Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Assassin secretly deported after JFK killed
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Wednesday, September 24, 2003

Posted on 09/24/2003 12:04:04 AM PDT by JohnHuang2

Just two days after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, a suspected killer and known foreign terrorist was captured in Dallas, Texas.

The U.S. government was aware the man had received rigorous training in a foreign military and was a member of a covert paramilitary organization that already had murdered dozens, if not hundreds of people, including military officers, high ranking police officials and democratically elected politicians.


President Kennedy speaking in Fort Worth the morning of Nov. 22, 1963

Amazingly, according to the authors of an explosive new book promising to unravel the 40-year mystery of who killed JFK, there is no evidence to show he ever even was questioned about his presence in Dallas so soon after Kennedy's murder.

Instead, say co-authors Brad O'Leary and L.E. Seymour in the upcoming WND Books release "Triangle of Death," the man was picked up and quickly and quietly flown out of the United States under a cloak of secrecy.

Although the book has not yet been released to bookstores, it has already shot up to 218 on the Amazon chart just from initial pre-sales.

The story of the mysterious assassin is revealed in a CIA document backing the author's compelling argument that President Kennedy was killed Nov. 22, 1963, as the result of a massive conspiracy between the CIA-installed government of South Vietnam, the French global heroin syndicate and the New Orleans Mafia.

"This deportation, in fact, and the sinister man in question, have been the subject of repeated U.S. Justice Department investigations for more than three decades," the authors write, "investigations that have been deliberately withheld from the American public and the world."

The suspicious expulsion also never was reported to the Warren Commission, the official investigative body appointed by President Lyndon Johnson.

"This revelation can only be described as colossal in the realm of assassination research, and one would accordingly expect the league of Kennedy researchers to jump all over it, examine it to every degree, and then include its startling importance in the overall field of their work," O'Leary and Seymour write. "But that never happened."

The CIA document reveals the man was a French assassin – wanted by France for subversion – who was in Fort Worth on the morning of Nov. 22, 1963, and in Dallas in the afternoon.

On that morning, President Kennedy was in Forth Worth, giving a speech in front of the Hotel Texas. In the afternoon, in Dallas, he was shot to death.

Noting all U.S. deportations were executed by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the authors ask: "Why would an authority of the United States Justice Department deport a known terrorist?"

One would believe, they write, that he would have been "apprehended and imprisoned, or at least sent back to France where the legal authorities there had already clearly deemed him an enemy of the state."

"But there's no evidence to suggest [he] was ever even questioned about his presence in Dallas so soon after Kennedy's murder."

The French, who believe he was expelled to either Mexico or Canada, identified him as a member of the right-wing extremist group, the OAS, Organisation de l'Armée Secrète, comprised of deserters from the French Army in opposition to President Charles de Gaulle's granting of independence to Algeria. The members of the "Secret Army" were involved in countless acts of terrorism and assassination.

"Triangle of Death" answers questions surrounding this previously dismissed episode and pieces it together with recently declassified federal documents, material supplied by the KGB, information from the Bonano crime family, documents obtained from a French court and the only interview done with a French witness previously only debriefed by the FBI and CIA.

As WorldNetDaily reported, newly released tapes of Johnson's telephone conversations also corroborate the central premise the book, showing the Kennedy White House did not merely tolerate or encourage the murder of its ally, South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem, but organized and executed it, writes Fox News White House correspondent James Rosen in the Weekly Standard.

Coup d'état

"Triangle of Death" – which includes details of a first-time-ever crime scene re-creation at Dealey Plaza – shows how Kennedy planned and developed the coup d'état that resulted in the political murders of the Catholic president, Diem, and his two brothers just 22 days before his death. The U.S. State Department suppressed this information for more than 30 years.


Evidence includes federal documents that only recently have been declassified or released – exclusively to the authors.

The authors reveal a Mafia chieftain, who employed Jack Ruby and Lee Harvey Oswald's uncle, confessed to federal officers he had been directly involved in Kennedy's murder.

In addition, O'Leary and Seymour recount how the United States and the Soviet Union both went on high military alert immediately after Kennedy's death, bringing the world to the brink of nuclear annihilation.

Other facts uncovered by the book include:

Two chapters of this book have already been used to make two different television specials – one on PBS and the other on the History Channel.

Co-author O'Leary, involved in politics for more than 25 years, publishes the O'Leary Report, one of the most influential publications in American politics. His clients have included more than 60 political and public figures, including Sen. John Tower and Texas Gov. John Connolly, who rode in Kennedy's car when he was shot. O'Leary also hosted his own radio show on NBC for seven years and was a contributing columnist for USA Today Weekend magazine. He currently is president of Associated Television News in Los Angeles.

