Update: Morley Suit For Records On George Joannides
New filings which support the motion for attorney fees in the case of Jefferson Morley v. Central Intelligence Agency, Civil Action No. 03-02545 (RJL).
An important case that raises issues relevant to past, present, and future congressional investigations which are vulnerable to subversion and obstruction by the federal agencies being investigated.
Following are: 1.) Supplemental Memorandum on Points and Authorities In Support of Plaintiff’s Motion, 2.) Dan Hardway, Sworn Declaration, Dated 25 April, 2016, 3.) Exhibit 1 to Hardway Declaration, Composite of Documents. (Click on each link to open file)
TRAFFICKING IN HALF-TRUTHS
By DB Thomas © 2015
In a telling passage in his recent piece in Politico Magazine, “Warren Commission staffers remain convinced today that Oswald was the lone gunman in Dallas, a view shared by ballistics experts who have studied the evidence,” reporter Phil Shenon traffics in half-truths. Whatever the Warren Commission staffers think today, Shenon's claim is inaccurate and untrue.
The FBI’s ballistic experts, in their summary report of December 1963, concluded that President Kennedy and Governor Connally were struck by separate bullets. Yet the Warren Commission’s staff decided that they had been struck by the same bullet – the magic-bullet theory. In a letter to the Commission, Director J. Edgar Hoover complained that this conclusion was contrary to the FBI laboratory’s findings. The magic-bullet theory, however, with or without evidence, was a construct necessary to the Oswald as lone gunman scenario.
Fifteen years later, the House Select Committee on Assassinations received testimony from an expert named Vincent Guinn who asserted that metallurgical evidence confirmed the magic-bullet theory. But Guinn’s data and conclusions, based on neutron activation analysis, were contrary to a study on the same bullets by the FBI laboratory. Subsequently, the testing method itself, and Guinn’s conclusion, were thoroughly debunked in a study published in2006 in the Journal of Forensic Science by Erik Randich and Patrick Grant.¹ Contrary to Mr. Shenon’s blithe assertion on the views of experts, the magic-bullet theory remains very much a matter of contention.
Regarding the President’s head wound, a ballistic expert consulted by the Warren Commission, Dr. Alfred Olivier, of the U.S. Army’s Weapons Testing Branch, did agree that the ballistic evidence was consistent with the official “Oswald did-it” version. But Dr. Olivier was not allowed to examine the actual evidence. He had to rely on the official autopsy report that the President had a “through-and-through” bullet hole in the occipital bone of his skull.² All subsequent expert panels that have been given access to the autopsy photographs and x-rays, have agreed that there was no “through-and-through” bullet-hole in the President’s occipital bone, or anywhere else in his skull for that matter.
Rather there is agreement that the top of the President’s cranium was massively disrupted; that there is a defect in the rear parietal area of the head that was caused by the passage of a bullet, and a defect in the frontal area of the head that was caused by the passage of a bullet. But as to which was the entrance and which was the exit, there is no agreement. The House Select Committee’s forensic pathology panel reached a split decision on the matter.
In reviewing the conflicting expert opinions, a deciding factor may be the Zapruder film which shows that the fatal bullet drove the President’s head backwards, which in any other case would seem to be prima facie evidence that the bullet originated from the front (the direction of the grassy knoll). Dueling experts have variously invoked competing theories including a sudden muscular contraction, acceleration by the President’s limousine, and even a jet propulsion-like recoil to try to explain the backwards movement of the President's head. Those theories, largely discredited, were designed to explain away the evidence rather than to fit the evidence, and all have their detractors.³
Mr. Shenon’s statement is technically correct in the same sense that there are experts who have studied the evidence and share the view that global warming is a hoax, that there is no link between tobacco and lung cancer, and that evolution is a lie straight from the pits of hell. The truth is, there is no consensus among ballistic experts in support of the lone gunman theory.
