Exclusive: JFK investigator on how CIA stonewalled Congress

Dan Hardway

Dan Hardway

In a new sworn declaration filed in federal court, former JFK investigator Dan Hardway tells the story of how the CIA stonewalled him and other investigators for the House Select Committee of Assassinations in 1978.

Hardway’s first-person story is the most vivid and powerful account of how the CIA obstructed Congress’s attempt to investigate JFK’s assassination in 1978 since Gaeton Fonzi’s book, The Last Investigation. Hardway adds new detail to the story Fonzi told by detailing the obstructionist tactics of George Joannides that he personally experienced.

Hardway also documents the “public benefit” of disclosures forced by my Freedom of Information Action lawsuit,  Morley v. CIA, now in its 13th year. The court is now considering the issue of whether the government has to pay the legal fees of my attorney James Lesar, who prevailed over government attorney’s three times during the course of the litigation.

Hardway’s declaration highlights how Joannides prevented the HSCA from clarifying the relationship between the CIA and the Cuban Student Directorate, an agency-funded anti-Castro group whose members had contact with Lee Oswald in the summer of 1963.

Hardway notes that the HSCA didn’t probe the issue in 1978 because CIA “had firmly represented to the HSCA  that all ties between the DRE and the CIA had been terminated prior to1963.”

That representation was false, as the records from Joannides’ personnel file, which I obtained in the lawsuit, demonstrate. In fact, Joannides served as case office for the DRE from April 1962 to May 1964.

Hardway also highlights one of the key documents that the CIA is withholding: a job evaluation, written September 20, 1978, “not long after Mr. Joannides began his job undercover as liaison with the HSCA. “(p. 29).

Read and/or download the Hardway Declaration here.

———

Jefferson Morley’s new ebook, CIA and JFK: The Secret Assassination Files, available on Amazon, provides the fullest account yet of the JFK records that the CIA is still concealing in 2016 and why they should be made public in October 2017.

CIA & JFK

 

 

 

 

59 comments

  1. Alan Dale says:

    Dan Hardway’s sworn declaration, and the accompanying Exhibit 1 to his statement, is an important “must read,” not merely for JFK researchers, but for anyone interested in the means by which “We the people” seek sufficient knowledge to govern ourselves. This affidavit, published with supporting documentation, illustrates and exposes a profound corruption within the fabric of America’s state of affairs.

    Supplemental Memorandum on Points and Authorities In Support of Plaintiff’s Motion, Dan Hardway, Sworn Declaration, Dated 25 April, 2016, and Exhibit 1 to Hardway Declaration, Composite of Documents may be viewed here:

    http://aarclibrary.org/update-morley-suit-for-records-on-george-joannides/

    • Ramon F Herrera says:

      Hi Alan:

      I have a respectful request. Could somebody please write an article named “The Morley v. CIA Lawsuit for Dummies”?

      While we are in requesting mode, the same about the “Dynamic Duo”, Harvey and Roselli. I have listened your “H Bomb” interview and frankly it could use some explanations for the uninitiated.

      http://www.jfkconversations.com/

      Whoever writes this (you and/or Larry Hancock would be perfect) should feel free to speculate (*) with things like, “at this point, Harvey was dead and thus Roselli lost his protector, so he was murdered within weeks”.

      One more: All your Conversations are in bad need of direct URLs, instead of descriptive “go to this page and scroll down until you find the words ‘H Bomb'”.

      TIA,

      -Ramon

      (*) Obviously, the speculative segments should be indicated as such.

      • I will take you up on this Raymon – Morley v. CIA for Dummies and Anthony Bothello v. CIA for Rosselli Operational files – both basics for beginners. I will post it at http://JFKCountercoup.blogspot.com where I recently posted The Crack in the Dealey Plaza Operation that quotes Hardway’s deposition and elaborates on the significance of the black propaganda operation to blame the assassination on Castro. It is the part of the PLAN – not plot – that failed and will make the rest of the conspiracy unravel.

        Bill Kelly

  2. Bogman says:

    It’s a frightening tract to me.

    1) That the CIA was and is still up to this much subterfuge around the assassination.

    2) That Phillips, Joannides, Kent were apparently all well-acquainted with each other, with the DRE and circumstantially but very likely the future accused assassin of POTUS.

    3) Helms personally appointed Joannides and soon after the DRE was publicizing the future accused assassin in NO – for me, making a direct link to the upper echelons of the agency.

    4) The media and those representing our democratic institutions don’t give a crap about any of this.

    Thanks, to Dan, though, for an amazing summary.

    • Bogman says:

      Hardway’s declaration also makes it clear that Helms and Phillips were fully aware of Joannides’ obstruction of justice and a Congressional investigation into the case.

      • Ronnie Wayne says:

        As I mentioned when Bogman posted a link to this on the Church Committee Files thread, the affidavit is outstanding. It should be required reading for our Congressmen and Women, and Senators. As I also mentioned, I did not know Jeff had shown the picture of Joannidies to three surviving DRE members who identified him as “Howard”, their case officer in the fall of 63.

  3. Brian Joseph says:

    I hope that Photon and Prof. McAdams comment on this. It would be interesting to see what their take is on this.

    • Antonio D'Antonio says:

      I’ll go out on a limb and say that it might be something along the lines of nothing to see here, so move right along please.

      • Brian Joseph says:

        Maybe but neither one of them has commented yet. I hope they do. If they have seen/see this thread and didn’t/don’t comment I guess that could still be saying something.

        Of maybe they haven’t seen this thread or they have and think it’s so ridiculous that it doesn’t warrant comment.

        • Antonio D'Antonio says:

          Whatever the reason, there really is no mystery to a potential responses or purposeful non-responses from them.

      • Antonio D'Antonio says:

        Surprise, surprise.

        “As for Hardaway I think that his claims are irrelevant . I simply do not believe that there is any significant information relating to the assassination or Oswald among confidential records still not made public.”
        Photon
        June 5, 2016

    • Fearfaxer says:

      As of June 1 at approximately 11 AM EDT, they still haven’t commented on this. If either or the both of them ever do, it will consist mostly of an ad hominem attack on Dan Hardway.

  4. DB says:

    Forgot to include Google as they are possibly in front of the pack with AI products . Their works on photo , photo search and analysis and language are revolutionary and will be life changers , especially communication

  5. Anthony Mugan says:

    The extreme measures taken over so many decades to try to keep these documents pertaining to Joannides and the DRE secret is indeed very thought provoking, and Hardaway summarises the situation very well indeed.
    What an extraordinary risk they took to bring Joannides back to do this work with the HSCA. The risk of reading another CIA officer into whatever they were hiding was clearly greater than the risk of this blowing up if his true history had been discovered in 1978. Whatever it is there is something extremely sensitive in these documents that Mr Morley is after and it must involve the DRE / JMWAVE connection and operations.

    A must read document.

    • Bogman says:

      Couldn’t agree more. If this document isn’t a smoking gun, it’s at least smoldering.

    • Bogman says:

      And WC faithful don’t say peep. Which is what I’ve seen repeatedly on this site. Attack the dumber conspiracy notions, stay quiet on the inexplicable.

      • Greg Arious says:

        You say that like it’s a bad thing.

        For 50 years you’ve been distracted by BS headlines instead of real ones like the Joannides story.

        Skeptics like Photon and McAdams are some of the only people separating reality from the con when it comes to JFK assassination debate. Don’t blame them for other people’s inanity.

        The CIA is hiding a lot with regard to Oswald. How about we concentrate on that instead of Grassy Knoll bullsh*t.

        • Bogman says:

          Much of the evidence in the JFK case is a judgement call – the original investigation was that badly run.

          Hardway’s declaration is new evidence that is difficult to refute. So they run and hide, showing themselves as dishonest interlopers in the JFK case.

    • Fearfaxer says:

      Actually, I would imagine Joannides lobbied pretty forcefully for this position. He had a lot to hide, and this job would give him the best way to keep it hidden. And given his position and duties in 1963, he was the perfect person for the post. He’d know just where to allow the investigators to look (where there was nothing to worry about), and where to make sure they were never allowed to go. There was nothing at the time connecting him to any of the DRE anti-Castro skullduggery, so it was easy to pass him off as an honest broker. There was always the chance he might be unmasked as someone who should have been investigated himself, but the need for someone with his knowledge of the operation was critical, IMO. The risk had to be taken. And it worked out beautifully.

      • Bogman says:

        And doesn’t Helms’ appointment of Joannides incriminate him in the cover-up and the HSCA charade?

        Helms knew Joannides had worked with DRE during the Oswald skirmishes. Says a lot to me that the high command was intimately involved in the obstruction of Congress.