O'Leary is available for media interviews through Shirley and Banister and Associates at (703) 739-5920.

His co-author, Seymour, is a free-lance writer and author of 15 novels, including "The Stickmen" and "Operator 'B'."

False claims?

O'Leary and Seymour note investigative bodies of the U.S. government have made numerous claims, including that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin; that only two shots hit their target, that the bullets fired that day all came from the sixth floor of the Texas Schoolbook Depository; and that Kennedy was killed because he was preparing to pull all U.S. troops out of Vietnam.


The authors insist all of these claims are false and are designed to placate the American public and distract them from the facts of the case.

They acknowledge most readers will find it difficult to accept that Kennedy authorized the overthrow of the Catholic government of South Vietnam and the assassination of Diem, South Vietnam's democratically elected, constitutional president.

After all, Kennedy had generously pledged American troops, military equipment and tax dollars to protect South Vietnam from the threat of communism.

But the authors of "Triangle of Death" provide evidence Kennedy personally asked a high-ranking U.S. military officer to assassinate Diem, who was a political disaster-in-the-making for the president.

The events were set into motion when a Buddhist leader named Quang Duc calmly sat down in a Saigon street June 11, 1963, soaked himself with gasoline, lit a match and burned himself to death.

The news swept through the world, and when the full extent of Diem's brutality toward the Buddhists became apparent, America immediately began to ask itself the obvious questions, O'Leary and Seymour write: "Why is the U.S. supporting a foreign government that engages in religious persecution? Why is President Kennedy sending U.S. military personnel to help the government of a man who puts his own people into concentration camps?"

The authors point out: "Until then, America believed the increasing number of U.S. men and women being sent to South Vietnam – close to 15,000 by June 1963 – and the $1.2-million-per-day aid package were to help the South Vietnamese fight the deadly Vietcong. But literally overnight, the U.S. was internationally perceived as a bunch of buffoons who were propping up a tyrant."


South Vietnamese President Ngo Dinh Diem was assassinated Nov. 1, 1963

With the next U.S. presidential election just over a year away, they write, "Kennedy was infuriated; moreover, he and his political consultants were scared."

People "already believed that Kennedy had stolen the election, based on suspicious vote-counting in Illinois; a Catholic U.S. president supporting a Catholic fanatic who was intent on persecuting another religious group would provide them with all the ammunition they needed in November of '64."

The authors contend they have irrefutable evidence the Kennedy White House supported a coup d'etat against the government of South Vietnam and the assassination of President Diem.

"More than anything else," they write, "this was the rich ground in which a counter-conspiracy was planted, the conspiracy that led to President Kennedy's own assassination."


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: assassination; bookreview; conspiracy; grassyknoll; jfk; jfkassassination; jfkconspiracy; jfkkilled; kennedyassassination; tinfoil; triangleofdeath
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-224 next last
Wednesday, September 24, 2003

Quote of the Day by Texas Eagle

1 posted on 09/24/2003 12:04:05 AM PDT by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Tomorrow.
2 posted on 09/24/2003 12:05:26 AM PDT by thegreatbeast (Quid lucrum istic mihi est?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2; justshutupandtakeit
Jean Rene Souetre. (aka Mertz, Michel; Roux, Michel). OAS. Mary Ferrell through FOIA suit 1977 obtained CIA document #632-796 dated April 1, 1964. French Intel claimed Souetre was in Ft. Worth a.m. November 22, 1963, Dallas p.m. Picked up by U.S. authorities and expelled from U.S. within 48 hours of assassination. May have been code-named QJ/WIN part of ZR-RIFLE.

Robert Morrow, a contract CIA man, writes in "First Hand Knowledge" (a new book that is a rewrite of his 1976 work, "Betrayal") that he bought three rifles used in the shooting from Sunny's Surplus in Baltimore. David Ferrie planned the assassination and Clay Shaw was involved. Morrow says one team of assassins was led by a French gunman named John Michael Mertz. Gary Shaw says CIA records indicate that French gunman Jean Souetre was in Dallas on Nov. 22, and was expelled from the country the day after. The FBI says that was another Frenchman named Michel Roux. Souetre used "Roux" as an alias, notes Anthony Summers in "Conspiracy," though Roux is also a real person. Souetre said in 1983 that the man in Dallas was Mertz, using Souetre's name.

3 posted on 09/24/2003 12:32:25 AM PDT by PhilDragoo (Hitlery: das Butch von Buchenvald)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2

(courtesy of serpentdove)

4 posted on 09/24/2003 12:34:16 AM PDT by Leroy S. Mort (Never attribute to malice what can satisfactorily be explained by stupidity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
It seems to me the fact that Kennedy had Diem assassinated, or at least ok'ed, the assassination is on very firm factual grounds.

I know baby boomer Dems all believe that JFK was going to bail on Vietnam, but if anything he was likely to have escalated faster then Johnson did.

I don't really buy any of the conspiracy theories floated...the truth would be too explosive to stay hidden for long...but the idea that the CIA/military did it is just so beyond the pale.

If Oswald didn't kill JFK, you are left with only two possibilies with *any* possible credence - the Cubans or the Mob...
5 posted on 09/24/2003 12:37:42 AM PDT by swilhelm73
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
this will not sit well with Arland 'Scottish Law' Specter's Magic Bullet Theory

.

6 posted on 09/24/2003 12:42:51 AM PDT by Elle Bee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Elle Bee
Does Scottish Law say anything about being an accessory to murder?
7 posted on 09/24/2003 12:49:49 AM PDT by Fresh Wind (Repeat after me: I, Cruz Bustamonte, do solemnly swear...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Fresh Wind
yes

it will kick start a political career for a sox puppet like Arland

Just look at what Waco has done for 'Weasley' Clark

.

8 posted on 09/24/2003 12:54:55 AM PDT by Elle Bee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Kennedy inherited 3 ongoing CIA-military operations from Eisenhower: The Tibetan Army, trained by us and deployed, the Cuban exile army, being trained and prepared for the invasion of Cuba, and South Viet Nam.

Within a few months of taking office Kennedy cut off support to the Tibetans and left them to be annihilated to the last man, he delivered the Cubans into the waiting arms of Castro's army, sidelined Eisenhower's team in Viet Nam (Lansdale et al) that had won a similar war in the Philippines, following that with the assassination of Diem.

The CIA guys who saw their men betrayed and killed and left to rot in dungeons on the orders of this man must have been very bitter. Perhaps dangerously so. What would you do?
9 posted on 09/24/2003 1:01:14 AM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Robert Kennedy didn't want his brother's death investigated because the investigation might uncover the fact that he, along with the president and the rest of the Kennedy White House, had drawn up operational plans to assassinate Fidel Castro after the Bay of Pigs invasion.

This I don't buy. I have no doubt that RFK knew precisely who killed JFK, and why, so it was important to some that he not reach the presidency.

10 posted on 09/24/2003 1:10:29 AM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Maybe a good read... I'll have to pick this one up.
11 posted on 09/24/2003 2:00:58 AM PDT by InShanghai (I was born on the crest of a wave, and rocked in the cradle of the deep.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InShanghai
Old stuff. The French killer has already been on TV. I am going to read the book, too. But if all it does is re-arrange old facts, I am going to be one mad reader.

In re the KGB "Investigation:" The Lee Harvey Oswald sojourn in the USSR has never been documented thoroughly by them. Hell, we still don't even know if the LHO who went into the USSR is the same guy who came out! They sent a false defector over to claim the KGB had "no interest" in him: a patent lie.

As far as JFK ordering the hit on Diem: "Duh," it's been known for years. Ditto, the JFK-Mafia plan to hit Castro.

If we divide up us conspiracy theorists into teams, we have the "Castro-KGB Connection Team," "The Mafia Team," "The CIA Team," "The Johnson Did It Team." I feel badly because my team, "The Castro-KGB Connection Team" never really gets an adequate hearing and it somehow always felt the most "logical" to me.

I promise to read the book and keep an open mind. That's because one learns something new every day. E.G. The Secret CIA Army in Tibet. If JFK let them wither on the vine, it will add evidence to my overriding theory: that the stolen election of 1960 was a watershed event in the history of the United States, namely the final, hopefully-not-irreversible-but-don't bet-on-it, crooked triumph of hosshite over American logic and common sense. Ted Kennedy's Immigration Reform Act of 1965 certainly fits nicely into this pattern of the Kennedy-driven destruction of the nation.

12 posted on 09/24/2003 5:28:41 AM PDT by Kenny Bunk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
After reading this (and similar hypotheses) about the JFK assassination for the last 35+ years, I can only speculate on what's going to come out 40-50 years from now about the Clintons!! Of course, if history progresses the way they appear to want it to, all info of ANY nature (books, TV, radio, internet) will be carefully monitored...and their biographies will read as though they were saviors of the US.
13 posted on 09/24/2003 5:53:10 AM PDT by Maria S (“I know a little bit about how White Houses work.” Hillary Clinton, 8/26/03)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Oh please. It's just amazing how this lunacy continues.

