Collaboration in JFK Killing

[LiAnn Simpson]

Many people have asked the question of how so many organizations could work together to pull off the assassination with no one blowing the whistle on the other.
The answer to your question is, they had already been doing it for years!
These organizations had worked together to murder people all over the world. They already had the killing teams in place, they just needed to know where the next hit would take place. All it took was a couple of phone calls. Remember the LBJ confession to the journalist --"We had been operating a murder incorporated in the Caribbean".
As mind boggling as it seems, it was just that simple. The cover-up-----not quite so simple. It got very messy. Many of the people who assisted in the murders overseas that were recruited to assist in the JFK murder refused because it was against everything they had been trained to do. They had been trained to kill overseas, not here. The CIA is not supposed to be operating within this country, it is a foreign "intelligence" organization. Which is why they screwed up the cover-up so badly because when they murdered in a foreign country no cover-up was necessary. It was just an in and out thing. Not so here. Which is why the concept of hiring foreign killers to do the job here seems entirely feasible.

[Bruce Patrick Brychek]

12.29.2012Dear JFK Murder Solved Forum Members and Readers:06.30.2007 - Ms. LiAnn Simpson Posted this powerful Headline worthy of consideration,and evaluation. Since then more research and study has focused on this subject matter.The factual information and theories that she advanced merit serious consideration and evaluation by the serious researcher and student of The JFK Event and relatedsubject matters.I strongly believe that LBJ was an absolutely essential lynchpin, and a forewarned participant before, during, and after the fact of the entire JFK Event.Author Craig I. Zirbel's two (2) books cover major aspects of LBJ's essential positioning:1. The Texas Connection: The Assassination of John F. Kennedy; and2. The Final Chapter of the JFK Assassination.Any more recent analyses, interviews, investigations, readings, research, studies,thoughts, or writings on any aspect of this subject matter ?Comments ?Respectfully,BB.

[kenmurray]

http://itwasjohnson.impiousdigest.com/index.htm

[kenmurray]

Excellent presentation on what LBJ knew:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BP12TT24nok#t=60

[Randy Bednorz]

In other recent posts, I explain how the Mac Wallace [LBJ] theory has hurt us. It resulted in complete suppression of the 9-part Nigel Turner series. Yet, there is little doubt in my mind that LBJ benefited; LBJ had strong motives. But unless you can put Mac Wallace next to either Dave Phillips or Dave Morales, it is a theory that simply doesn't fit.Consider this. Even today, somebody like John Kerry may accept that there was a conspiracy, but he still promotes the "Russians or Cubans" idea. Of course, you have Gus Russo's book. Think about it, though.After the Missile Crisis, why would the KGB (or even "rogue" factions) send someone back to the US, who then brands himself as someone who had lived in Russia, branded by others as having "defected" to Russia, and promoting himself as a "Marxist-Leninist . . . but not a Communist" -- then -- to put him up to killing JFK? Why would CAstro want to touch Oswald with a ten-foot-pole -- under the same emerging myth?And why would LBJ wind up Mac Wallace like a "Bourne-Trilogy" assassin and put him in the book depository -- to kill JFK? None of it makes much sense.Addressing the OP's concerns. We have these large institutions that are part of the national security apparatus. The problem with the proliferation of theories -- they over-generalize the culpability in the assassination to the organizational scope. This, again, is part of our own Achilles Heel. Important to keep in mind that our focus must be on individuals, then -- on associations and participation of more than one individual. If they happened to be a faction within the NS apparatus or the M-I-Complex, it does not automatically mean that there was this massive conspiracy of entire institutions. Yet, this is the "conspiracy-a-go-go" criticism that has been hurled at those vocal in rejecting the Lone-Nut pablum.

[Tom Bigg]

At the very least we have what may be called an unconscious conspiracy, or partly conscious and unconscious. The mafia had strong motives as their imperatives are greed at any cost, ruthlessness to achieve their ends and kill anyone who gets in their way. I want to keep a completely open mind on the idea of conspiracy; you can assume the mafia were one driving force as this researcher suggests: "On a political trip to Dallas November 22, 1963, JFK was killed by a mafia conspiracy. Carlos Marcello, the mob chief of New Orleans who also controlled Texas, vowed revenge when RFK had him deported and dropped in a Guatamala jungle. In 1962 Marcello was quoted as saying in reference to the Kennedys: "The dog will keep biting you if you only cut off its tail. You must cut off the dog's head." He also said one could get away with it if one found "a nut to take the blame." Oswald worked in New Orleans from April to October 1963. He was a close associate of one of Marcello's top aides, a man named David Ferrie. Oswald was also the nephew of Dutz Murret, another Marcello associate, who set Oswald up in New Orleans (the mafia trusts family). A third Marcello associate arranged bail when Oswald was arrested in August for a street disturbance. Three weeks before the assassination, Jack Ruby, a small-time mobster, called Nofio Pecora, Marcello's chief aide. Ruby, who had suddenly come into a great deal of cash on November 22, 1963, said later that he was "framed into killing Oswald." After the hit on Kennedy, Marcello let it be widely known throughout the mob world that he had done the hit. He told Jimmy Hoffa through a mob lawyer "You tell him he owes me, and he owes me big." Hoffa rewarded Marcello with $3.5 million from the Teamster's pension fund for a French Quarter hotel project. The House Select Committee on Assassinations (1979) concluded that the Mafia pulled the job. Robert Kennedy told Arthur Schlesinger that he blamed Marcello for his brother's death. Ironically, RFK's 3 year prosecution of Marcello ended the day JFK was killed - Carlos Marcello was acquitted in a deportation case November 22nd by a jury in New Orleans." http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICL ... fk.htmlNot that thorough, facts always need to be checked out.We don't have conspiracies in the manner of "Get Smart" with the good guys like Max and 99 and bad guys like Chaos. Ultimately it is a battle of good vs. evil, but rarely in the political arena do we see good people vs. bad people, but rather theater of what they want you to believe.In summary, organised crime was at the center of this, why would the political hoi polloi not want to nail the mafia for this?

[JDThomas]

Well put Tom.No matter how good JFK's public approval rating was, there were a number of special interest groups who wanted him 'out of the way'. That's not to say all of these wanted him dead - of these, not all were prepared to have him killed and of those that were, not all of the them carried it out.Who had the motive?Who benefitted?Who had the power to cover it up?.. Now where have I heard that before?Mafia certainly fail on point 3.

[Randy Bednorz]

My last post didn't address OP "LiAnn" directly.Many people have asked the question of how so many organizations could work together Here is where we run astray. Citizens and individuals are "outside the black box" looking at "persons-of-interest" who were inside the "black-box." I encounter this all the time as an erstwhile political activist: One political extreme uses broad generalizations in their propaganda. For instance, "[The President] is a SO-sha-list!" Or "The gov'mint wants to make us dependent, take away our FREE-dums and drain our precious bodily fluids!" Today, we have a groundswell of public clamor to emasculate the NSA. I might think the collection of meta-data is no different than the mailman reading the address information on my envelopes, although the USPS doesn't keep that information and store it for 5 years. So there are definitely valid concerns. And perhaps my lukewarm reaction to Snowden's actions -- some say heroic but I say [at least technically] criminal -- derives from the fact that I assumed NSA had the capability to do what it does going back before 1993, and that I knew what it was doing in surveillance in conjunct with Canada, UK, NZ, Australia, Japan -- even Germany -- to people outside the USA and even before BBC's expose' on the ECHELON system in 1999.So we tend to generalize about the whole black box. Personally, I'm tentatively inclined to think that James Angleton did not instigate the assassination, because in its wake, his clinical paranoia took a quantum leap as he pursued the HONETOL mole-hunt. If he was instrumental in holding Nosenko incommunicado for three years, it was as likely due to a fear of Soviet penetration and his own speculation about the assassination as for a desire to keep what Nosenko knew from the public. But I'll accept a possibility that Angleton might have been involved, if someone can offer me proof.The same for LBJ. LBJ certainly had motive. But if you incline to accept Oswald's remark about being a patsy as more believable than his "Marxist-Leninist" promotions, then you must wonder about LBJ's remarks: "They're going to kill us all!" or "We were running a damn Murder Incorporated in the Caribbean." If LBJ were directly involved -- still admitting a possibility of general foreknowledge -- why would he march out Mac Wallace as a wind-up assassin in the depository, when it would trace right back to him? Similarly, you would ask why KGB would use a "communist" making a public spectacle of his orientation. And so why would LBJ even remark to others in his circle about Frank Sturgis and the other covert-operators in the Caribbean? It would only point back at him if suspicions arose -- and they did, of course.Now -- about the Mafia . . . . Here's an excerpt from Dave Phillips' first book, "The Night Watch" [1977] -- to which I've added a "hint" of a picture:[3: Wash., Cuba, Lebanon, Cuba 1955-1959 pg 73] The problem of cover was fortuitously resolved when I made a connection with a rich Texan on a flight from Ankara to Paris. He had asked for a bourbon before takeoff and was visibly offended when the stewardess told him it could not be served until we were airborne. This was at nine in the morning. The Texan turned to me. "Suppose you think it's too early for booze? In fact," he said, "I never drink before five in the afternoon."He guffawed, showing me his wristwatch. All the numerals were fives. "From Neiman-Marcus," he assured me. "Promised my wife I'd never drink until after five, and now I can always tell her I don't."This entire page is about cover stories. First, it is firsthand anecdote about CIA's relationship with the oil industry -- what other industry is implicated, with a rich Texan traveling to the Middle East and places like Ankara? It goes on to describe the Texan's own jet: fitted with a double bed. Phillips insinuates that it was more important for CIA to protect the "cover's" business interest than Phillips himself.Second, we all know the story of how Blakey deflected the HSCA findings to assert that "The Mafia probably did it." Moreover, we have numerous additions to "Assassination Literature 101" which follow that theory. It is easily a myth, because of an equal chance that Mafia elements were used. No less useful -- the quote from Carlos Marcello. So -- looking at Phillips' story again, what two colors do you think of as indicative of classic watches and clocks? What color are the hands? What sort of hands have five digits? And what did they used to call the Mafia?There have even been documentaries featuring retired mobsters who reminisce that CIA intended the Mafia to take the fall if the outermost cover story fell apart in operations against Castro.EDIT: One more point. LiAnn is spot on about CIA's assassination programs, but it is probably worth arguing that from the viewpoint of General Walter Bedell Smith, who called "propaganda" a cost-effective "prophylactic," and Frank Wisner, Sr., who ran "The Great Wurlitzer" of his fabled worldwide propaganda network, the propaganda -- the cover-story -- was just as important as the target and the terrorism. So the blowback from these programs occurred -- just as LiAnn states -- precisely because it was being done against CIA's charter and on American soil. This only made the cover-story more relevant, and it is the cover-story which was slow poison to "public opinion" in the assassination's wake.Even today, after the Gifford shooting in Tucson, Right-wing elements availed themselves of the old Oswald canard: "We don't engage in political violence -- Oswald was a Communist!"