        • DB says:

          I just read the exhibit 1 which I failed to do originally. Wow! Blakely statements are shocking and I’m starting to understand he was in an impossible situation.

          I never really could put Helms in the plot bucket , rather the protect the agency reputation bucket.

          However if Joanides reported directly to Helms, I find it unlikely he would have no knowledge that the LHO pro Castro propaganda to journalists came directly from Phillips and Joanides intelligence assets. Helms IMO is dangerously close to being in the conspiracy bucket as an executive plotter. How can you be part of the cover up without having knowledge of the plot? The propaganda / cover up was likely the most complex part of the operation so both DAP and GJ are by definition are executive plotters and Helms appears to be right there.

          I wonder if this lawsuit ties into the CIA admitting to a “benign cover up” document. They likely had to steer the discussion in that direction given the explosive information this lawsuit has divulged.

          Thank you Mr. Morley as your actions has led to a wealth of new information and has proven criminal actions by senior government employees.

          I suspect that Mr. Morley lawsuit played a big part in that stunning CIA cover up document in 2013/2014. I wonder if there is a timeline that supports this position ? i.e. knowledge that DAP and GJ criminal actions would be publicly exposed and the CIA was forced to minimize damage via limited hangout about the cover up. No way they admit to such serious crimes “in good faith” lol.

          Now both investigation heads of the HSCA and ARRB have confirmed crimes committed by very senior employees of the CIA.

          The silence in this thread states what everyone knows, and many times its the silence that shows ones true beliefs. The confusing part is why pretend, I wish I could understand.

          • Brian Joseph says:

            “How can you be part of the cover up without having knowledge of the plot?”

            If the conspirators infiltrated and used a different operation or just used a Company asset that would be reason enough to cover up. The conspirators may have planned it that way to insure a cover up. If that is how it happened it would mean that the conspirators knew about a Company operation or operations.

  6. Bogman says:

    The overriding question this document raises is did members of the CIA and/or its assets in any way enable, encourage or facilitate the assassination of JFK and deny the citizenry’s democratic rights to choose the top representative of the people?

    That’s what’s at issue, 53 years later. And don’t let anyone tell you it doesn’t still matter. It does.

  7. DB says:

    Logically you just have to think. Why would someone as intelligent as Helms, who had to know at some point this information would become public in the future, directly commit such a serious crime. Anybody that has researched this event will come away with the conclusion that Helms was a despicable man, a traitor to congress and the country.

    To appoint Joanides as the HSCA liaison, effectively putting Joanides in a position to completely halt the investigation of himself, is beyond brazen and borders on crazy.

    What concerned Helms so much to take such a desperate act, an act that had tremendous downside? There is no way to explain this or defend this, this was beyond even serious obstruction of justice, to mislead investigators to such a level is beyond desperation, this is one step behind permanently silencing the investigators. The information Hardaway and Lopez was seeking must have been simply explosive, direct and concrete, information that even the CIA could not spin away or side step, which is just incredible to me.

    Its amazing what Mr. Morley has accomplished with this lawsuit, it exposed how desperate Helms became to hide what appears to be Explosive, breathtaking. I just cant come away with any other explanation or conclusion than Helms was knee deep in the plot itself, it was far more than CIA image protection as he destroyed his reputation forever. Nothing else can explain such brazen act, an act that decades later the investigation Chairmen is still fuming about, both publicly and legally.

    Open to any comments on how brazen this act was by Helms. Its just breathtaking and provides direct evidence of what we have all known

    • Bogman says:

      It reminds of that point in the movie ‘All the President’s Men’ when Deep Throat tells Woodward “everyone is involved.”

    • Ronnie Wayne says:

      Excellent analysis DB, Thank You.

    • Based on the dates of the House Select Committee’s existence, it was not Richard Helms who appointed George Joanisdes. His official appointment as Liaison, to the committee would have been by Admiral Stansfield Turner, However his position monitoring the work of the HSCA was done by the CIA Director that President Carter Fired and told to have his desk cleared out by Noon on January 20th 1977, Director George H. W. Bush, who appointed January 30th 1976 as CIA director by President Ford. Upon assuming the position of CIA Director Bush’s first order to staff was to compile an extensive inventory of files for him to review personally immediately upon starting as CIA Director. The withheld files likely indicate the George Joanisdes was initially appointed by Director Bush for that particular initial task and was promoted from that to monitoring the committee and to the eventual Liaison assignment by Director Stansfield Turner to the house as he likely briefed both Director’s Turner and Bush on the inventory of material available.