There were eyewitnesses who looked up at the window in the Texas Book Depository, and saw Oswald shooting at President Kennedy for God's sake.

14 posted on 09/24/2003 6:37:11 AM PDT by veronica (http://www.PetitionOnline.com/bombings/petition.html - Homicide bombings = war crimes - sign this!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: veronica
Some years ago, there was a novel suggesting that Diem's family had JFK killed.

If all the people positively identified as being on the grassy knoll were to have a reunion, they wouldn't fit into Yankee Stadium.
15 posted on 09/24/2003 6:42:04 AM PDT by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: veronica
Kennedy was shot for God's sake? That's news to me!
16 posted on 09/24/2003 6:45:38 AM PDT by Oberon (What does it take to make government shrink?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Co-author O'Leary, involved in politics for more than 25 years, publishes the O'Leary Report, one of the most influential publications in American politics.

Hmmmm. Has anybody actually ever heard of the O'Leary Report?

17 posted on 09/24/2003 6:47:45 AM PDT by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kenny Bunk
The one thing that breaks down all of the 'team' conspiracy theories is the complexity that they all require. 'Cuba-KGB", "CIA - Vietnamese - Mob" all require either strange as hell bedfellows or, in Cuba's case, smoking the guy who had just handed over an entire army of dissident ex-Cubans.

Likewise, Johnson was on way too shaky ground within his own party - witness the total destruction of the guy by the demo-left wing that followed.

My own belief is that Bobby "knew who killed JFK" because he was as much in on it as anyone else - the hit, if it was a hit & a conspiracy, came from inside the circle.

And, the popular myth that JFK was ready to pull out of Vietnam is the single most blatant piece of disinformation ever constructed by the left wing. It was necessary so that the break from yesterday's democrat party and the one that came into being could be masked over; again, Johnson was made the goat because he was an outsider. As someone else stated; a watershed in US governance and society.
18 posted on 09/24/2003 7:02:04 AM PDT by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: norton
Oh! Did I leave out the part about -

If JFK had lived another couple of months the world would have known about the diseases, infirmity, the propiganda mill, and outside sports that were common knowledge to the inner circle?
19 posted on 09/24/2003 7:05:46 AM PDT by norton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

Comment #20 Removed by Moderator

To: marron
The CIA guys who saw their men betrayed and killed and left to rot in dungeons on the orders of this man must have been very bitter. Perhaps dangerously so

Indeed.

The major problem with a conspiracy is the difficulty of keeping it a secret. Especially now, when the man who discloses the facts will become rich and famous.

I am not one to believe the CIA men of 1961-63 (CIA being shorthand for all the shadow warriors from agencies known and unknown) were Nazis, or traitors. Most of them were patriots, and courageous ones at that.

What if someone made up a story (or what if it was really true) that JFK was compromised by his sex life, or his drug taking, or who knows what, and that the failures in Cuba, and SVN, and Laos, and Tibet were the result.

What if that someone were DCI, or the FBI Director?

Do you think there would have been an impeachment, and a Senate trial? I don't.

Do you think, given the choice between a live traitor and a dead hero, that his brother would have aggresively pursued the truth? I don't.

This crime will never be solved.

21 posted on 09/24/2003 7:26:44 AM PDT by Jim Noble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
You mean there's actual honest-to-God corruption in our government.........argh! (hand ringing here) I simply refuse to believe it. Jennings, Blather & Brokaw would have told us for sure.
22 posted on 09/24/2003 7:35:22 AM PDT by patriot_wes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Other facts uncovered by the book include:

Kennedy's brain - a crucial piece of forensic evidence - was stolen by a U.S. Navy admiral, on Robert Kennedy's orders.

This is not new. I remember going to a lecture (around 1987) at my college by a guy who focused on the medical and autopsy aspects of the JFK assassination. I don't remember much about the talk other than "people" who didn't want the truth to be known altered things and didn't let a full examination of JFK's body take place, and this involved doing something with or to his brain. I don't remember if this guy implicated RFK, though. Maybe that's the new part.

23 posted on 09/24/2003 7:47:56 AM PDT by michaelt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
This subject has been rehashed over and over here on Free Republic. Some people simply cannot accept that a single insignificant deranged man had the means and opportunity to fire a few shots from a short distance, with a cheap but powerful rifle, and kill the President of the United States. It happened folks. Truth is stranger than fiction, in this case.