[Slav]

JD your rightWho has the power to cover it up then and now and do a recent media blast of propaganda diss-info to try and brain wash the newer generation. Why Would LBJ use Mac Wallace its very simply Mac has his back and will do anything for LBJ,Why not use Mac Wallace Hoover will let him go if he is caught, his other charges were dropped. Who appointed the warren commission to stop any investigation? LBJWho told his wife and Mistress the Kennedys will be off my back after tomorrow, LBJWho had the meeting or party the night before at the Billionaire house where he told his mistress thart the Kennedy will be no more, LBJWho was LBJ next door neighbor who ran the FBI to help cover up the crime Hoover,Why was General Lansdale standing on the sidewalk with George bush on Elm st?Who changed the Route to go to elm street ? The same people that had the shooters planted on Elm not the Mafia they cound not change the route.who had the records locked up for 50 years and more and why?Why was a Cia abort team flown in?Why does LBJ Lawyer say that LBJ is responsible?Why was mafia people like rosseli Nicolletti Killed off?Why was there an attempt of Reagons life when Bush was VP ? hoping to get in like LBJ?who has the power to move the location of a bullet on JFK back like ford did? which is not legal and he should of got arrested?Who made LBJ duck down in his vehicle before he turned on to the school book depository? Not the Mob.Who took away all the security detail that was supposed to be watching the route for open windows? and why was that general sent out of the Country the day before there was lack of secret service and police presence on the route. not the mobif you could answer Mafia to one above, No I dont think so.why does bush laugh about the lone nut at fords funeral? the mafia made him Laugh?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ft3eGWZd7LEthe men who killed kennedy can be seen on this video watch it and Learn.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jgNfQYpS1gQOver 4 million people Visit JFK grave every year not because the Mafia killed him they do because the cant get over there own government LBJ Hoover killing JFK and then covering it up and still being covered up today. Who would have the power to cover it today. Not the Mob there all dead.The so called Mob were also employed by the federal government the CIA. The Mob only followed orders given to them by the CIA which followed by a Bag Of Money.The Government Hoover LBJ Bush Ford Nixon then Worked on the cover up.