      We may find out the exact dates and assignment duties if the files are released.

      • Bogman says:

        I believe Hardway said that Joannides was appointed by Helms to his position at JM/WAVE in 1963 to oversee the DRE and conduct other propaganda.

        According to Dan, he would also keep Helms up-to-date on his progress. This covers the time of the DRE run-ins with Oswald.

    • Brian Joseph says:

      It sure appears that Helms was involved in the cover up but that doesn’t mean that he was involved in the plot to take out JFK.

      If Oswald was an asset building a legend as a leftist in order to get into Cuba or to infilitrate domestic leftist groups and the conspirators used that legend in setting him up as the patsy that would certainly be something that Helms, Joanides, and many others would want covered up in the aftermath. It would be just as or maybe even more important to cover it up years later at the time of the HSCA because they would want to cover up the earlier cover up. The exposing of the cover up would have virtually destroyed the Company. Congress and the American people would have demanded it. I can see how Helms and Joanides could have seen the cover up as the patriotic thing to do. In their view the disbanding of the Company would have disaterous effects on national security, the fate of the cold war, and the perception of the US on the world stage.
      Proof that Joanides was involved in a cover up seems pretty solid. That doesn’t mean that he or his boss were conspirators in the plot that killed JFK.

      • Bogman says:

        Well, that’s all well and good if you trust the suspect. I don’t.

        Here’s one reason why:
        http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Snowden-Reacts-to-Mistaken-Destruction-of-CIA-Torture-Report-20160520-0023.html

        • Brian Joseph says:

          I don’t trust the suspects at all. As far as the cover up I don’t even consider them suspects. I think that there isenough information to say for certain that specific individuals participated in the cover up. Enough information so that if they were alive (Joanides for one) they could be indicted for obstruction of justice.

      • Well, Brian, it’s Cognitive Dissonance that matters. I’m sure the Statues regarding Murder, would not apply to Cover up, well a Willing Co-Conspirator Technically Obstrucking Justice in a Murder investigation is still also consider d Assecory to Murder, a charge with No Statute of Limitations, as Justice Antonio Scalia I’m sure pointed is his Opinion that allows the continued investigation in to the Murder Our 35Th President. I doubt a Non Disclosure, of a Non-Disclosure so called agreement makes assisting in the obstruction of Justice in a Murder investigation of a President. I’m sure someone was still Alive they could arrested on that Charge and successfully prosecuted and indicted in most likely a Sealed Indictment for National Security reasons…..

        • Technically you would need a pelethra of Cognitive Dissonance to get around that pesky 1917 or 1913 Espinage Act, as the Assistance of Covering up a Coup Murder Conspiracy, would be at least one charge of Treason to deal with, or even Espinage, if a Foreign Colony or Country were involved….. That Pesky Claw Shaw Visit to Montreal with, Well supposedly a young tall thin young man who claimed he was Lee Oswald or Harvey Oswald, would be a bit of a Sticky wicket Too, the General Lemay needing a Special Air Mission to a Canadian Continuity of Governance site seems odd, their were only 6 of those with 6000-7000 foot Runways like Wiraton, Ontario…. No Statutue of limits on a Accessory to Treason Charge Either… Just how did General Lemay Enter Canada? There must be some kind of border record public appearance?

        • Brian Joseph says:

          I’m not defending the cover up or Helms or Joanides. I think the cover up was wrong and criminal but covering up is not the same as being an engineer of the operation. What I mean is that identifying those who participated in the cover up doesn’t mean the orchestrators of the plot have been identified.

      • Ronnie Wayne says:

        So Angleton kept files on Oswald but he left Helms out of the (very limited) loop?

      • Phil says:

        Is it true that JFK autographed a photo of himself when Helms requested s signed picture of the President? If true, did this happen the last time Helms saw Kennedy alive?

        • Bogman says:

          “In his book, On November 19, 1963, deputy CIA director Richard Helms visited JFK in the Oval Office, and brought a machine gun, supposedly supplied by Cuba to revolutionaries in Venezuela. With this prop Helms sought to persuade JFK to take more aggressive action against Cuba. Kennedy was non-committal, saying sarcastically that the sight of a gun in his office made him feel much more secure.”

          http://jfkfacts.org/from-july-26-to-november-22-to-today/

          Not sure Helms got JFK’s autograph that day, too, but I guess he got his attention, four days before Dallas.