I was once a conspiracy believer, but after digesting everything I could find on the subject, and after witnessing how OJ's "dream team" made every police screw up look like the conspiracy of the century, I realized that there is absolutely no evidence of anything other than Oswald firing from the sixth floor book depository window.

I have seen the vultures circling delay Plaza in Dallas selling their conspiracy rags. There's no market in selling the truth, so there needs to be a "new killer" all the time. Please don't give these ghouls your money!

24 posted on 09/24/2003 8:31:29 AM PDT by SoCal Pubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble; JohnHuang2
I am not one to believe the CIA men of 1961-63 (CIA being shorthand for all the shadow warriors from agencies known and unknown) were Nazis, or traitors. Most of them were patriots, and courageous ones at that.

That was my problem for years in making sense of the various conspiracy theories surrounding the murder. The details of what happened and how were always pretty clear and pretty undeniable. The mystery that left it all hard to swallow was the "why". The theories always presume some kind of evil cabal who wanted to destroy Camelot, and none of it ever really made any sense.

The light came on for me a few years ago, ironically after reading an aricle in George magazine. Ironic, because they published the story of the Tibetan freedom fighters, and what happened to them. It was disgusting.

I had read bits and pieces for years about them, and about the embittered CIA men whose handiwork had gone for nothing, but had never read the details until that article. The details have since been written elsewhere as well.

The army was killed to the last man, of course, with phone calls to the White House going unanswered.

About the same time I read of the wife of a CIA man who was a Kennedy mistress, who was murdered while jogging, not that that's a big issue...

Anyway, after reading the George article, a light went on in my head. I thought also about the very bitter CIA officers whose men were betrayed and killed at the Bay of Pigs, and it just hit me. What would you do? The evil cabal defending the Federal Reserve System never made sense, the evil cabal wanting to make big bucks in Viet Nam never made sense, but a coup to remove a rogue president makes perfect sense to me. This was the height of the Cold War, and it was very a deadly serious time. People weren't fooling around.

In any other country in the world, it is understood that if the president goes beyond the pale, at some point a panel of military officers will remove him. He can go quietly into exile, or he can go the hard way, but he goes.

There is no tradition of military defense of civilian institutions in our country, so exile is not an option. That leaves the hard way.

The thought you expressed that it would be hard to keep something like this secret, I have considered, and finally dismissed. The fact is that it isn't secret at all. All of the facts in the case are known. Everyone knows them. And everyone knows that if they draw the logical conclusions based on what they know, we all agree to consider them a kook. So everyone knows, but knows in silence. The case is unsolvable because we have in effect agreed that it is unsolvable. There is an interesting study in mass psychology there for anyone who wants to dig into it.

Something similar occurred when Clinton was caught taking money from Chinese intelligence. Everyone knows, everyone has agreed not to know. [The events surrounding the JFK episode were sufficiently traumatizing that no one in the security services was going to move against Clinton, or perhaps he had enough allies there to protect him from forceable removal.]

There was, of course, a long list of people who died in the few months after JFK's death, and the people who were directly complicit took their story to the grave. But it really isn't a secret what happened, just the who and why. They have, as you said, been content to let him be lionized by his biographers. It is this lionization that makes the crime inexplicable. If he was who his biographers said he was, why would anyone take him from us? But he wasn't, and the decision to remove him was probably shared out among several, including Johnson and Earl Warren. Hoover. And the "shadow warrior" chiefs.

25 posted on 09/24/2003 11:20:56 AM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
If all the people positively identified as being on the grassy knoll were to have a reunion, they wouldn't fit into Yankee Stadium.

I always figured it was Joe DiMaggio. ;~))

26 posted on 09/24/2003 11:35:54 AM PDT by Ditto ( No trees were killed in sending this message, but billions of electrons were inconvenienced.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: marron; All
but a coup to remove a rogue president makes perfect sense to me. This was the height of the Cold War, and it was very a deadly serious time. People weren't fooling around.

The 40th anniversary of the Dallas Event is bound to bring new interest, and new revelations.

For one thing, the spread of technology was not counted upon.

The Voice Stress Analyser was not in private hands...Oswald apparantly gave truthful answers to press questions when he said he was a "patsy."

Also, computers were still in air conditioned rooms...the rudimentary PC's were almost 20 years away. Dotto Photoshop and Forensic Software. What does that have to do with anything???

Try a scan of the "official" autopsy Photographs...and shade the "mortician's wax" additions...Kennedy's face is made up of most of it.

Look, I'm not an assination buff...just someone who watches the History Channel. Every few years they run "The Men who Killed Kennedy", and each time they seem to add another volume of evidence.