[Randy Bednorz]

I had been puzzled by the McClellan book which is still on my bookshelf. Check for instance DiEugenio's review of the Waldron "Ultimate Sacrifice" book. He demolishes it, with a great deal of work on the CTKA website. It demonstrates my own technique for "vetting" new books I buy: If the theory sharply points in a direction that I "know" or "believe" doesn't wash, I look for facts that are missing. That means the evidence was cherry-picked. The problem with the Wallace theory -- first of all -- is similar to the problem with the "Russians and Castro" theory. We don't deny that elements of the mob likely played a role: they had motive, means and opportunity to perform the mechanical end of execution. But why would LBJ put someone close to him in that sniper's nest? Just like "Why would the Russians send a "defector" who had lived in Russia and openly professed the ideology? We can say similar things about Castro. What you might forget here is that McClellan had indeed worked in the law offices used by LBJ -- "back when . . . " But McClellan -- from before the time of his book-writing -- had been in the opposite political camp: his son was Dubya's press secretary. The political charge to the assassination issue had always been there. But with Stone's film, the preview to both houses of Congress and the passage of the '92 Records Act, some odd things began to happen.Bush 41 stonewalled implementation of the Records Act, and he was quoted as saying -- I have the audio clip -- that he didn't favor revealing "classified information." As soon as Clinton tried to make up for lost time in getting a new list of academic candidates from Congress and setting the ARRB in motion, Ken Starr was coincidentally appointed to begin the investigation of Clinton. All during the 1990s, the Clinton troubles filled the front pages of newsprint, and the trickle of information coming from ARRB was pushed to the back pages.The Wallace Theory doesn't fit with theories that put Dave Phillips close to the center -- until you can find a documented connection between Wallace and Phillips' intelligence network. On the other hand, I argue that Phillips -- "in print" and right under the noses of the reading public -- implicates "Mr. Rubbers" in some minor role. His characterization fits with his actions at the time of the assassination -- making telephone calls. There is another angle on this. E. Howard Hunt, who was arrested among the "Committee to Re-Elect the President" in Watergate, was a loyal Republican. While implicating Phillips and Morales, he then points the finger at Cord Meyer and LBJ. Certainly, Meyer had motive, in that JFK had an affair with his wife -- long since glamorized in the Jefferson-Airplane Rock-Opera -- "Mary Meyer." Now -- here it is true -- having once contributed to the RNC during the 1980s, I might like to see it come to pass that Bush is actually proven to be a culpable conspirator.But since I stand fast in my conclusion that I found Phillips' confession hidden in his published works, I can neither ignore "Mr. Rubbers" nor can I try and make it into something more than it is.At this point, there is enough documented to show that the Mafia "participated." Mafiosi retirees had been interviewed to explain how they would be a "fallback cover-story" in assassination plots against Castro. People like Carlos Marcello may even have been manipulated into thinking that it was their very own conspiracy.But who planned the essentials? Oswald had to be guided through various hoops. He was a ready-made scapegoat, having professed "defecting" to USSR, returning to US. While living in the White Russian community, surrounded by an American intelligence network and showing few if any real ties that would link him to Castro, he was pushed around in New Orleans, then guided into the Depository employment. And it doesn't wash that because Phillips was a "propagandist" he wouldn't be privy to the mechanical preparations -- by someone like Morales -- who connects to both Mafia resources and others in that "Murder Incorporated of the Caribbean." And -- he implicates Morales.People will do what they want. They can choose to accept the Wallace print when the FBI rejected it. Is it really Wallace's "pinky?" Or is it someone else's middle finger? Is a 14 point match always enough? And what was the real chain of custody for that print? If Sandy Burger could get caught trying to steal documents from NARA/College-Park, would it be possible for someone else to succeed in smuggling something into the facility? Security measures at NARA are tight: you almost have to go through a strip-search, leaving every pen, every piece of paper, every personal ID and credit card in a secured locker before entering the document area.Everything this year -- the "anniversary" -- has been marked by smoke and mirrors. Vincent Bugliosi. Lone-nut implications dominating the media. Suppression of the Nigel Turner series.Seldom in the history of criminology and politics has there been such a political spin put on the effort to find out who was really responsible in contrast to the Oswald theory. And never before in such a history have those inclined to reject one theory -- this time, the Warren Report -- been told that their inclinations are governed by a "mass-psychology" of needing "more than an insect" like Oswald. So when you see the mass-psychology that underlies the actual plot -- even if Phillips might have been the only plotter -- it seems as though this same factor lies at the heart of frenzied Lone-Nut advocacy.While it isn't "conclusive," the wrist-watch story says a lot. Phillips -- like other criminal narcissists -- is a tease. But what he suggests with that story is a higher level of complicity in various things between elements of Big Oil and elements of CIA. They are talking about cover stories in the anecdote. And since this anecdote already deals with a sophisticated topic in clandestine operations, I argue that it is most likely a reference to a function supplied by the Mafia -- as substantiated by witness testimony by Mafiosi themselves.