          One last attempt to get JFK to change his mind on Cuba before the ambush?

          • Phil says:

            I thought I heard Joan Meager once say that Helms included the JFK autograph story in his autobiography. If true, it fits in with Hardway’s information about Joannides, Kent, DAP, and Helms.

  8. DB says:

    Exhibit 1 has some fascinating stuff. What a lawsuit

    Love the DAP testimony when shown the Maurice Bishop sketch that he did not know who it was but “it looks like me” lol

    Man several CIA officers lied about knowing a Maurice Bishop and knowing David Atlee Phillips at JM/WAVE but they were different CIA employees.

    Who prepped these guys ?

    I swear you cant make this stuff up lol

    It sad none of these guys never went to jail for obstructing justice however I really hope Mr. Morley lawsuit formally exposes them for the traitors to their country.

    I really think this lawsuit is going to change the official story. Love how it throws all these officers official statements and testimony right back in their face- just blatant lies in maybe the most serious murder investigation this country has ever had.

    How can any lawyer even defend this stuff? I love how My Morley asked the CIA how the CIA Historian Harelson said formally Joanides nor any CIA officer had contact with the DRE and 1 year later we have confirmation that Joanides was their case officer. When Mr. Morley throws this back in the CIA’s faces, they comment “we think the records speak for themselves”. LOL, this stuff is incredible and a treasure of information I wasn’t fully aware of.

    Blakely says it best when he says “The law has long followed the rule that if a person lies to you on one point, you may reject all his testimony” Ouch when that person was part of the investigation-and since this was done by many at the CIA- nobody can use any information provided by the CIA to support the lone nut theory.

    With the public so disgusted with government lies and BS at the expense of the people, this is not a good time for the CIA to be defending these lies regarding the murder of a democratically elected president.

    Trump sure is right about one thing “the systems sure is rigged”

    Waiting patiently for Warren Commission supporters to defend these acts. Picking and choosing what you want to respond too is evidence of an being agenda driven and not fact driven

    • Ronnie Wayne says:

      Don’t forget Mr. Lesar, DB.

      • Brian Joseph says:

        “Waiting patiently for Warren Commission supporters to defend these acts. Picking and choosing what you want to respond too is evidence of an being agenda driven and not fact driven.”

        I’m waiting too because this is sufficient evidence to most reasonable people that something was being covered up.

        It is possible that they could be victims of the confirmation bias they accuse (and often justifiably so in my opinion) others of. Some conspiracy theorists ignore facts that don’t support their pet theory. Some lone nutters suffer from the same affliction.

        Sometimes silence speaks louder than words.

        • “Sometimes silence speaks louder than words.”~Brian Joseph

          Indeed it does, I have confronted some “debunkers” on other websites recently and other than “sputtering” responses at first, there is now only deafening silence.
          \\][//

  9. Yes Legend, Has it, That Richard Helms, 38 Years prior to the Release of the Bob Redford Spy Game Film on 11-19-2001, or 46 Years prior to my Marriage on 11-19-2009 to Kodak Vision, Lucy Award Winner Pauline Renee Heaton For outstanding Cinematography, the First woman to win that award, presented by Legendary Titanic Director of Photography Richard Carpenter…. But I Digress…. on beautiful Kailua-Kona Sunset on a Night Dive with 6 Manta Rays as Guests as well as Lost Film Crew Union Underwater operators, who used to work for Watervisions.com for the first filmed wedding of Manta Rays Dancing for the Bride….

    Richard Helms who worked in an Office with my Uncle, future Retired Lt Cornel Jimmy Bill Campbell from West Virginia Brother in-Law to Army Brigadier General Ivy, as Legend has it did indeed request an Autographed image of our 35th President, according to a story Retired General Alexander Haig told at Cocktail parties, according to Jimmy Bill.

  10. Bogman says:

    I think we can safely assume that Dulles et al in the CIA hierarchy obstructed justice by not disclosing the relationship between the DRE and the agency to the WC onward.

    Clearest indication of a high-level, coordinated conspiracy I’ve seen yet.

    • Bogman says:

      And it was a CLOSE relationship. Formed by the CIA, the DRE was a key propaganda and operations partner in the war against Fidel.

      Dulles, Phillips, Bissell, Helms, Shackley, Harvey, Angleton, etc. all had to have known. Yet no one tipped off the WC or HSCA or AARB.

      In fact, the agency worked to keep that fact hidden for decades and still withholds key details.

      • Bogman says:

        If it was all just a crazy coincidence, the accused nut job shooting from a warehouse window just happens to run into a CIA-backed student group three months earlier, why NOT tell the investigative bodies?

        • Tom S. says:

          Bogman, it may not be as many assume….
          Part I of II

          http://www.assassinationweb.com/roseb1.htm
          INCA DINKA DO*
          by Jerry D. Rose
          This article originally published in The Fourth Decade Vol. 4, #3, Mar. 1997.

          …Finally, I come to the intensive activity of INCA in the era of 1967-1969 as related to the investigations of District Attorney Jim Garrison. Apparently INCA had hoped at an early stage to co-opt the investigation. Shortly after the first publicity surfaced in the Garrison case, on February 21, 1967, Butler wrote Garrison to “offer INCA’s facilities, contacts and know-how in the area of communist psycho-warfare.” (15) Apparently Garrison did not accept the offer since,… Butler had moved INCA files from New Orleans to Los Angeles and Ochsner,…. finally granted its wisdom……

          For all these and other instances of Garrison-bashing by INCA, there is nothing in the published record (that I know of) to indicate that Garrison ever did contemplate prosecution and/or public vilification of INCA. In neither of Garrison’s two books on the assassination is there any mention of INCA, Butler or Ochsner (and even the name Bringuier does not appear in the index to the second book). (22) Are we dealing, then, with a case of severe paranoia (or a guilty conscience) on the part of INCA; or, perhaps, with an actual co-optation of the Garrison investigation by INCA? Let us explore for a bit this second possibility.
          ….the unusual composition of the group of New Orleans “citizens” who, in early 1967, formed a group called Truth and Consequences (T&C) which would provide private funding for Garrison in his investigation. (23) Peter Dale Scott long ago pointed out the anomaly that two of the three leaders of T&C, Willard Robertson and Cecil Shilstone, were in fact founding members of INCA…..

          Beyond the T&C connections to INCA represented by Robertson, Shilstone and Raul, there is at least one other likely connection. In reporting the formation of T&C, James and Wardlaw mention a few additional members, namely Eberhard Deutsch,…. (33) The name of Deutsch jumps out of that list, since he is an attorney whose name appears on the letterhead of the Directors of INCA. (34) Deutsch has been described by Scott (who was probably unaware of his T&C connection) as the General Counsel of Standard Fruit and as “Jim Garrison’s former law partner and political mentor.” (35)

          …INCA, which was supposedly in mortal combat with the Garrison investigation, has at least 4 of its associates among the leaders of Truth and Consequences, the money bag outfit for the Garrison investigation. Did T&C “get” what it may have been “paying” for? – i.e., immunity for INCA from Garrison prosecution? Certainly those INCA people who were T&C-involved were not ostracized by INCA for “sleeping with the enemy.” In fact, two of them – Robertson and Shilstone – were re-elected as INCA directors in September, 1968, after T&C had been operating for a year and a half. (36) …I haven’t proven that the Garrison investigation was INCA co-opted, but there seems to be quite a bit pointing in that direction….

          continued

          • Tom S. says:

            Part II of II

            http://jfkfacts.org/the-jfk-connection-why-cointelpro-still-matters/
            The JFK connection: Why COINTELPRO still matters
            January 7, 2014 jeffmorley
            ………
            As Bill Simpich documents in his revelatory and important ebook, “State Secret,” the FBI and the CIA’s counterintelligence staff worked together on a program to discredit the FPCC 1963 throughout the fall of 1963.

            Here’s the CIA’s Sept. 16, 1963 memo ( http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=12654#relPageId=2 ) to the FBI about the operation to discredit the FPCC “in foreign countries.”

            The author of the memo, John Tilton, was a supervisor of George Joannides, the Miami-based undercover officer whose paid assets in the Cuban Student Directorate (DRE) publicized and denounced Oswald’s pro-Castro activities in New Orleans in August 1963.