And, of course, The New York Slimes as always ignores it, or goes ballistic, as when "X-Files" summarizes the informed opinion in a Dream Sequence between two characters in a Sci Fi episode.

27 posted on 09/24/2003 12:22:06 PM PDT by Lael (Bush to Middle Class: Send your kids to DIE in Iraq while I send your LIVELIHOODS to INDIA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: marron
a light went on in my head

Most murder victims are not killed because they are good.

And any reasonable homicide investigation begins with, "who wanted to kill him", which usually leads directly to the dark side of the victim.

I wrote this in 1994:

Most of the researchers theories of which I am aware about the motive for the crime can be summarized as: "JFK was killed because he was good" (insert your preferred goodness here: Getting us out of Vietnam, opposing the Federal Reserve, wanting peace with Cuba/USSR, prosecuting the Mafia, etc). Of course, there was obvious government participation in the immediate aftermath of the crime, and also probably in the crime itself, AND the participants have kept their secret for 34 years.

This requires that you believe that many actors had motive not just to do the crime, and not just to cover it up, but to sustain the coverup for a generation. Now, I find it implausible that so many people would be able to sustain such an incredible effort for so long UNLESS THEY BELIEVED THAT THEY WERE DOING THE RIGHT THING. The person who cracks this crime will be famous and also have material rewards. There is a major incentive to tell the truth now, and none to lie, unless there is an underground story or legend WHICH REMAINS PERSUASIVE TODAY about why the coverup should continue.

When a normal person is killed unexpectedly, the search for a motive begins not with the victim's good points, but with the passions and behaviors which might have brought another person to commit homicide. This search for a motive often reveals new and unanticipated facts about the victim. Such facts about JFK may be available now, or may appear in future books and papers.

It is my own view that JFK was caught in a vortex of his own making, of aggressive anti-Communism, secret operations involving extralegal and extraconstitutional use of force, and his personal life. These were his passions: (Pay any price, bear any burden, Green Berets, covert ops, compulsive sexual behavior, undermine the institutions by numerous back-channel connections to lower-echelon types not afraid to take chances, etc.) If you were, say, Hoover, and you wanted him dead, how easy it would have been to make up a story (and how much easier if the story were true) for Allen Dulles, or others, that JFK had been sexually compromised (or pick another vice of your choice) by a Russian agent, and that the secret deal not to invade Cuba was the result. An impeachment trial, so the story would go, would leave the country weak and defenseless at a time when almost everyone, not just a few nuts, thought the reds were scaling the walls (Cuba, Berlin, Laos, duck and cover in my fifth grade class, etc). In order to save the nation the agony of a treason trial in the Senate, why not let a few good men take care of the problem in a way which will leave a dead hero.

The virtue of this scenario is that it provides the remaining actors who are still alive just as much reason to keep quiet today as in 1963.

28 posted on 09/24/2003 12:27:15 PM PDT by Jim Noble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Noting all U.S. deportations were executed by the
Immigration and Naturalization Service, the authors ask:
"Why would an authority of the United States Justice Department
deport a known terrorist?"

The INS was part of the DOJ.

Under it's new incarnation it's known as
the Bureau of Citizenship and immigration Services (BCIS)
and is now part of the new Dept of Homeland Security.

29 posted on 09/24/2003 12:38:50 PM PDT by ASA Vet (1st Vietnam KIA: ASA Sp/4 James T. Davis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhilDragoo
So that was QJ/WIN. He was associated with the Corsican Mafia and drawn into this through the CIA/Mafia attempts against Castro.

Those attempts were hidden from both the President and Attorney General and even Dulles' successor at CIA. Harvey lied to RFK about these attempts and continued to run them for months after he was explicitly ordered to stop them.

Apparently these efforts continued until the late summer/early fall of '63. When they finally stopped it looks as though the apparatus was turned around and targeted JFK rather than Castro.

It is important to note that the CIA admitted after the fact that several of the conspirators charged by Garrison were, in fact, connected to the Agency. In Shaw's case for decades. But the quantity of lies told by the FBI and CIA is gigantic.

If you want to read something interesting read Dean Andrews' interview by the Warren Commission particularly his comments of the possibility of LHO being able to do the shooting.

It is also interesting to see the disbelief of those who knew Oswald that he could have done it and to see the number of witnesses who did not think the shots came from the TSBD.
And to catalogue the number of exhibits embarassing to the LoneNut theory which are MISSING. Gee, I wonder why.
30 posted on 09/24/2003 12:48:36 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree. Bush must be destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: veronica
...amazing how this lunacy continues.

