OPERATION ZIPPER:

[ChristophMessner]

Randy, will you confront Vincent Bugliosi with the letter from Phillips publicly?

[ChristophMessner]

Randy Bednorz wrote:There are facts, and there is folklore -- which has value, but there have to be facts that support the myths -- otherwise, they are just myths. At least, if you can establish a conspiracy and put at least one CIA man behind it, it narrows down the confusion of folklore. If you can also show that you have a first-hand confession, and the confession is actually in print, it goes further. And finally, if the suspect who penned this confession-of-sorts fingers others who are also supsect, it adds strength to the findings and conclusions. That's the narrower view. What can you prove? Do you have a confession?The more you get into the thinking of the conspirators, the more you can puzzle a confession together from their traces. Randy Bednorz wrote:Otherwise, like so much stuff here and there, we can extend a wide dragnet, find all the dirt we can about -- say, George Bush -- and try to make it stick. I'm not arguing that it shouldn't stick, but maybe there isn't enough to indict, arraign, try and convict. Again, maybe there is, but it hasn't floated to the surface. Or maybe I missed something. And you can argue that point, either way -- I'm listening. It would hinge on who told Phillips what and when, and whether, say, George Bush told this and that to either Phillips or someone in the chain of communication.What was the actual chain of command in the CIA back in 1963?Randy Bednorz wrote:This doesn't mean that Dulles, or LBJ, or Lansdale or others above Angleton's pay-grade weren't somehow "in" on what was about to happen. The question remains: what did they know, and how does that knowledge incriminate them in the essence of the word -- "criminality?" At least coknowledgers to conspirators for a murder of the president support murder and high treason, don't they? Randy Bednorz wrote:Phillips had a personality flaw -- narcissistic personality disorder. His entire family history, his chosen career pursuits, his behavior -- even his writing style -- suggest it.If he had this personality flaw, and if vetting of CIA authors posed a challenge to him, he might be induced or even driven to put clues to his role in the assassination in those books. And if he did that, he might also incriminate others. But for this to happen, he would (a) have to be guilty, and (b) have the personality inclination we mentioned.Phillips had the plausible means: access to large quantities of unaccounted cash; access to the JM/WAVE Mafia assets through Morales; an underling who had just returned from Russia -- easily malleable to become a real-life Raymond Shaw; obsessive familiarity with the works of Richard Condon, the Frankenheimer movie and advance knowledge about when the film would be released -- providing a "great psy-war project" opportunity; and an obsession for making a project go right after Swan Island and Operation Zapata went wrong.Phillips had the motive. He disliked Kennedy -- evident just from his story about meeting the President in the Mexico City US Embassy. He had a grudge against Kennedy -- for damning the Bay of Pigs invasion (or so he thought). He may even have been jealous of Kennedy's medal for PT-109, when Phillips had spent all that time in a Nazi POW camp. He had long-standing Texas contacts in the oil-industry, even if this wasn't so special. He had insinuated that CIA was "in bed" with Big-Oil.Despite his personality the intentional orchestration of an open air murder of the president cannot have grown out of Phillip's lap alone, he must have had massive backing from big oil and from inside the CIA, cause would have Phillips wanted to split the CIA and the country? Randy Bednorz wrote:E. Howard Hunt pushed Phillips' narcissistic funny-button by referring to Phillips and his pseudonym -- "Knight." Hunt connects Phillips to the hypno-assassin in "Manchurian Candidate." Phillips responds to Hunt's book and the paragraph about "Knight." He insinuates there had been a propaganda project involving the Condon book and the Frankenheimer movie.Phillips trys again to answer Hunt with the first two pages of his spy-novel. Again, there is a reference to a page in Condon's Manchurian Candidate. Even so, it would seem that Phillips might not care so much if Hunt was even reading his books.Is it coincidence that Zbigniev Brzezinski wrote a recent book in which he compared