the second term, he had connections to Ruby, etc., etc.
Lays a pretty strong case. Heard the author interviewed on several radio shows. Very convincing...
Yes, that’s the guy. He’s made a pretty convincing case of it for me, at least.
There’s no mistaking that high front sight...
Surprised they weren’t carrying Tommyguns on slings, with the shoulder stock removed under their sport jackets...
They were still around back then... or M3’s...
Lord have mercy. He would have an absolute coronary to see what the FBI, CIA and even Secret Service has morphed into. Not to mention so called "Homeland Security".
For you gun experts, Stone stated that Oswald’s rifle was NOT even Sighted. And yet he was able to pull off 3 shots in 6.? seconds — that was an eye-opener to me.
***Truman was no distant, uninformed public policy professional...***
Unlike our ‘leaders’ of today.
The 6.5mm Mannlicher-Carcano that he allegedly used is one of the WORST bolt-action rifles ever made. It was and is a piece of crap. I’ve fired them. They can’t hold a candle to a good M1903 Springfield or Kar98K Mauser. Even the Type 99 Arisaka is better, but barely.
I can see Oswald - IF-IF-IF he was ONE of the gunman - getting off one good shot. I’ll never believe he was the ONLY gunman.
Possibly the last decent Democrat.
And was using a side-mounted scope...
They have been telling us since the assassination that the documents were to be sealed for 50 years. Well, it’s been 50 years and no release of the Warren Commission files yet.
Has there been any “official” statement on the release (or lack thereof) of the Report?
If had, say a scoped semiauto M1C or M1D Garand....
...or a Gewher G43 with the ZF41 scope on it that Wermacht and SS Scharfschutzen were so fond of and proficient with...
..or a Tokarev SVT-40 with the 2.5 PU scope...
Yeah, then I could see Oswald - a former Marine, remember - getting off three accurate and fast rounds. Maybe even a Kar98K or an Enfield (very fast bolt action on the No 4 Mk I).
But not with that Carcano piece of crap.
Plus, the whole “Magic Bullet” theory crap... and the bullet that “fell” out of Kennedy on the stretcher, in pristine condition, no way...
Dad had a saying... “If you smell dog crap, it’s a pretty sure bet you stepped in it...”
Re: I can see Oswald - IF-IF-IF he was ONE of the gunman - getting off one good shot. Ill never believe he was the ONLY gunman.
That ONE “good shot” was probably the one that hit the concrete - sending debris into the cheek of the bystander under the overpass.
tell me: is the correct word “Sighted” or “Sited” in regard to the scope?
Sight refers to vision. Site refers to location.
Forgot the /Sarc
LBJ....the monster that became president.
and now once again we have a monster...
Fatal Error I think it was called.
Read the book last year, was free on Amazon Prime. Made a good case. The head shot might of came from the AR, but the two other wounds from Oswald were probably not survivable.
“...Sighted or Sited..”
Without the “gh” the word “sited” refers to something “situated” or “located”. Like a “missile site” (base, platform, location).
“Sighted” refers to something viewed. “He sighted (viewed, spied, saw) the storm clouds in the distance...”
At least that’s always been my understanding of the difference.
Yeah, he’s something else all right, ain’t he...
Little tin pot Napoleon with a tan.
more ashen then tan. like he spent time in hell crafting his trade.
that’s a picture of my old black lab, posing in the dark.
the original AR was the AR 10 a larger .308 version of the AR 15.
In happened in LBJ's home state (Texas) -- which if it were true he was involved -- it would be easier to cover the tracks of his allies...
LBJ was known to be a let's make a deal man. So LBJ could have made a deal with other folks (organizations). JFK made the Mafia mad by looking to prosecute the Mafia (RFK was doing that).
And if the CIA was involved, that would have been access to Lee Harvey Oswald, who probably was a double agent -- pretending to defect to the Soviet Union, but being a CIA agent (or possibly being one).