See: "Jack the Ripper". "Roswell". Amelia Earhart. Kidnapping of Lindburgh's child.

What I want to know about the Kennedys is how 1.) Ted Kennedy can still get elected, and 2.) How can his liver take the alleged abuse?

31 posted on 09/24/2003 1:00:26 PM PDT by Calvin Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: swilhelm73
The available evidence indicates that JFK and RFK put a stop to the attempts on Castro as soon as it came to their knowledge. Not only were these attempts initiated before they took office but their attempts to stop them were ignored by William Harvey, the CIA man in charge. Harvey even kept his boss, the new director, McCone, in the dark about these attempts and the CIA/Mafia linkages.

Some of these operatives acted as though they were a law onto themselves and answerable to no one. They are the ones who assembled the Mafia team for the Castro hit and it was from that team that the killers of JFK were to come. However, I believe that the mob would have never allowed this to happen had it not been sure that a coverup would keep the truth from coming out. Otherwise the revelation that the Mafia had killed the President of the United States would have meant a full scale all out attack by the US upon it. One that would have been even worse than what it was undergoing at the hands of RFK which was already massive in scale.
32 posted on 09/24/2003 1:07:11 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree. Bush must be destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: veronica
Baloney. The only person who supposedly saw a shooter at the window was legally blind. (I can't remember his name at the moment. )
33 posted on 09/24/2003 1:16:15 PM PDT by JoeA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: veronica
That is totally false or these "witnesses" were lying. You think the shooter hung out the window to do it even if one accepts the claim that shots even came from the sixth floor?
Other "witnesses" saw TWO men in the window.

This "lunacy" continues because of the many patent lies told TO the Warren Commission by the FBI and CIA and BY the Warren Commission about the shots, capability of the rifle and "shooter" and witnesses with contrary information ignored by the WC. Many of these lies have been revealed decades later through the FIA. FIA requests have also revealed that many documents with information contradicting the LoneNut Theory are conveniently missing.

But the biggest reason is because most realize that it was virtually impossible for LHO to have shot well enough with any rifle to do it in the time available and this particular rifle was a complete POS impossible even to aim accurately because the scope was mismounted and unadjustable to do as claimed. It would have been hard to find a worse rifle. And every indication is LHO LIKED JFK

In fact, close examination with a critical eye of almost ANY aspect of the Commission's claims shows them to be a house of cards which collapses with the slightest breeze. The Zapruder film clearly shows JFK's head being blown apart by a shot from the front. Spare me the "Jet Effect" crap, too.
34 posted on 09/24/2003 1:22:33 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree. Bush must be destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
J. Eddgar Hoover was owned by the Mob. It is well documented that he had extensive dealings with Frank Costello.
35 posted on 09/24/2003 1:25:34 PM PDT by appeal2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: norton
Evidence for the withdrawal from Vietnam comes from Col. Fletcher Prouty who was a briefing officer for JFK and liason between the CIA and the Joint Chiefs. He produced the NSC memoranda to support his claims.

Leftist had nothing to do with THAT.

You believe RFK knew JFK was going to be hit? ROTFLMAO.

Certainly Hoover did, having been warned repeatedly by informants. But he made sure RFK did not receive that info.
36 posted on 09/24/2003 1:28:54 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree. Bush must be destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: SoCal Pubbie
The idea that someone from a building shooting JFK with a cheap scoped rifle has *never* been that hard for me to believe. Seems that security was crap then, and they got nailed for it.

I strongly believe that if stupid jerk Ruby hadn't killed Oswald, he would've eventually confessed. Ruby's garbage about how he couldn't talk about bigger things is just that, insanity. He had every opportunity to do so for *years* afterwards.
37 posted on 09/24/2003 1:29:28 PM PDT by Monty22
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
Why don't you look a LITTLE into the careers of William Harvey, and Richard Helms before you make Saints of CIA operatives? Examine their testimony where they describe lying to their superiors and blatantly admit they would lie to the Warren Commission and ANYONE else in order to protect the Agency.

Many of these operators' first loyalty was to the Agency NOT to the United States.
38 posted on 09/24/2003 1:34:53 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree. Bush must be destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: SoCal Pubbie
Not only was the rifle total crap but the scope was improperly attached so that it could not shoot accurately. Nor could it have been adjusted to do so.

Read the testimony of the gun shop operators and craftsmen to the Warren Commission where they discuss the complete unlikelihood of this being done with this rifle.

The Mannlicher was just a throw away intended to tie Oswald to this act.