global policy to a chessboard in the title? Randy Bednorz wrote:American policy was at a crossroads. "Are all the communist countries working together?" "Was the split between China and Russia real, or phony?" "Can they create 'hypno-assassins' using drugs and other means?" So the great happening for many agents on Dealey Plaza that day, was mainly separating wheat from the chaff inside the secret services? Randy Bednorz wrote:There are various target audiences for both the harmless film-noir of "Manchurian Candidate," and the shock-treatment and orchestrated terrorism of the assassination -- which brought the film to life. It isn't important to gauge whether Phillips' "project" worked, or how much it worked, or if it had a wider participation in planning than just Phillips. This was what Phillips was thinking. And the elaborate casting of Oswald apparently worked long enough to get through the Warren Commission and Watergate, with the trail grown cold.Imagine if Oswald would have crossed their plans and just went out of the TSBD or not come that day! Randy Bednorz wrote:As for the pre-propaganda and propaganda of action in the psy-war plan, it may have worked in several ways. Ask the veterans of CIA's Soviet Division. But that's the insidious problem: you can't measure how much it worked. We know that Vietnam could have ended in '65, but didn't. We know that six-trillion dollars was spent on the Cold War, when USSR might have collapsed under its own weight, and China would experiment with capitalism in its own way. And we are daily familiar with the knee-jerk reactions of citizens when newly unearthed history suggests money as a potent motivater equal to ideology. Today, if you support single-payer health-care, you're either a socialist or a commie in some circles. Gradually the US is discovering what socialism really is: (lat. socius) = togetherness , whereas the promotion of their holy cow was individuality (lat. individere) = no more fission possible, haha! Randy Bednorz wrote:But like Chomsky has said -- you can't measure the impact so easily, and it's often difficult to prove authorship for an orchestrated propaganda campaign. Even if it is sitting there, staring you in the face. It's pretty much squeeling away still ... Randy Bednorz wrote:kenmurray wrote:The Bugliosi- Phillips connection explains alot I think on why Bugliosi promotes the Oswald alone theory. Plus a reported million dollars in his pocket for writing that cement block of a book. ... That's my problem with books and the reading public. I'm all for people reading Bugliosi's book; I'm all for people reading a lot of books besides Bugliosi's; and I'm confident that once they do, they won't believe Bugliosi.But you will always find someone who swells with accomplishment at reading 1,600 pages, and that's the end of it. I could provide parallel examples, but I don't want to debate matters of religion . . . . It seems money is the biggest religion to the most, cause they rather buy many books than pray (to the CIA) ... Randy Bednorz wrote:And Bob? You're right. Do you want to see Lansdale's headstone? It's just a walk down the hillock from where Phillips lies. And you don't need a golf-cart to get up to the "Eternal Flame," either . . . .They forgot to reserve a place for James Files there ... Randy Bednorz wrote:See? That's the problem with this. You can't disinter those veterans. I don't even know how the law is written on that matter. That's the main problem. The law is just written for those who act above the law to keep the many under law busy and controllable. Randy Bednorz wrote:With Lansdale, all we have is that Tramps Photo with identification from Prouty and Krulak, and we get Krulak's identification through Prouty. We've got his "Operation Northwoods" provocation proposal; he pops up in Vietnam just before Gulf of Tonkin and following the arrival there of Lucien Conein. Mr. Conein is on photo on Houston street on 11/22/63, isn't he? Randy Bednorz wrote:... Lansdale ... The only book he wrote was "In the Midst of Wars," 1973 There is a nice photo of a gathering of agents with him, Oliver North one of them. Do you think, Oliver North knows from Lansdale, how it all was there, back then, in Dallas? Randy Bednorz wrote:So far, the only thing I've discovered in Phillips that could possibly connect the two is Phillips' remark about serving on the "Vietnam desk" at Langley sometime during the '50s. It doesn't help to infer that that they were in the same business -- propaganda and psy-war -- so they must've crossed paths frequently. Of course they did. But when? Where? Which gatherings of the AFIO or ARIO? Even if there is reliable information that they both knew the Luces, so what? If I had known the Luces, I could've got advance payment for writing Bugliosi's book.Of course, there's that hotel claim-check ticket from Fort Worth dated November 21. Shackelford has even questioned the legibility of the date, saying it could be a few days this way or that way. And it was Shackelford who first tipped me to Fonzi's 1994 book, which led, of course, here -- to this.The best evidence you have about "General Y" is one person's testimony: "Mr. X" -- Col. Prouty.Now it dawns on me that I should make time to drive up to Palo Alto and look at the file-boxes at Stanford. And I'm getting old.But your ductus sounds pretty refreshing to me! Randy Bednorz wrote:By the way. You forgot something about Zapruder. "Dallas Petroleum Club" [easily fitting with those other entities you mention -- and the people.] So easy it is to search for indications that may only be syllables. "Zap Zap Zap . . . " Then, you have that array of pictures suggested by the placement of artists' names on Phillips' page -- which are arrayed like the frames of the digitized Zapruder film. But this is speculation.So it was great carnival with a lot of extra at Dealey Plaza back then? Randy Bednorz wrote:The facts are, that the phrases in Hunt's book and the choice of words in "Carlos Contract" won't be found on single pages of any other book than "Manchurian Candidate." There are enough indicators that limit how you can swap the pictures, so they only fit in that checkerboard sequence, and in the pattern of the Knight's chess-move. Therefore, the words, their context in the connecting book and relation to sender and recipient are determined, and have meaning. Keep in mind that when "Carlos" was published, Powers had just produced his book about Helms ("Man Who Kept the Secrets") and PHillips wouldn't likely have known that Powers would reveal "Zapata." But Hunt knew, and Phillips knew -- about "Operation Zapata." Correct me -- I don't think Lyman KirkPatrick's IG report on Bay of Pigs was available to the public then -- in 1979 -- either. then again, it might have come out in the Church Committee hearings. But only certain readers would know how to "connect the artists." Didn't those "artists" play pretty kakophonical still, while so many witnesses had to be murdered afterwards? Randy Bednorz wrote:That's the kind of argument that beats a rebuttal from Bugliosi. So with the speculations, I can't let 'em go . . . but I can't scatter them around as part of the argument. As I may have mentioned, the Gaulloise "helmet" belongs there -- it is consistent with a revelation shortly to follow -- (or bear with me.). And we should probably air the speculations . . . about Helms. But call them what they are -- until we think -- and can argue -- that we know better. As I see it, we broke new ground with your discovery, and we need to treat it like an archeological dig -- with brushes and delicate little trowels. Any admiration for artistry should not forget however that we have to do with guys who commited high treason and murder and disrespected the law and the vote of the people. They playen Gods, but they stumble over us humans who question. Randy Bednorz wrote: Kennedy had already made the decision to exit Vietnam before MacNamara and Taylor went to Vietnam. Do you think the joint chiefs of staff and right wing industry chiefs mainly regarded Kennedy as young idle egomanic stupid boy? Randy Bednorz wrote:The others, DeMohrenschildt, for instance, were just subordinate "handlers." I don't think that deMohrenschildt knew more than he needed to know for what he was told to do with Oswald. A lot of those people surrounding Oswald didn't need to know the end to which he was being prepared. Some of them may have just been conveniently asked to observe and report. Like Ruth Paine as well? Randy Bednorz wrote:I'll agree that it was a pernicious combination of networks and influence, and agree with Scott that it was "The dark underbelly of American politics and society." But what you know is one thing; what you suspect is another; and like Denzel Washington says in "Training Day" -- "It's not what you know; It's what you can prove."I can prove that I know that I suspect some theatrically handsome people in the jfk-case.