            Eleven days after Tilton wrote his memo, a man identifying himself as Lee Harvey Oswald appeared at the Cuban Consulate in Mexico City applying for a visa to travel to Cuba. He gave his self-made FPCC membership card as part of his visa application. Officials in the Cuban Embassy were suspicious of Oswald and rejected his application.

            After JFK was killed, Joannides’s assets in the Cuban Student Directorate published the first JFK conspiracy theory linking Oswald to Castro. The group cited Oswald’s FPCC activities in New Orleans as evidence.

            After Oswald was killed in police custody, the White House and the FBI moved to convince the public Oswald was the sole assassin.

            At the CIA, Angleton killed John Whitten’s efforts to investigate Oswald’s Cuban contacts.

            The wishes of the CIA and FBI came true. The FPCC disbanded on December 27, 1963, its name forever tainted by the linkage to the accused assassin.

            As Simpich notes correctly, “Counterintelligence is the hidden heart of the story…”

          • Bogman says:

            Thanks, Tom. Interesting posts. Gotta admit it’s hard for me to buy Garrison overlooking INCA or anyone for love or money, but you never know. Garrison died before the revelations about Joannides came out. I often wonder if he would’ve felt vindicated in his ‘Quixotic’ pursuit.

            IMO, the larger, more important story is this: top CIA officials knew well that the DRE was formed, funded and guided by the agency. Yet no one mentioned that fact to successive investigations.

            This decades-long deception came from on high, and the withholding of critical evidence related to the assassination continues to this day despite changes in personnel and leadership at the top.

            Who says no one can keep a secret? The CIA kept its relationship to the DRE as an institutional secret, showing where their true loyalties lie.

          • Tom S. says:

            Part I of II

            Stephen B Lemann announces appointment of Walter J Machann (aka Father Machann) : (July, 1965)

            Garrison describing Stephen B. Lemann in complaint letter to FCC Chairman., pub. 06/18/67 Times-Picayune:

            http://maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?%E2%80%A6d=176&tab=page
            2of2 Garrison 06/18/67 letter to FCC comm. Rosel H. Hyde
            (Top of right side column)
            …It should be added that the last described endeavor has been accomplished not by members of the station (WDSU) itself, but by an attorney closely connected with the station who has previously been known to disperse funds in the New Orleans area in behalf of the Central Intelligence Agency…

            Joan Mellen and her husband, Ralph Schoenman first met Garrison just months after the Shaw trial verdict.: My Investigation of the Garrison Investigation, New Orleans, Louisiana, October 17, 2015
            http://joanmellen.com/wordpress/2015/10/20/my-investigation-of-the-garrison-investigation-new-orleans-louisiana-october-17-2015/
            ………………………..

            http://www.amazon.com/Man-Million-Fragments-True-Story/dp/0692226419/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top?ie=UTF8
            Man of a Million Fragments: The True Story of Clay Shaw (Paperback)
            by Donald H. Carpenter
            Page 145 –

            http://www.amazon.com/Man-Million-Fragments-True-Story/dp/0692226419/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top?ie=UTF8
            Man of a Million Fragments: The True Story of Clay Shaw (Paperback)
            by Donald H. Carpenter
            Page 156 –

            https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Unredacted_-_Episode_1_-_Transcript.html
            Unredacted Episode 1: Transcript of Interview with Joan Mellen
            ……..
            JOAN: – when Baldwin was present, he was a CIA asset, his brother worked for the International Trade Mart and Clay Shaw, David Baldwin, and these, these are CIA people.……

            http://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/3/26/Lewis-Reporter-Dies-Journalist/?page=2
            Anthony Lewis ’48, Pulitzer Winner and Crimson Mentor, Dies at 85
            By Nicholas P. Fandos, CRIMSON STAFF WRITER March 26, 2013
            Pg 1 of 2…….
            …But even as The Crimson shaped Lewis, he, in turn, shaped the organization. Over decades as an active member of the paper’s graduate board and one of its three trustees, he was the champion of quality journalism and the model for every young Crimson editor that hoped one day to make it in the world of print.

            “You were in a situation where everyone’s parents were begging them not to go into journalism, and you wanted to have some visible role model,” said Nicholas B. Lemann ’76, the dean of Columbia University School of Journalism. “A lot of his influence was just modeling for us what a happy and an honored career in journalism could look like, and it looked pretty good.”

            …….“At a liberal moment in American history, he was one of the defining liberal voices,” Lemann said.
            http://joanmellen.com/wordpress/2013/10/21/clay-shaw-unmasked-the-garrison-case-corroborated/2/
            ……..
            (When I mentioned that I was working on a book about Garrison to the late New York Times columnist, Anthony Lewis, at a conference at NYU on the subject of 9/11, Lewis literally turned white. CIA’s friends in the media continued in their efforts to discredit Jim Garrison long after his death).

            continued…

          • Tom S. says:

            Part II of II

            Oliver Stone protested :

            http://www.nytimes.com/1992/02/03/opinion/l-warren-panel-findings-should-stir-outrage-381592.html
            Published: February 3, 1992
            To the Editor:

            Anthony Lewis’s Jan. 9 column is only one in a series of attacks in The Times on me and the movie “J.F.K.” and, in fact, on anything that questions the Warren Commission’s findings on the assassination of President Kennedy…..
            ….. Inaccuracies aside, I find Mr. Lewis’s charade of civil libertarian concern far more disturbing. Mr. Lewis asserts that Jim Garrison “bribed witnesses to prosecute an innocent man.” The “bribed” witnesses all signed affidavits denying the allegations, and Clay Shaw — the “innocent man” — won an acquittal. I do not question that verdict. While Mr. Lewis and you excoriate Jim Garrison for taking a man to trial (after several hearings on the evidence), neither shows remorse in calling Oswald “Kennedy’s assassin,” though he was never tried, convicted or even allowed legal representation in Dallas.

            In 1964, Mr. Lewis wrote of the Warren Report: “Few who loved John Kennedy, or this country, will be able to read it without emotion.” For some, like myself, the emotion is outrage. For Mr. Lewis and The Times, it’s complacency. OLIVER STONE Los Angeles, Jan. 9, 1992

            Here is the link to Nicholas Lemann and Zachary Sklar trading letters in GQ, after the Lemann’s Jan., 1992 article was published…..

            Lemann responds on pg. 2, to Sklar’s letter which begins on pg 1.:

            http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/S%20Disk/Stone%20Oliver%20JFK%20Movie/Gentleman's%20Quarterly/Item%2002.pdf

            No disclosure in Nicholas’s rebuttal to Zachary Sklar, or from Sklar about Lemann’s conflicts/background:

            https://books.google.com/books?id=GyskeQlVFfkC&pg=PA345&lpg=PA345&dq=%22Evidently+GQ+has+forgotten+one+of*%22&source=bl&ots=b02QHvBpVD&sig=iEO3sbtiMZy8BxRg-I5wOALTuEI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjLjo-yhJXNAhUI8CYKHXHADjQQ6AEIHDAA#v=onepage&q=%22Evidently%20GQ%20has%20forgotten%20one%20of*%22&f=false
            JFK: The Book of the Film : the Documented Screenplay
            By Oliver Stone, Zachary Sklar

            “…..Evidently GQ has forgotten one of the fundamental rules of American journalism: Give the readers both sides of the story. The case for Jim Garrison is not to be found in your pages. Lemann’s glib charges are so sweeping that it’s impossible to respond to all of them in a letter. I suggest anyone interested in Garrison’s case read On the Trail of the Assassins, the former New Orleans district attorney’s own account of his investigation. As the editor of this book, and co-screenwriter of Oliver Stone’s JFK, I take issue with several of Lemann’s unfounded assertions…..”

            Stone claims “JFK, the movie” cost $41 million, yet he seems as out of the loop as Joan Mellen, and Jim DiEugenio….

            I’ll end with pointing out that Harold Weisberg was also “taken in” by David Baldwin’s close friend and his successor as PR man at the trade mart, Jesse R. Cole, III.:
            http://jfkfacts.org/memories-parkland-doctor/#comment-879343
            Tom S. May 30, 2016 at 8:59 pm

            http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/C%20Disk/Core%20Jesse/Item%2012.pdf
            Harold Weisberg befriends Jesse Core. I find no mention of David Baldwin in the Weisberg archives.

  11. Bogman says:

    I’ve read through everything you’ve posted, Tom, and I can see the connections but not sure I get your main point. Very interesting about the WDSU being owned in part by the CIA ‘kingmaker’ in NO. Was there anything Oswald was involved in within the last three months of his life that didn’t involve the CIA?

  12. Thanks for re-posting this again here, Tom. Lord knows I’ve seen it more than once from you, most seeming to fall on blind eyes. Oh well…

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