Monday, October 28, 2013

Author Philip Shenon: Is He An Idiot or A Dupe?

It's hard to know. But I lean to perhaps a mix, so being an idiot, he emerged as a dupe for the Warrenites (and CIA)  in his book, 'A Cruel and Shocking Act: The Secret History of the Kennedy Assassination” - the first phrase of which  takes its name from the first sentence of the Warren Commission’s report: “The assassination of John Fitzgerald Kennedy on November 22, 1963, was a cruel and shocking act of violence directed against a man, a family, a nation, and against all mankind.”

In his appearance this morning on CBS Early Show, former NY Times reporter Philip Shenon tried to make the case that the CIA, FBI "failed to connect the dots" in nailing Oswald after "threats made against Kennedy's life in Mexico City". Also, on account of inadequate information from the CIA, FBI, the Warren Commission failed to report this. He claimed (via Bob Schieffer's voice over) that "not only did the FBI and CIA withhold information from the Commission but prior to the assassination the agencies did not tell FBI agents and law enforcement officers in Dallas all that they knew about Oswald. Had they done so, Shenon averred the assassination "might well have been prevented."

How so? According to Shenon, answering Charlie Rose: "The FBI and CIA failed to tell the authorities in Dallas about the threats Oswald made in the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City."

Shenon - incredibly for a supposed "investigative reporter" (who took five years to dig this up) - points to a statement Oswald purportedly made when at the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City and related by J. Edgar Hoover in declassified FBI files:

"He (Oswald) stormed into the Embassy, demanded the visa, and when it was refused him, headed out saying: 'I'm going to kill Kennedy for this.!"

So, basically, Shenon places his faith in one of the most ardent Kennedy haters of the era, J. Edgar Hoover. The same Hoover who possessed information about a proposed assassination plot on Kennedy from New Orleans' gangster Carlos Marcello in 1962 and who failed to disclose it! (See the documents presented in Mark North's book Act of Treason).  Meanwhile, Shenon lets himself be played and led into a blind alley by a CIA determined to frame Oswald using the 'Oswald in Mexico City' fiction.

Shenon goes on to say that the "document then disappears" intimating that had it been circulated to the Dallas' authorities in timely fashion,  the assassination would have been prevented, Why? Because  "people in Mexico City knew Oswald was talking openly about killing President Kennedy.".

In a pig's eye.

Besides, what moron for an assassin "talks openly" about killing an American President at a foreign embassy? An impostor seeking to frame a patsy-  to be set up to take the fall- would do so, however. This makes one wonder if Shenon's IQ even reaches double digits. But again, a CIA media shill, using the ploy of a "soft" conspiracy (powerful forces agreeing not to release key information)- could also work wonders to take the heat off the agency and obfuscate the REAL conspiracy. In this case, Shenon may be merely a "useful idiot" - though doubtless rewarded with terrific book sales- thanks to CIA help in PR promotions. (Google his book and you'll see it everywhere.)

First,  Oswald was NEVER in Mexico City! The "Oswald" reported there was an impostor (also supported by documents presented in John Newman's 'Oswald and the CIA'), and even captured as such on CIA cameras (also presented in Newman's book), e.g.

The "Oswald" that made the proclamations to which Shenon refers was none other than the character on the right - not the Lee Harvey Oswald falsely arrested in Dallas.

That Shenon didn't know this, or why the accounts never reached Dallas' authorities, is troubling, because such a monumental blind spot after "five years" investigation points to another CIA dupe. Or maybe an idiot who himself is incapable of "connecting the dots"- even when they're staring him in the face.

Second, recall if you will, a long standing CIA document (1035-960) that strongly advises for use of "propaganda assets" to protect the Warren Commission from critics (and also to protect the CIA's ass from scrutiny).  Paragraph (2) of the document notes, in regard to mounting criticisms of the Warren Report in the 1960s:
 " This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the U.S. government, including our organization." 

Then, later on we read:" Innuendo of such seriousness affects not only the individual concerned, but also the whole reputation of the American government.  Our organization itself is directly involved: among other facts, we contributed information to the investigation"

Ah, but that "information" was mainly disinformation, felonious misdirection and lies. Such as concerning Oswald's CIA files (withheld from Warren Commission), as well as fake cables dispatched from Mexico City (chronologically mis-arranged in files given to the Commission), and the fake FPCC handbills submitted to the Warren Commission as exhibits but which John Newman (in his "Oswald and the CIA") referred to as "whole cloth fabrications.") For more in depth insights into the CIA chicanery see my October 22 blog post, on the Pre-Assassination Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald (link below) which evidently Philip Shenon himself now wants to be a part of, ex post facto.

As I noted, all of the above were part of a covert action effort headed by David Atlee Phillips, and documented in Gaeton Fonzi's The Last Investigation with techniques exposed in Peter Dale Scott's book, ‘Oswald, Mexico and Deep Politics’.  (Which I suggest Shenon read to get his head on straight).

Anyway, moving back to the CIA document, it continues with two singular objectives:

"to discuss the publicity problem with [?] and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors), pointing out that the Warren Commission made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, "


"To employ propaganda assets to [negate] and refute the attacks of the critics.  Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose".

Ah, but it turns out that lately books have also become "appropriate" including Vince Bugliosi's "Reclaiming History", former CIA hack Brian Latell's "Castro’s Secrets: The CIA and Cuba’s Intelligence Machine" and earlier Gerald Posner's "Case Closed". Shills anyone? Now add to that constellation Philip Shenon's effort.

Those readers who'd like a cogent synopsis of how and why Philip Shenon is far off the beam, and has actually helped deliver and advance CIA mischief, can read my blog posts of Oct. 21 and Oct 22. If you don't wish to read both, then at least read the one from Oct. 22nd:

which gives the skinny on how Oswald was set up from the Mexico City Station (compliments of David Atlee Phillips)  via a trip there that never occurred - but which helped later with the Oswald as deranged, angry assassin narrative.

Keep alert, as there's bound to be much more codswallop on the "Oswald did it" theme to come. It seems the media evidently  loves the dupes and deceivers more than truth tellers, but this ought not surprise anyone familiar with "Operation Mockingbird".

For all those not in the know, or who need a deep politics refresher, please Google it! To see a Youtube video on 'Mockingbird', with open admissions,  go to:

Footnote on Operation Mockingbird: Kathryn Olmstead, in her book, Challenging the Secret Government: The Post-Watergate Investigations of the CIA and FBI, Univ. of North Carolina Press, p.21 notes:

According to the Church committee's final report, approximately fifty U.S. Journalists had covert relationships with the CIA, about half of which involved money. Watergate investigative reporter Carl Bernstein charged that the total number of U.S. journalists who worked for the CIA was actually much higher. In a controversial article in 'Rolling Stone', Bernstein claimed that more than 400 American journalists secretly carried out assignments for the CIA from the early 1950's to the mid-1970's. The 'New York Times' alone, Bernstein insisted, provided cover for ten CIA officers from 1950 to 1966.

No comments: