Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: 56th anniversary today of JFK death [View all]Kid Berwyn
(14,876 posts)7. True, based on information limited by FBI and CIA.
CIA didnt even bother to mention their own liaison to HSCA George Joannides had been Oswald's handler in New Orleans.
I am no longer confident that the Central Intelligence Agency co-operated with the committee...
SNIP...
I was not told of Joannides background with the DRE, a focal point of the investigation. Had I known who he was, he would have been a witness who would have been interrogated under oath by the staff or by the committee. He would never have been acceptable as a point of contact with us to retrieve documents. In fact, I have now learned, as I note above, that Joannides was the point of contact between the Agency and DRE during the period Oswald was in contact with DRE.
That the Agency would put a material witness in as a filter between the committee and its quests for documents was a flat out breach of the understanding the committee had with the Agency that it would co-operate with the investigation.
The committees researchers immediately complained to me that Joannides was, in fact, not facilitating but obstructing our obtaining of documents. I contacted Breckinridge and Joannides. Their side of the story wrote off the complaints to the young age and attitude of the people.
They were certainly right about one question: the committees researchers did not trust the Agency. Indeed, that is precisely why they were in their positions. We wanted to test the Agencys integrity. I wrote off the complaints. I was wrong; the researchers were right. I now believe the process lacked integrity precisely because of Joannides.
SNIP...
Significantly, the Warren Commissions conclusion that the agencies of the government co-operated with it is, in retrospect, not the truth.
CONTINUED...
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/biographies/oswald/interview-g-robert-blakey/#addendum
Thats not all they forgot to mention.
Bay of Pigs
40 Years After
National Security Archive
George Washington University
SNIP...
AUG 1960: Richard Bissell meets with Colonel Sheffield Edwards, director of the CIA's Office of Security, and discusses with him ways to eliminate or assassinate Fidel Castro. Edwards proposes that the job be done by assassins hand-picked by the American underworld, specifically syndicate interests who have been driven out of their Havana gambling casinos by the Castro regime. Bissell gives Edwards the go-ahead to proceed. Between August 1960, and April 1961, the CIA with the help of the Mafia pursues a series of plots to poison or shot Castro. The CIAs own internal report on these efforts states that these plots "were viewed by at least some of the participants as being merely one aspect of the over-all active effort to overthrow the regime that culminated in the Bay of Pigs." (CIA, Inspector General's Report on Efforts to Assassinate Fidel Castro, p. 3, 14)
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/bayofpigs/chron.html
Theres lots more we know today than was known when officially reported in 1964 and 1979, despite the best efforts of so many.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
19 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Thank you. It occurred 2 years before my birth, but it's an event I feel I've lived thru...
Dennis Donovan
Nov 2019
#1
Proof that some great crimes can go unpunished - at least in the perpetrators' lifetime
sandensea
Nov 2019
#12