¹Randich & Grant, "Proper Assessment of the JFK Assassination Bullet Lead Evidence from Metallurgical and Statistical Perspectives," J.Forensic Sci., July 2006, Vol. 51, No.4. available http://www.dufourlaw.com/JFK/JFKpaperJFO_165.PDF. See also, Spiegelman, C., Tobin W.A., James, W.D., Sheather, J.J., Wexler, S, Roundhill, “Chemical and Forensic Analysis of the JFK Assassination Bullet: Is a Second Shooter Possible?” Annals of Applied Statistics, Vol.1, No.2, Dec, 2007, pp. 287-301. http://arxiv.org/pdf/0712.2150.pdf
²Report available at http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=32001&relPageId=1&search=Dr._Alfred%20Olivier%20U.S.%20Army
³See, e.g., Don Byron Thomas, Hear No Evil: Politics, Science & the Forensic Evidence in the Kennedy Assassination (Skyhorse Publishing 2010), available at http://www.amazon.com/Hear-No-Evil-Politics-Forensic/dp/1626360286/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1446137225&sr=1-3&keywords=hear+no+evil; G. Paul Chambers, Head Shot: The Science Behind the JFK Assassination (Prometheus Books 2010) available at http://www.amazon.com/Head-Shot-G-Paul-Chambers/dp/161614209X
THANK YOU, PHIL SHENON
By Dan Hardway © 2015
We all need to thank Phil Shenon for bringing attention to the CIA’s latest position in their continuing stonewalling of the truth in regard to the JFK assassination. The new limited hang-out that Shenon helps test float in his October 6, 2015, Politico piece, “Yes, the CIA Director was Part of the JFK Assassination Cover-Up,” is acknowledgment that DCI John McCone participated in a “benign cover-up” by withholding crucially important information from the Warren Commission. Once again, we can benefit from what is normally gleaned from a limited hangout: 1) it will fill in some blanks; 2) point the way to further avenues of investigation; 3) illustrate the continued lying while admitting to past lying; 4) illuminate the real issues by its misdirection; and 5) ultimately contribute to the long unravelling leading to the eventual revelation of truth. In this case, Shenon’s latest spin on the CIA’s new limited hangout does all this and more. I say “his spin” deliberately because Mr. Shenon’s latest article in Politico1[i] doesn’t even accurately represent his cited CIA source.
We can elucidate this from an examination of some of the specific assertions Mr. Shenon makes in his article which is based on a recently declassified chapter out of a top secret CIA biography of former CIA Director John McCone.[ii]
I. John McCone was a “stranger to the clubby, blue-blooded world of the men like Dulles…”
The purpose of this statement, made early in Shenon’s article, appears to be to try to reinforce the idea that McCone was a Kennedy man, and, consequently, one who may have been more inclined to side in any dispute with the Kennedys rather than with the CIA’s insiders, including Allen Dulles. Both the statement, and the implication, are misleading at best.
While I am not aware of any information about McCone’s membership in any clubs prior to his appointment as Director of the CIA, it is true that he did not share an east coast patrician background with “men like Dulles.” But he very much did share the political and business background of men with whom Dulles was comfortable. He was a very successful industrial businessman from California, having founded the Bechtel-McCone engineering company in 1937. W.A. Bechtel bought him out after the end of the Second World War. After selling his business, McCone began a career of public service, working as a Deputy Secretary of Defense and an Under Secretary of the Air Force before being appointed to head the Atomic Energy Commission by President Eisenhower in 1958. McCone would, after his stint as DCI, become a director of ITT, where he admitted that he offered money to the CIA to prevent the election of Salvador Allende to the office of President in Chile. While McCone would testify that then CIA Director Richard Helms declined the offer, the CIA did eventually assist in getting $350,000.00 of ITT funds to Allende’s opponents in Chile.
After the Bay of Pigs, John Kennedy contemplated a serious restructuring of the CIA, having threatened to “splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and scatter it to the wind.” He appointed a commission, headed by General Maxwell Taylor, to investigate the fiasco. After that commission made its report, Arthur Schlesinger, Jr., was tasked with developing a reorganization plan for the intelligence service. While that plan was never implemented, due to political opposition in Congress, Kennedy did begin cutting funds from the CIA, reducing the number of employees working there, transferred primary responsibility for covert military action to the military forces, and to the Agency’s great resentment, appointed his brother Bobby to ride herd on the Agency’s covert operations.
