‘You can make an iron-clad argument that the CIA knew very much about Oswald’

A reader writes perceptively about the “conspiracy v. gross negligence” question in the JFK story. In an email, he explains, perhaps better than I have, why I emphasize this issue.

“Funny- like Jacob I used to wonder why you were driving home the ‘negligence’ angle. But it eventually dawned on me.”

“I think this issue gets to the crux of your credo and indeed the name of the site. That is: why you may have never explicitly said you lean toward ‘the latter (i.e. conspiracy),’ I and probably many of your readers, have intuited that that’s what you probably think. However, you’ve had to build the case, however slowly, on ‘facts.’

“Thus, at this point, after painstakingly assembling facts, you can make an iron-clad argument that the CIA knew very much about LHO and could realistically be accused of negligence. Even [CIA historian David] Robarge concedes much of that.”

“This is a long way of saying that I’ve felt your ‘negligence’ approach isn’t so much for those who are already steeped in the JFK issue, but rather for those outside who think it folly to even still be discussing it now— or who say nothing came out of the files. Basically you’re establishing an unassailable beachhead for what might come next. An almost lawyerly exercise in establishing the facts. A narrative that can’t be denied.”

 

6 comments

  1. Eddy says:

    “This is not to suggest or imply that Angleton was party to an assassination conspiracy; there’s no proof of that and I don’t believe it.” – Jefferson Morley 2018

    What Facts lead you to beleive Angleton was not party to an ‘assination conspiracy?’.

  2. Kennedy63 says:

    One could take umbrage with the “conspiracy v gross negligence” approach. The Bethesda autopsy was an act of gross negligence. The Secret Service was grossly negligent. The Dallas Police were grossly negligent. The FBI was grossly negligent. All in different ways, but ultimately contributing to the whitewash. Specific CIA sections and personnel were grossly negligent. So there was no shortage of gross negligence in the JFK assassination and its aftermath. I’d rather say conspiracy and keep it moving!

  3. Vegard says:

    Ok, as soon as you can actually cite concrete, credible evidence tieing Oswald to shooting either JFK or Officer Tippit, we could move into the next territory. Possibly that task evades the immense understanding of many who casually read about the connected triple murders of JFK, Tippit, and Oswald, since it seems to be so much work to become familiar with the case against Oswald. But there”s no real evidence that he shot anyone at all, much exculpatory evidence in his favor, and until Oswald can at least be credibly placed on the sixth floor when shots were fired, and connected to the alleged assassination weapon, we are left with a conspiracy that created Oswald as exactly what he said he was: “the patsy. writers help

  4. Kennedy63 says:

    Vegard, what we know for certain beyond any doubt: President Kennedy and DPD Officer Tippit, died 11/22/63. Jack Ruby shot and killed Oswald 11/24/63, then Ruby died 1/3/67. The “Warren Whitewash” officially and publicly lynched Lee Harvey Oswald for the deaths of JFK and JDT. The Kennedy Assassination, viewed as a peek behind the veil of Deep State secrecy, reveals an amoral universe, an abiding malignancy and putrefaction infecting and contaminating the whole of our society. In the words of JFK (but flipped by his enemies for their use/meaning) regarding JFK’s assassination: “Let JFK’s assassination go forth, to friend and foe alike, indicating that the government has been usurped by a war mongering generation of Americans, subscribing to fascist ideology and destesting any overtures or negotiations for peace.” Major policy disputes within our Executive Branch, in 1963, obviously were settled by firing squad.

    • Ger Ven says:

      “ . . . The “Warren Whitewash” . . . Major policy disputes within our Executive Branch, in 1963, obviously were settled by firing squad.

      John McCloy himself all but admitted your point – seems some folk actually did talk :

      “ It was of paramount importance to show the world that America is not a banana republic, where a government can be changed by conspiracy.” . . . “to lay the dust of Dallas” . . . to show the world that America “can solve its own problems”

      Moreover, the presence of Allen Dulles on the Commission will forever taint it’s objectivity and hence its findings, as was suspicioned so early on :

      “ Will the presence on the panel of Allen Dulles, erstwhile headmaster of the Central Intelligence Agency, assure us that the truth . . . will ever be known ?

      –Richard Starnes, Truth Won’t Out, The New York World-Telegram & Sun, Tuesday, December 3, 1963, p.25

  5. Gerry Simone says:

    How about guilty by association?

    Let alone the surveillance or monitoring, Antonio Veciana swears that he saw David Atlee Philips talk to Oswald in September 1963. David Atlee Phillips surely must have talked to Angleton.

    On top of this, circumstantial evidence that refutes the lone assassin proposition.

    The lone assassin case is weak when one argues that a one time meeting with Kosikov trumps all the association with members of the CIA or their contacts (like Ferrie, Clay Shaw, George de Mohrenschildt, etc. etc.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.