[Phil Dragoo]

John Kennedy caused inspiration to soar. Early. The trip to the moon. Ask not. On earth God's work. Great stuff.He began accruing dizzying balances of piss-off in the accounts of all the heavy hitters. CIA. Pentagon. Oil. The Fed. Carlos and Sam and Johnny and Santo and Jimmy. John Edgar Hoover. Dulles & Dulles "We Run the World--at least, we DID".Bay of Pigs. One last B-26 raid--denied. The Tu-33's with their .50's hosed the brigade. The Navy ships. Had to watch.So, he's firing Dulles, putting him on the council of witches to pick at his bones.Missile crisis. Bobby proposes to Dobrynin removing the Jupiters from Turkey. A lot of brass dreaming of a lot of lead.NSAM 263. The last straw.On top of the Fed--imagine you're the Fed, printing money; making and breaking fortunes; now imagine Johnny-Come-Lately says your license to print money expired. Now you finance somebody to take this stone from your shoe.And Johnson was to be removed from the ticket and thrown in the slammer for the Billy Sol Estes scams, and the Bobby Baker business. Maybe your new president will play ball.And J. Edgar was to be denied the waiver from mandatory retirement. Maybe the Director will do your "investigating" in such a way you won't be in jeopardy.Little brother is constantly hounding you with scores of lawyers and subpoenas. Maybe you go for the head and the tail stops wagging, too.And the people who are your screenwriters and "shrieking fairies of Madison Avenue" have been putting on plays in the attic, The Manchurian Candidate, for example.And Mitch has some bang-up new suppressors to show you. And some bullets that virtually disappear.But it must be done before the end of the year to not cast a shadow on the coming campaign.If you can't get this done when the mayor is the brother of one of the high priests of the guild, when the big agencies are invested, when the military and the bodyguards are in on the con, and the press will play along, and you control all the images and the body post-mortem, and the witnesses can be bullied or simply killed--why then, you should get back on the porch with the little dogs, because here in the arena, the hounds of hell are thundering down the ramps.

[Bob]

Phil Dragoo wrote:John Kennedy caused inspiration to soar. Early. The trip to the moon. Ask not. On earth God's work. Great stuff.He began accruing dizzying balances of piss-off in the accounts of all the heavy hitters. CIA. Pentagon. Oil. The Fed. Carlos and Sam and Johnny and Santo and Jimmy. John Edgar Hoover. Dulles & Dulles "We Run the World--at least, we DID".Bay of Pigs. One last B-26 raid--denied. The Tu-33's with their .50's hosed the brigade. The Navy ships. Had to watch.So, he's firing Dulles, putting him on the council of witches to pick at his bones.Missile crisis. Bobby proposes to Dobrynin removing the Jupiters from Turkey. A lot of brass dreaming of a lot of lead.NSAM 263. The last straw.On top of the Fed--imagine you're the Fed, printing money; making and breaking fortunes; now imagine Johnny-Come-Lately says your license to print money expired. Now you finance somebody to take this stone from your shoe.And Johnson was to be removed from the ticket and thrown in the slammer for the Billy Sol Estes scams, and the Bobby Baker business. Maybe your new president will play ball.And J. Edgar was to be denied the waiver from mandatory retirement. Maybe the Director will do your "investigating" in such a way you won't be in jeopardy.Little brother is constantly hounding you with scores of lawyers and subpoenas. Maybe you go for the head and the tail stops wagging, too.And the people who are your screenwriters and "shrieking fairies of Madison Avenue" have been putting on plays in the attic, The Manchurian Candidate, for example.And Mitch has some bang-up new suppressors to show you. And some bullets that virtually disappear.But it must be done before the end of the year to not cast a shadow on the coming campaign.If you can't get this done when the mayor is the brother of one of the high priests of the guild, when the big agencies are invested, when the military and the bodyguards are in on the con, and the press will play along, and you control all the images and the body post-mortem, and the witnesses can be bullied or simply killed--why then, you should get back on the porch with the little dogs, because here in the arena, the hounds of hell are thundering down the ramps.Nice rant Phil. Very apropos, especially on 11/22.

[Randy Bednorz]

What Phil offers there is a perception pretty much common to everyone by now who have "read more than one book" and don't buy the 1964 official report. It's a good summary. But the cynical mass-perception has Peter Dale Scott's "dark underbelly" of American politics mostly by motive and association. Motive and association by themselves don't "convict." Do I know that H.L. Hunt met with Johnson on the eve of the assassination? Sure. Or that Madeleine Browne and a maid both noted that Hunt met variously with Johnson and Nixon on the same evening? Sure. What is needed is what they said. [Or do I have this right? Didn't Murchison meet with one or more of the two Presidents? Again-- it matters less when you see that the Hunts and Murchisons knew each other, they were both "Dallas Petroleum Club," to add all the other trimmings like Hunt's assassination-day "Treason" poster or Murchison's rental of the Dal-Tex Third Floor. It matters more what was said, and what was said is gone. So either the entire "underbelly" is one giant conspiracy -- begging that someone among thousands would eventually say something -- or your knowledge is suspicion and belief.]Personally, even for the minor revelation by a recently dismissed White House aide for giving validation to a "9/11" conspiracy, all I can say is that there was a photo at the post-disaster memorial with the younger and elder Bushes and the Clintons. The Clintons had a somber expression; the camera caught the two Bush presidents smiling at each other. The only obvious thing to say is that the younger Bush may have "won a lottery" -- by accident. I haven't any evidence. Who has evidence -- beyond ideas about what makes buildings collapse, or flight paths of planes around the Pentagon? It's speculation. It's even less than Specter's "Magic Bullet." And -- it's not related forensically to anything involving today's anniversary.Does anyone have some short summaries about Lucien Conein and the JM/WAVE boys indicating his whereabouts and activities just before or during Operation ZAPATA and between the April, 1961 ZAPATA failure and the assassination? Prouty only mentions him in shadowy, ominous descriptions, then has him going to Vietnam after the assassination under cover as a US Army Lt. Col. Conein and Lansdale had an association going way back to OSS days in France. I'm sure it was France.Then, I want to post some observations about conflicting accounts and inaccurate information found on-line, some of it related to Angleton and some related to Helms. And I want to show how Helms misrepresents a few things in his autobiography -- innocent as those misrepresentations may be. But he also provides enough information to show that certain "encyclopedia" statements on the web are hogwash.Then, after that, something entitled "THE FOURTH ARTIST: A Rocky-Horror Picture Show."

[Randy Bednorz]

THE FOURTH ARTIST: A Rocky-Horror Picture-ShowCondon's first book was "The Oldest Confession." It was brought to theaters as a movie entitled "The Happy Thieves." It would seem important at this point to place the release date in January, 1962. The plot centers around art theft and art forgery in Madrid's Prado Museum."Manchurian Candidate" was released to the theaters on October 24, 1962. Kennedy had seen the U-2 reconnaissance photos on October 16, and the missile crisis was at its peak by October 27. No movie in history would have a more aptly-timed release date. Real events had been accumulating for years as the two great powers -- Russia and the US -- continued a confrontation that began with the Berlin airlift. We know for certain that Frankenheimer and Axelrod were in New York during 1960, scheduling auditions and making plans. Phillips was also there; we just don't have concrete evidence that the movie production team and Phillips crossed paths. We only have Phillips' remark that he was planning to leave CIA; that he was going to New York to "begin a new career." What career would that be, for someone who had never given up his acting aspirations, who blended those aspirations with his CIA work, who had produced a Broadway play?"Happy Thieves" was a comedy; it has been compared to "The Thomas Crowne Affair." The book's cover-leaf describes it as "screamingly funny, . . deeply serious . . . " "Manchurian Candidate" the movie is no comedy. It is film-noir. Yet, (and this is my personal impression -- "a dime and a cup of coffee") -- reading the book will put you in stitches through some passages. I had a similar experience reading Tom Wolfe's "Bonfire of the Vanities.""Carlos Contract" obliquely mentions a fourth artist. From our minimalist strategy that certain expressions are singular variously to MC, Hunt's memoir, and "Carlos" or that two words together will never appear on a single page from two books but "Manchurian" and "Carlos," we conclude that the use of these phrases or words is deliberate, with an uncanny parallel to characters in the Condon "Manchurian" book. They are deliberate; they have meaning; they compare Phillips to key characters in "Manchurian."Similarly, the artists on "Carlos" page 4 all have one thing in common; when you find all the pictures entitled "Zapata," the number of pictures matches the number of times the artist names appear variously on the page. The array of the pictures -- following suggestions that two pictures are "on the same level" (they both have horses in them) and a third is a color lithograph (with the word "lithograph" appearing below the Rivera picture), indicate a chess-board pattern and the movement of the Knight. Finally, Phillips identifies himself as "Knight" in "Night Watch."Therefore, all pictures and artists are important in "Carlos." They're not thrown in randomly to satisfy the gum-chewing, bus-riding spy-novel audience. They have deliberate meaning. There are three separate references to execution and assassination on that single page -- if you accept the premise that the helmet on the Gaulloises package represents Vercingetorix. If you don't, then there are two such references: a subtle yet clear comparison of "Knight" to Ben Marco in "Manchurian Candidate," and a Mexican hero who was brutally assassinated -- not by rifle fire from a lone nut -- but by dozens or hundreds of uniformed soldiers lining the walls around a courtyard.The artists' names appear so many times on the page; the artists had one thing in common -- pictures of "Zapata;" and the number of paintings for each artist matches the frequency of the names on the page. So, by inference, there are five pictures of "Zapata" suggested on that page.A major character in the book is made to describe David Sanchez Morales. Morales, according to David Corn, had much higher rank at the Florida JM/WAVE station than was previously thought: Chief of Operations. He was CIA's liaison to Johnny Roselli -- "Colonel" Roselli -- the liaison to the mob. Morales, as the story goes, had too much to drink in a New Mexico bar around 1975, boasted of having a hand in killing JFK, and was found dead a day or two later. The book character is named "Emilio Zapata Gonzalez."These are no random accidents of a hack-novelist slapping together a cheap spy-novel for mass entertainment. They are a deliberate response to the non-random reference by Hunt to "Knight" as a character in "Manchurian Candidate."Finally, we have both Hunt and Phillips making reference to the Kennedy assassination. Brief. Sparsely worded. But stark. And the page number in the "Carlos" reference matches the number Phillips quotes as a percentage of the public who believe there was a conspiracy.The two CIA colleagues are simultaneously joking, but not joking. This isn't about Mexican legends or the Gallic Wars. It is about the Kennedy assassination, and they are joking about it.Like two grade-school boys throwing spit-wads at the teacher, they are joking because either one or both of them are guilty. You do not joke about these sorts of things unless you are playing "chicken" with your CIA reviewers and the public, sneaking snickering comments back and forth.What is going on with this background banter? The Watergate burglary, the Nixon tapes, the Church Committee, the litigation against Hunt connected with the Kennedy assassination in 1979, and Hunt's libel suit in 1983. The House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1979. The publication by newspapers and magazines about Phillips' role in the assassination, followed by his own lawsuit pursued by Vincent Bugliosi. These were not times to make jokes, unless you could count on the superficial reading habits of a sleep-walking public and the protection of rubber stamps in red ink for "SECRET," "CONFIDENTIAL," and "CLASSIFIED." They were not times to make jokes unless you were guilty, passing notes in a classroom while assured protection with oaths of non-disclosure and files containing documents with those stamps on them. We will show three more characters that match people associated with the anti-Castro projects. Before that, we must note the only other artist's name that appears in the spy-novel. It appears only once, but it is insinuated by a reference to two mountains near Mexico City, often called "the sisters," one called "The Sleeping Lady." The artist's name appears on the second page -- page 95. The artist was known for two paintings, often referred to as "sisters:" "The Naked Maja" and "The Clothed Maja" in pictures of repose.