Both Robert Kennedy and Schlesinger favored a former Justice Department prosecutor, Fowler Hamilton, to take Dulles’s position at CIA after his retirement as part of the shake-up of the Agency that could be accomplished politically at the time. The Agency opposed that choice and Kennedy ended up appointing John McCone over the objection of RFK and Schlesinger who opposed him as a Republican holdover from the Eisenhower administration. W. Averill Harriman, who had replaced John J. McCloy as Kennedy’s chief arms control negotiator, let Schlesinger know that McCone would not change much at the CIA. He felt that the CIA, under McCone, was actively undermining the administration policy of neutrality in Laos. Harriman felt that JFK’s purge of just the top leaders of the CIA had not been sufficient, that the purge should have been more sweeping. Two years into McCone’s tenure, Dulles would tell a reporter, “Since my retirement there have been few important policy changes [at the CIA], and I am wholly in support of its new chief and of its recent work.” In June of 1963 McCone would not hesitate to speak about his opposition to the administration’s economic policies in Schlesinger’s presence. Prior to the assassination, McCone routinely “checked in with his predecessor, dining with him and sending him cordial notes.”[iii]
President Kennedy was aware of McCone’s less than enthusiastic embrace of his administration. As reported by Talbot in The Devil’s Chessboard,
“In March, the president’s secret White House recording system picked up a heated conversation between the Kennedy brothers about their increasingly disloyal CIA director. McCone, Bobby informed his brother, was going around Washington feeding anti-Kennedy information to the press. ‘He’s a real bastard, that John McCone,’ responded JFK. ‘Well, he was useful at a time,’ observed Bobby. ‘Yeah,’ replied the president ruefully, ‘but, boy, it’s really evaporated.’”[iv]
McCone was never a Kennedy man. He was a Republican businessman much more at home with the political ideas and inclinations of Dulles and the military/industrial/security class than he was with the policies of the Kennedy administration. By the time he was called on to testify before the Warren Commission, he was no longer a stranger to the Dulles/CIA insider group, if he ever had been, whose views were more compatible with his than the Kennedys ever would be.
The Murder of JFK, Part 2: Counterfeit ID Planted in Oswald's Wallet?
By Bill Simpich, Reader Supported News © 2015
In my previous article, I asked the question “Who found Oswald’s wallet at the murder scene?”
Here, I pose another question: Was a phony identification card for “Alek Hidell” inserted into the wallet after Oswald’s arrest? “Alek Hidell” was the name used to order the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Texas School Book Depository the day JFK was killed.
Listen here to Dallas Police Department Officer Gerald Hill discuss the capture of Lee Harvey Oswald on November 22, 1963. [Editor’s note: to cut to the chase, go to 3:17 in the audio file.]
Listen for what Hill does not say:
He does not say anything about “Hidell” or an identification card.
Is this omission significant? I think it is.
The Murder of JFK: Another Puzzle Piece Solved - PART I
By Bill Simpich, Reader Supported News © 2015
The mainstream media in America continually fails to understand that Americans are not interested in having a secret government.
Salon founder David Talbot has a new book coming out this week, entitled The Devil’s Chessboard: Allen Dulles, the CIA, and the Rise of America’s Secret Government. The book explores how Dulles targeted foreign leaders for assassination and then brought this practice back home with the murder of JFK.
Tufts professor Michael Glennon released a book last year on the similarity in security policies of Bush and Obama entitled National Security and the Rise of Double Government. Glennon explains how the roles of the presidency, the Congress, and the courts are “largely illusory” compared to the powers of those safely situated in the back room.
Esquire writer Charles Pierce wrote a story picked up by RSN in the last week discussing how the CIA has been forced to admit, yet again, another clue to how the agency covered up the story of JFK’s murder.
What the mainstream media has not yet realized is that the JFK case is being solved, thanks largely to the brute force of the power of the Internet. As in most suppressed stories, the revelations come one piece at a time. The following story is illustrative of how social media is able to force long-hidden stories to break open.
WHAT JANE ROMAN SAID
A Retired CIA Officer Speaks Candidly About Lee Harvey Oswald
By Jefferson Morley © 2003
This is the previously-unknown story of three senior CIA officers—Jane Roman, George Joannides and John Whitten—who knew about the activities of accused presidential assassin Lee Harvey Oswald in 1963. It is based on interviews and recently declassified CIA records in the National Archives.
Their story, as told by Washington journalist Jefferson Morley, reveals the CIA's pre-assassination knowledge of Kennedy's accused killer to be wider and deeper than generally known. It also documents the CIA's role in the publication of the first JFK conspiracy theory.
In the summer of 1994 I became curious if a retired employee of the Central Intelligence Agency named Jane Roman was still alive and living in Washington.