If LBJ was involved, it would have been a tangled web of Mafia/CIA/Freemasons. Freemasonry has appeared in some conspiracy theories because JFK closed down a Masonic lodge on a military base (though I can would have trouble proving that assertion).
Freemasons could play a role as they are a secret society.
And LBJ was probably a very high ranking Freemason who may have enlisted brother Freemasons to help him...
That is -- if LBJ was part of some larger conspiracy...
[What was the CIA supposed to do/be as opposed to what it became (at that time) ?]
Truman intended the CIA to limit its mission to foreign intelligence gathering and counterespionage. He didn’t intend the agency to expand its operational scope to creating private armies, fomenting bloody coups and assassinating heads of state.
Never heard that assertion. But at this point in time, anything could be possible.
What is your gut instinct on it, though? Who do you think was definitely involved - giving the orders-wise, right through to carrying it out...
After hearing Stone on several different programs, it’s pretty convincing to me that LBJ was all over this.
Funny how people are ... no one wants to believe that “OUR” president could ever do something like that. Like we’re so far above the norm or something. So it’s difficult for some people to fathom treachery at that level. Sort of like the astonishment you see when a murder happens in a “good neighborhood” - “That sort of thing NEVER happens HERE!”
Hell, the way I see it, someone at that level, the more they have to lose, the more desperate they become, and the more likely they are to abuse the power they have while they have it... human nature, after all.
The CIA had only been around about 15 years by the time he said all this. So they went rogue quickly.
If you look closely you will notice the muzzle looks like the open three pronged model. They did not round it off until later and do away with the three pronged end of the muzzle.
M16, not the A1 version quite yet, right? Also, that model didn’t have the forward assist on it yet either, correct?
Like the M14 better... my personal favorite. Heavy, yes, but wood and metal are just wonderful together. Also love the M1 Garand; first rifle I ever learned how to shoot.
However... that being said... I saw a beautiful wood furniture set for the AR15, and it just transforms that firearm into something sweet...
THAT’S the furniture set I was talking about!!! Beauty!
Thank you brother! There’s a darker wood set too that I’ve seen. Just sweet.
So many theories I really don’t know. But wasn’t the CIA responsible for a number of assassinations of So. American leaders around that time? Until a law was passed that “we aren’t going to do that any more”.
I really don’t see JFK as having done anything that bad — unless of course you’re Mafia and then it is his brother that’s the big problem. Stone implies that Robert Kennedy was more the target — get JFK and you get rid of RFK as Atty General and put “friend” LBJ in power.
Still fascinating after all these years, isn’t it.
Lyndon B. Johnson was initiated on October 30, 1937 in Johnson City Lodge No. 561, at Johnson City, Texas, but completed only the Entered Apprentice, or first, of the three Masonic degrees. For this reason, he is not included in the gallery(of freemason presidents)
Interesting. Never knew this about Truman.
“For you gun experts, Stone stated that Oswalds rifle was NOT even Sighted. And yet he was able to pull off 3 shots in 6.? seconds that was an eye-opener to me.”
Well if Stone said it has to be true /sarc
Assassination investigators had an Army specialist attempt to replicate Oswald’s 3 shots using Oswald’s rifle exactly as it was found in the Book Depository.
The specialist hit the moving target three times and did it more quickly than Oswald. It is not a difficult shot.
This is in the Warren Report, that thing that no one reads because they are too busy filling their little heads with juicy conspiracy stories that they take for gospel.
As far as individual guns go, Of the original Armalite Hollywood prototypes, S/N 1 and 2 definitely had the top handle, but S/N 4 had the charging handle in the typical location.
S/N 1 was much more similar to the early AR-10's than any other AR15 ever built. S/N 4 is essentially the design that went into production.
S/N 1 is 2nd from top, S/N 4 is 3rd from top.
From what he says, it sounds like he intended the CIA simply to be an intelligence gathering and analysis agency, not an agency that engaged in espionage operations and tried to shape government policy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.