In this far-ranging interview, Alan Dale speaks with the esteemed Malcolm Blunt, an independent investigator of the truth with an unbiased instinct for what is important–and what is not –in the details of President Kennedy’s assassination.
No one knows more about the CIA bureaucracy and how it functioned in the Kennedy era than this wise and funny and generous man.
Blunt is the 1998 recipient of JFK Lancer’s New Frontier Award In appreciation for his contribution of new evidence in furthering the study of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
He is, alas, an Englishman, confirming Toqueville’s apercu, “There are some things that Americans can only learn from a foreigner.
Source: Listen — 2017 JFK
8 thoughts on “Speaking Bluntly: A conversation with a leading JFK researcher”
The shooter was Wallace Oswald was a patsy oswald never been to Mexico city the conspiracy was covered by the planner L.B.Johnson. a lots of parties got involved
I can’t say enough about Malcolm Blunt. By tracing the flow of information within the CIA bureaucracy, Mr. Blunt has demonstrated that extremely compartmentalized administrative decisions about Oswald’s defection were made BEFORE Oswald defected. This proves to my satisfaction that Oswald was a false defector.
It takes a special kind of genius to crunch the internal flow of information within government to draw conclusions about policy but Mr. Blunt does it superbly. Generations ago, during World War II, people just like Mr. Blunt would have been at Bletchley Park working on code breaking and ENIGMA.
Nor can I say enough about all the interviews Alan Dale has published. The long, lonely efforts undertaken by those researchers are staggering and the results highly persuasive in the aggregate.
The ground has finally shifted under our feet. Bill Simpich did not get it quite right when he stated that the internet is “solving” the assassination. It HAS SOLVED it. There are now enough pieces of the puzzle available to know what the picture looks like.
As I pointed out in the mess of the recent ballistics thread, the interpretation of events in Dealey Plaza doesn’t matter as much anymore. In the first three decades of assassination research, the ballistic arguments mattered because they would have gone a long way to prove or disprove conspiracy. But in the last two decades, so much more is now known about official activities surrounding Oswald, thanks to the efforts of Mr. Blunt and many others. I would specifically credit Jefferson Morley and Bill Simpich’s work on Mexico City for enlightening me that when an event is in dispute, you can look to the actions of people involved before and after the event to deduce what actually happened during the event.
Therefore, WC’s Dealey account no longer has the authority to disprove conspiracy. Even if Dealey went the way lone nut “flat earthers” think it did, Oswald was part of a much bigger story that transcends Dealey Plaza. He was never alone and not a nut. The questions and contradictions in the official story are facing a very different resolution in the wake of what we now know about Oswald and the actions of people and institutions around him. We don’t know everything, but we know enough to draw very serious conclusions. As the research continues those conclusions grow stronger and stronger.
^ Excellent summary, Charles. Well said.
Charles, I believe this is an astute and well-informed summary, and I enjoy reading your comments.
I’m going to cull one particular observation you made and expand in a way that will be controversial, but it’s a shadow that has yet to be pursued let alone explained:
You write: “I would specifically credit Jefferson Morley and Bill Simpich’s work on Mexico City for enlightening me that when an event is in dispute, you can look to the actions of people involved before and after the event to deduce what actually happened during the event.”
Aside from the controversy over whether or not the Lee Harvey Oswald arrested in the Texas Theatre is the same LHO alleged to have been in MC, I want to pursue Win Scott. We know that Scott was Chief of Station, and thanks to Mr. Morley, we also know that on retirement he went into ‘private’ business with Al Ulmer, a consultant firm called Diversified Corporate Services (the operative word being “corporate” imv). What is not widely reported is Al Ulmer’s close friendship with George H.W. Bush, a friendship that was in play the week of the assassination when the Ulmer’s and Bush’s were catching up in Tyler, Texas. Fellow Tylerites included Joe Zeppa who according to Barbara years later, would provide his plane for she and George to arrive at Love Field in time to catch a commercial flight home to Houston just hours after the assassination. Al Ulmer had “left the CIA” the year before to join the Niarchos Greek shipping operation in London. Ulmer had continued cutting his teeth with the CIA in the early 50’s in Athens, Greece, encountering in the process Frank Wisner and Tom Karamessines (Greek heritage). George Joannides, a native of Athens, was recruited into the CIA in 1951.
” . . . people involved before and after the event.” Analysis of these individuals before and after 11.22.63 begs coincidence: Joe Zeppa, by pure coincidence served on a very small board of an oil interest whose headquarters were in the International Building, 630 5th Ave. along with fellow tenants, Allen Dulles and Britain’s MI-6. (Whether or not Fergie Dempster – whose relationship to Win Scott and Al Ulmer is also reported in Jeff Morley’s “Our Man In Mexico” – was in and out of MI-6 US HQ is also a matter of interest.) Win Scott at the centre of the MC screw up; Win Scott knew Al Ulmer well enough to go into business with him after the assassination; Ulmer most surely crossed paths with George Joannides during their years with the CIA; Al Ulmer was with George H.W. Bush the week of the assassination as was Joe Zeppa.
“We went all over the world and we DID WHAT WE WANTED,” (emphasis mine) said Al Ulmer, the C.I.A.’s Far East division chief in the 1950s. “God, we had fun.” – Tim Weiner, “Legacy of Ashes”
“Bill Simpich did not get it quite right when he stated that the internet is “solving” the assassination. It HAS SOLVED it. There are now enough pieces of the puzzle available to know what the picture looks like.”~Charles
I pull this one out to highlight from the rest of your excellent commentary; as I find it especially true and perceptive.
I had determinded many years ago that the event in Dallas 63, was a coup d’etat. One that has never been amended, one that has left us in a totalitarian police state. One hidden under thick blankets of PR and propaganda, but indeed perceptible to the lucid observer.
Thank you for your exceptionally fine commentary.
I strongly agree with Alan and Leslie…Charles couldn’t have said it better: “[Oswald] was never alone and not a nut.”
charles- can u provide link to “ballistics”thread(as opposed to toolmark evidence?). im organizing mock trial on this and other forensic evidence.
Peter Dale Scott’s new book Dallas ’63: The First Deep State Revolt Against the White House represents a great advance on John Newman’s Oswald and the CIA in its analysis of the CIA documents having to do with Oswald and the JFK assassination.