I was curious because I had just seen Jane Roman’s name and handwriting on routing slips attached to newly declassified CIA documents about Lee Harvey Oswald, the accused assassin of President John F. Kennedy. This is what I found significant: these documents were dated before November 22, 1963. If this Jane Roman person at CIA headquarters had read the documents that she signed for on the routing slips, then she knew something of Oswald’s existence and activities before the itinerant, 24 year-old ex-Marine became world famous for allegedly shooting President John F. Kennedy in Dallas. In other words, Jane Roman was a CIA official in good standing who knew about the alleged assassin in advance of Kennedy’s violent death.
What self-respecting Washington journalist wouldn’t be interested?
Of course, I knew enough about the Kennedy assassination to know that many, many, many people knew something of Lee Oswald before he arrived in Dealey Plaza with a gun—a small family, an assortment of far-flung buddies from the Marines, family and acquaintances in New Orleans and Dallas, some attentive FBI agents, not to mention the occasional anti-Castro Cuban, and even some CIA officials.
But Jane Roman was not just any CIA official. In 1963 she was the senior liaison officer on the Counterintelligence Staff of the Central Intelligence Agency in Langley, Virginia. That set her apart. At the height of the Cold War, the counterintelligence staff was a very select operation within the agency, charged with detecting threats to the integrity of CIA operations and personnel from the Soviet Union and its allies. The CI staff, as it was known in bureaucratic lingo, was headed by James Jesus Angleton, a legendary Yale-educated spy, who was either a patriotic genius or a paranoid drunk or perhaps both. Jane Roman’s responsibilities in the fall of 1963 included handling communications between the CI staff and other federal agencies.
A Cruel And Shocking Misinterpretation
© 2015 Dan Hardway
Phil Shenon and I agree on at least a few things. In any resolution of the mysteries surrounding the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Mexico City will undoubtedly be important. The investigation into what happened there in 1963 was, for some reason, seriously curtailed by the U.S. government. The government has, since then, fought tooth and nail to keep the full story about what happened there secret.
While I have never met Mr. Shenon, I have spoken with him several times by telephone. I first heard from him when he called me around 2011. He introduced himself as a reporter for Newsweek Magazine. He said he was working well in advance on an article for that magazine for the 50th anniversary of JFK’s murder. He wondered whether I would be willing to talk about the HSCA’s investigation in Mexico City. I agreed to speak with him.
Over the course of that first conversation, and several follow-up calls from him over the next couple of years, it became apparent to me that Mr. Shenon was only interested in our work investigating what had happened in Mexico City in 1963 insofar as it might provide some kind of basis for linking Oswald to Castro or the Cubans. I tried to discuss the details of the HSCA investigation into what happened in Mexico City in its anomalous issues, but he was uninterested in those details. While there is an acknowledgment in his book, A Cruel and Shocking Act, stating that Ed Lopez and I were “generous with their time and interviews for this book,” precious little, if any, of what we shared with him made it into the book or any of his subsequent writing on the subject of Mexico City. Not only does Mr. Shenon ignore the post-HSCA materials we tried to bring to his attention, he also ignores the primary thrust of our report written for the HSCA.
JFK assassination: CIA and New York Times are still lying to us
Fifty years later, a complicit media still covers up for the security state. We need to reclaim our history
By David Talbot
We’ll never know, we’ll never know, we’ll never know. That’s the mocking-bird media refrain this season as we commemorate the 50th anniversary of America’s greatest mystery – the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. New York Times executive editor Jill Abramson hijacked a large chunk of her paper’s Sunday Book Review to ponder the Kennedy mystery. And after deliberating for page after page on the subject, she could only conclude that there was some “kind of void” at the center of the Kennedy story.
Why the last of the JFK files could embarrass the CIA
Among the documents are roughly 3,600 that have never been seen by the public.
By Bryan Bender 5/25/15 7:15 AM EDT Updated 5/28/15 12:34 PM EDT
COLLEGE PARK, Md. — Shortly after the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Chief Justice Earl Warren, who oversaw the first official inquiry, was asked by a reporter if the full record would be made public.
“Yes, there will come a time,” the chairman of the Warren Commission responded. “But it might not be in your lifetime.”
It will soon be in ours — that is, unless the CIA, FBI or other agencies still holding on to thousands of secret documents from related probes convince the next occupant of the White House otherwise.