[Phil Dragoo]

The hooded vigure on the viewer's left side of the human heap in Quinta del Sordo is Hunt.Randy, you inquire as to Conein. Hunt mentions him to son Saint John. I have a print-out of the latter's ebook.Yes, they (Hunt and Phillips) are having a grand and privileged tete-a-tete.You express concern that we be able to prove something.Here's a quick posit, one of many, many available to any of us:The half-dozen or more Parkland medicos who cite "cerebellum or cerebellar tissue" exuding from the occipital wound big as a baseball.Of course the Warrenite zombies would say it's the scoop of cerebellar tissue on the cerebellar cone Clint Hill was bringing Jackie which he spilled as the SS driver accelerated.They'll have "just discovered" evidence it was something Clint Hill did every day at one as an excuse to be near the First Lady.A large conspiracy not doable? Did not Agatha Christie depict Hercule Poirot uncovering the murder of one by many? Even dedicated readers would be left clueless in either a Christie mystery or a Dealey enigma--if the necessary clues are studiously retained in the dealer's hand.Hunt may have left something, and to find it one must peel away the outer story of the son and his personal drama.Phillips admitted to being in Dallas as did Hunt. Hunt had the last word; it has not been as thoroughly parsed as it deserves.

[Randy Bednorz]

Phil Dragoo wrote:The hooded vigure on the viewer's left side of the human heap in Quinta del Sordo is Hunt.Randy, you inquire as to Conein. Hunt mentions him to son Saint John. I have a print-out of the latter's ebook.Yes, they (Hunt and Phillips) are having a grand and privileged tete-a-tete.You express concern that we be able to prove something.Here's a quick posit, one of many, many available to any of us:The half-dozen or more Parkland medicos who cite "cerebellum or cerebellar tissue" exuding from the occipital wound big as a baseball.Of course the Warrenite zombies would say it's the scoop of cerebellar tissue on the cerebellar cone Clint Hill was bringing Jackie which he spilled as the SS driver accelerated.They'll have "just discovered" evidence it was something Clint Hill did every day at one as an excuse to be near the First Lady.A large conspiracy not doable? Did not Agatha Christie depict Hercule Poirot uncovering the murder of one by many? Even dedicated readers would be left clueless in either a Christie mystery or a Dealey enigma--if the necessary clues are studiously retained in the dealer's hand.Hunt may have left something, and to find it one must peel away the outer story of the son and his personal drama.Phillips admitted to being in Dallas as did Hunt. Hunt had the last word; it has not been as thoroughly parsed as it deserves.I suspend judgment or have none about who is in the picture. Phillips chooses to obliquely reference it without name -- but for that of the artist. It is the only picture I can find among all those by Goya which exactly matches the description -- sans coffin.Somebody sent me an animated cartoon that uses Jack Nicholson's voice as a cartoon-dog fast-food slinger in an "in-and-out-burger" drive-thru. The punch-line: "Who put the straw in strawberry?""Nature did . . . .""Who put the ap- in apricot?""Nature did . . . . ""And who put the 'freak' in french-fries . . . . ""Ah . . . there's no freak in french-fries . . . . ""That's what I said! There's no freakin' french-fries!"So who put the coffin in the Quinta del Sordo mural?Phillips did!It's only wise to see this stuff in its basic, elementary meanings. The pictures are important. It's may be no accident that Condon's first several pages of "Oldest Confession" quote from Goya:"I had three masters: Velazquez, Rembrandt and Nature."You can "guess" that maybe Phillips had that in mind. You can't prove it.No -- the other artists are very important; Goya is important; and the importance is subtle for "the action chapter."You can always involve a larger number of people in a "conspiracy" if (a) it is well-coordinated, (b) a large number of participants do not know that a crime will occur, (c) the largest number of participants don't know who's doing what, or if someone else will do something to actually execute the unanticipated crime. So the guys at the bottom, some few with fingers on the trigger and the threat of being silenced for breaking a silence -- knew what was happening. Maybe they only heard someone else's voice on a walkie-talkie, but did not know whose voice. The guys who planned it -- those around Phillips -- would know the most. The high-level people above them might only know what was going to happen and when -- not who or how. They may even have given thumbs-up or thumbs-down, as some interpret the meeting with the oil-men.This endless conversation has been going on for 45 years. It will never stop. If you produce evidence, someone comes up with an elaborate argument to controvert it. If you say Phillips mentioned Angleton before his allegorical snake-story, then Angleton - not Phillips -- is at the bottom of it. Or you hire a lawyer, sue the newspapers, and encourage the lawyer to write his "last word" of 1,600 pages."Magic Bullet?" "Frangible, mercury-filled round from the knoll." "Entry from front?" "No, entry wounds from the rear." "Oswald and the Carcano?" "No prints on the metal surfaces and casings -- only on the book boxes." "He used gloves." "Let's do a trajectory analysis using computers." "What? You can make that come out any way you want, but a conspiracy doesn't mean no bullets came from the 6th floor TSBD." That's why these telltale links between these books by CIA men are of special value to me. Sooner or later, somebody else will try and fabricate some other "interpretation." For me, it's not about interpretation. There are only a few ways in which it interprets. I believe Helms had it figured out before he died. I've heard enough from the tape of Hunt's death-bed remarks that further confirms it. As far as Helms is concerned, Phillips is on the s***-list for any mention, but he gives plenty of space to Hunt, footnotes for Bissell and Meyer -- a lot of information. Some of it is erroneous and misleading. But some of what is erroneous or misleading is unintentional. It's one person's perspective; one person who saw so many documents, but not others; who was aware of specifics for certain clandestine operations but not others; one person who is working on a memoir 30 and 40 years after the fact of that decade and the one preceding it.I can satisfy myself that I now know -- "Know" with a capital K. I might satisfy others. And there will be someone out there, paid or encouraged by whomever or whatever to write a book, twist the facts and attempt to further reduce a consensus about what happened. Am I a "conspiracy nut?" Say whatever you want. I'm freaking retired!

[Bob]

Wow. I'm going to need some time to digest all of this. This reminds me of a time in college when I was doing a report on the works of Edgar Allan Poe. Talk about deep and mysterious. While I was reading Poe and trying to decipher his words, I listened to music by the Alan Parsons Project from an album called Tales of Mystery and Imagination. It seemed to help my focus or at least make me think out of the box. I think I'm going to do the same thing here.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSQz_LQ6 ... re=related

[Bob]

As I read through all of the great perspective Randy has given us, there is no doubt that Phillips uses a skill that he learned in the CIA called cryptography, which is the practice and study of hiding information. Phillips does that well in his books, as does Hunt. As Randy shows, Phillips basically confesses in his books, but does not state it matter of fact. He uses code words and numbers, a standard practice of cryptography.David Phillips had many talents. Win Scott once said of Phillips, "His (Phillips) comprehensive understanding of human beings combined with a thorough knowledge of covert action techniques and his fluent Spanish make him unusually valuable... He is the most outstanding Covert Action officer that this rating officer has ever worked with."Phillips was also "theatrically handsome".Randy has also given us a glimpse of the narcissistic personality of Phiilps. That is...being excessively preoccupied with issues of personal adequacy, power, and prestige. He used his years of training to manipulate Lee Harvey Oswald and others to do his bidding. The JFK assassination was a classic black ops mission. One that fit into the deniable category, a situation in which there is no claim of responsibility for the action, and/or a false flag operation is used to give the appearance that another actor was responsible, or – most often – black operations involve extensive arrangements so as to be able to hide the fact that the black operation ever occurred. That is precisely the way the Warren Commission defined the murder of JFK. They covered up the true facts. And people like Vincent Bugliosi, Gerald Posner, Gary Mack and Chris Matthews do the same to this day. All four of those individuals felt that selling their souls and credibility was worth it in their minds.Speaking of Bugliosi, the fact that he is historically tied to Phillips and was his attorney, speaks volumes about why his 1,600 page door stop was written. Like Phillips, Bugliosi has many faces, and when one explores all factors, the face one sees is quite ugly.Once again...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZQ4UgPBS ... re=related