Oswald liked JFK and had no motive to shoot him. As he said during an interview killing him would produce no change since he would be replaced and the same policies would continue. He had no illusions that LBJ would dramatically reverse the US policy towards Cuba or the USSR.
39 posted on 09/24/2003 1:43:23 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree. Bush must be destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: justshutupandtakeit
Try reading CASE CLOSED, by Gerald Posner.
40 posted on 09/24/2003 1:44:56 PM PDT by veronica (http://www.PetitionOnline.com/bombings/petition.html - Homicide bombings = war crimes - sign this!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
Unfortunately, your scenario also means that a coup-de-etat occured and the government of the United States was overthrown. That is not something a patriot would have done no matter how much he disagreed with the President.

It is, however, something a power-mad, out-of-control group would do to maintain its own power.
41 posted on 09/24/2003 1:50:00 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree. Bush must be destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: appeal2
One of his informants, Jose Aleman, told the Bureau of the comments Santos Traficante made stating that JFK was going to be "hit." Others told of the threats from Carlos Marcello, a Costello protege. Hoover ignored them all.

While I don't think Hoover set it up, I do believe he knew what was going to happen, let it, then covered it up every way he could.
42 posted on 09/24/2003 1:54:36 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree. Bush must be destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Lael
Oddly enough, we pulled out the tape 'The Men who killed Kennedy', just last night and watched it again. I wanted my son to see and hear what type of evidence had been supressed.

Each time you watch it, you pick up on things that were missed before. Last night, I caught the part where they talked about JFK's 'doubles'. How many did he have etc. Makes sense. Doubles were used and one probably died the same day. This would explain how they were able to prodice false or doctored autopsy photos that didn't jive with what eye witnesses saw. This would also explain the switched caskets and their contents.

Cyril Wecht (forensic pathologist) was quite outspoken during 'The men that killed Kennedy' about the shenannigans that went on, including the missing brain, so that the brain could not be studied to show which direction the bullet came from.

43 posted on 09/24/2003 1:58:29 PM PDT by ET(end tyranny) (Psalm 146:3 -- Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: marron; Jim Noble
The explanation for the assassination that you are suggesting is, I think, suggested between the lines in Seymour Hersh's The Dark Side of Camelot, and I strongly suspect that that explanation was suggested to Hersh by the CIA sources that Hersh obviously had.
44 posted on 09/24/2003 1:59:28 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: marron
In any other country in the world, it is understood that if the president goes beyond the pale, at some point a panel of military officers will remove him. He can go quietly into exile, or he can go the hard way, but he goes. There is no tradition of military defense of civilian institutions in our country, so exile is not an option. That leaves the hard way.

Your theory is not so far fetched as most. We came very close to it in the 1930's with FDR.

45 posted on 09/24/2003 1:59:58 PM PDT by Harmless Teddy Bear (Hold the forks / The knives are coming / Spoons are on their way….)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Leroy S. Mort; dighton; general_re

Re your #4, that guy got around.

46 posted on 09/24/2003 2:00:39 PM PDT by aculeus (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
Impeachment might have been thought undesirable. But what about the obvious alternative of making JFK an offer he couldn't refuse, and procuring his resignation for, say, reasons of health?
47 posted on 09/24/2003 2:02:08 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: veronica
I have read it and it is filled with misinformation, distortions, outright lies and sophistic use of red herrings and straw men. It certainly cannot and does not explain how
a gun with a misattached scope was able to be shot more accurately and faster by an out of practice, mediocre shooter than by firearm experts.

Not only could the experts NOT shoot it accurately until the scope attachment was shimmed into a semblence of proper attachment but many were afraid to shoot the gun at all for fear it would blow up in their faces. This was as poor a gun FOR ANY purposes as could be purchased.

Tracing it to Oswald involves leaps of faith I am not willing to make. Particularly after some of the lies to the Warren Commission told by the FBI and CIA have been revealed under the FOIA. The gun "found" was NOT even the gun he "ordered."
48 posted on 09/24/2003 2:04:16 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (America's Enemies foreign and domestic agree. Bush must be destroyed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Day of the Jackal bump. Weren't there reports that the CIA was tied in with the OAS?
49 posted on 09/24/2003 2:05:01 PM PDT by aristeides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Maria S; Alamo-Girl
......and their biographies will read as though they were saviors of the US.......

And that is precisely one of the most important American historical documents is the Down Side Legacy by Freepers own Alamo Girl.



50 posted on 09/24/2003 2:08:15 PM PDT by bert (Don't Panic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-224 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson