Some of us suspect that translates to: "Some of our assets who played a key part in the events of the time are still alive". Suspicious? Paranoid? Fuckin-A right! I mean what have they got to hide?
Let's get sensible for once: One single unabashed and full release of the remaining files would quell nearly all the most dire conspiracy subtexts (e.g. those directly implicating the government or its agencies in executive action) and render redundant Comedian Tom Hanks' proposed 13-part HBO series next year - ostensibly designated to "prevent the American people from being snookered by the belief Oswald was framed".
Hey, Mr. Hanks, who is 'snookering' who? If you had one milligram of gumption or intestinal fortitude you'd be using all your energies to get those files released and dealing with them, instead of trying to brainwash the rest of us with two-bit propaganda dredged out of Vince Bugliosi's Warren Commission PR 'brief'.
According to Larry Sabato, a political scientist at the University of Virginia, who is writing a book about the impact of JFK’s assassination on American politics:
“This is a deeply disappointing decision that deprives everyone of a fuller understanding of the JFK assassination The 50th anniversary of that terrible event is the perfect opportunity to shed more light on the violent removal of a president. This adds to the widely held public suspicion that the government may still be hiding some key facts about President Kennedy’s murder.”
Well, uh ..duh...and why on earth wouldn't such suspicions be aroused? Any person with a pair of functioning neurons ought to be asking: What has the government got to hide?
The records were originally requested by the nonprofit Assassination Archives and Research Center (AARC), will now remain secret until at least 2017, when the 1992 JFK Records Act mandates public release of all assassination files in the government’s possession. However, do not be surprised that if Mitt Romney gets in, he passes an Executive Order mandating the remaining files never be released. Especially if they're found to contain what many of us already suspect.
Interestingly, The Archives’ decision comes as two former CIA officers have gone public with the unsubstantiated conspiracy theory that Cuban leader Fidel Castro had advance knowledge of JFK’s assassination in Dallas on Nov. 22, 1963. In a piece published in the Daily Beast this week, retired CIA officer Glenn Carle claimed that “the Cuban dictator knew of Lee Harvey Oswald’s intention to kill President Kennedy.” Carle also defended a deceased CIA colleague, David Phillips, from allegations of JFK conspiracy theorists that he conspired in JFK’s death.
First, I already exposed the 'Castro did it' bunkum for the horse shit it is, and people can see that in the blog eviscerating CIA hack Brian Latell's effort:
As I asked therein, and do so again: WHY should anyone in his or her right mind believe a pack of inveterate liars and their disinfo lackeys who had no compunction about blowing an airliner out of the sky off the coast of Barbados, on Oct. 6, 1976, killing all 73 on board- the entire Cuban National Fencing Team?
We also know at the time these "Oswald-Castro did it" tricks emerged, the one key person behind it was George Johannides, the Chief of Psychological Warfare branch of the CIA's JM/WAVE station in Miami . Almost all his energy was directed to: a) implicating Oswald in the assassination by a strategy of "sheepdipping" (see Univ. of Maryland Military Science Professor John Newman's excellent 'Oswald and the CIA') and b) processing disinformation from pseudo -double agents and deliberate false sources to implicate Castro, the Soviets, Oswald or all three.
Interestingly, on May 20, 2005, the same CIA that wants us to believe "Castro did it" or "knew about it" or "knew of Oswald", filed papers to block the release of specific JFK-assassination related documents to do with the activities of deceased CIA officer GEORGE JOANNIDES. Coincidence? Hardly! At the time of Kennedy's death, Joannides (as Chief of Psychological Warfare branch of JM/WAVE) was the character who manipulated Oswald (in conjunction with disaffected anti-Castro Cubans in the DRE and fellow agent David Atlee Phillips) and over months had him painted as a pro-Castro looneytune. By the time of the hit, 'Hey looka that! The Pro-Castro nut dunnit!' (Despite a savvy columnist, Kenneth Crawford, noting "the suspicious irony inherent in a lone-pro-Castro gunman being fingered in a city (
By doing this, Joannides also set the stage for the later Castro –conspiracy theory, that it was really Fidel who had Kennedy killed because of attempts made on the Cuban leader’s life via Operation ZR-Rifle. Not said, of course, is that Kennedy had already (from late 1962) initiated a rapprochement with Castro through his aide-de-camp Rene Vallejo and Kennedy's emissary, William Attwood. (See, e.g. Peter Kornbluh: ‘Kennedy and Castro: What Might Have Been’, in The Baltimore Sun, Aug. 22, 1999. )
This is what neither of these CIA hucksters, Carle or Latell, want people to process: that it makes ZERO sense for Castro or any of his confederates to want to whack JFK when he was already in the process of healing relations with Cuba, spurred on by the near calamitous events of October, 1962 and the Cuban Missile crisis (when Kennedy was being pressured by Gen. Curtis LeMay and others to bomb and invade Cuba).
Second, Carle's defense of David Atlee Phillips is more disinformation BS. As reported in The Baltimore Sun, (Nov. 28, 1997): 'Document Supports Conspiracy Theory In JFK Slaying' - Paper Buttresses Theory That Oswald, Agent Met' we read:
"A long secret government document released Wednesday lends credence to a favorite theory of conspiracy theorists on President John F. Kennedy's assassination: the contention that Lee Harvey Oswald was seen in Dallas with a U.S. Intelligence agent about two months before the killing. This issue has long been connected with unproved reports that a violent Cuban exile group - perhaps with the help of a U.S. intelligence agency - was involved in the assassination."
The Sun article named the intelligence agent as 'Maurice Bishop' which pseudonym was later exposed as the cover identity used by one David Atlee Phillips - who Carle seeks to protect. The article also noted that the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1978 "failed to substantiate the report" but we now know why in the aftermath. It was because both Phillips and Joannides were recruited to stonewall and lie their asses off to the HSCA.
Fifteen years after JFK's killing, Joannides was called out of retirement by the CIA to serve as the agency's liaison to the House committee looking into Kennedy's assassination. During this time he never disclosed his own actions in 1963 to the congressional investigators he was supposed to be assisting. It wasn't until 2001, 38 years after Kennedy's death, that Joannides' support for the Cuban exiles, who clashed with Oswald and monitored him, came to light. Since then, the Agency has blocked every effort to get the bastard's files.
"[Joannides'] behavior was criminal," said Robert Blakey, the former House committee counsel who was deceived by the CIA agent. "He obstructed our investigation."
Even pro-lone nut hack Gerald Posner ('Case Closed') was disturbed enough by the CIA's file disclosure intransigence (on the release of the Joannides' files) to comment:
"The agency is stonewalling, It's a perfect example of why the public has so little trust in the CIA's willingness to be truthful."
And also why the public should continue to have so little trust in CIA hack disinformationists like Carle and Latell, trying to pin the tail on Castro. What, Mr. Carle? Latell's crap wasn't good enough psych material so you had to put in your 0.02? Why isn't Tom Hanks investigating THIS? Why does Hanks instead choose to become part of the matrix of the "Unspeakable"? (After James Douglass' remarkable book: 'JFK and the Unspeakable'). Well, I suppose for a sometime comedic actor ('Larry Crowne') and dabbler in semi-fictional historic fare ('John Adams', 'Band of Brothers', 'The Pacific' etc.) it's a lot easier to be part of BS orthodoxy and getting HBO propaganda gigs, than it is to take the straight and narrow road to truth!
Back to David Atlee Phillips who Glenn Carle defends against those nasty CT's: Investigator
HSCA investigator Gaeton Fonzi is abundantly clear regarding the tactics of David Atlee Phillips (The Last Investigation, p. 336):
“David Atlee Phillips, former Chief of the Western Hemisphere Division of the CIA, lied under oath to the House Select Committee – and he got away with it. In its final report the Committee slipped in that fact obliquely, relegating it to a footnote. This was a devious way to cover its ass; it also illustrated the Committee’s readiness to dismiss evidence that would contradict its final report. That it disregarded Phillips' perjury confirms the Committee's tacit decision not to pursue the truth 'wherever it might lead' - especially if it headed toward the CIA. Chief Counsel Blakey had, after all, a' working agreement' with the Agency."
The last point makes it especially confounding to read Blakey's words (above) about being so incensed at Joannides, when the liar and perjurer Atlee Phillips was equally guilty. Fonzi goes on to emphasize Phillips import (op. cit., p. 336):
"David Phillips represented the most crucial investigative link ever developed between the Central Intelligence Agency and the assassination of President Kennedy."
So for Glenn Carle to assert Phillips had no role is nothing short of doing what Phillips did in respect of the HSCA investigation: lying! Fonzi, meanwhile, probably has offered the best perspective on our illustrious government's investigations thus far in the end notes of his book, (Gaeton Fonzi: 1993, The Last Investigation, Thunders Mouth Press, p. 410):
“So again, our government slapped the American people in the face. We have been slapped in the face over and over and over again and we still deny it is happening to us. Why?"
Maybe because they believe they can do so with impunity. Let's also bear in mind that a report issued by the House Select Committee on Assassinations noted that of all the anti-Castro groups, the DRE ( Directorio Revolucionario Estudantil ) of Phillips and Joannides was “one of the most bitter toward President Kennedy for his deal with the Russians”. (HSCA Volume 10, 1979: ‘Anti-Castro Activities and Organizations: Investigation of the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy’, in Appendix to the Hearings Before the Select Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives (U.S. Government Printing Office, p. 82) The "deal" referenced pertains to JFK's promise to Khrushchev - as part of resolving the October,1962 missile deal - to attempt no further invasions of Cuba if all Soviet hardware was removed. Kennedy also, to much right wing consternation, removed U.S. Jupiter missiles based in Turkey - 6 months later. All of this had to make the Phillips-Joannides Cuban clique apoplectic.
Well, imagine - just imagine - how riled and furious that same Phillips-Joannides anti-Castro Cuban group would be when it learned (compliments of their CIA handlers, no doubt) that Kennedy was in the process of establishing normalized relations with Fidel via a rapproachement with his aide-de-camp (Indeed, medical assistance had already been dispatched to Cuba as a sign of good will). Hell, the fuckers would have gone ballistic and begged Joannides and Phillips for anything they might do, any role, to exact payback. Anyone want to bet that one or more were offered the job of mechanics in a hit? Too extreme? They'd never do it? Hey ....these were the same fuckers that blew a Cubana Airliners plane (Flight 455) out of the skies off Barbados on Oct. 6, 1976! If they could kill 73 innocents that day don't tell me they wouldn't volunteer to put one or more bullets into a prez that: a) they believed 'betrayed' them by not providing air cover for Operation Zapata (the Bay of Pigs invasion), or b) had begun rapprochement with Fidel Castro.
To quote Larry Sabato on this NARA perfidy:
“After five decades it is ridiculous that information is still being withheld from the people whose taxes paid for it,”
But hey, maybe it isn't a biggie since they feel no compunction - the gov't - about pissing $10b a week on a useless operation like Afghanistan. So what's a little document concealment in the scheme of things? Especially when it may point the way to finally seeing the permanent war-security state entered via a coup de-etat in November, 1963?
Sadly, as the 50th anniversary of the hideous Dallas tragedy approaches, CIA officials are hiding information about covert operations that culminated in the death of perhaps the most liberal president in the last half century and the National Archives is helping them get away with it. Worse, a supposedly "liberal" president and Democrat seems to be condoning it. Go figure!
For a solid account of the Cubana Airliner bombing (including the false arrest of five Cubans who were in the process of exposing the actual anti-Castro Cuban-American terrorists) and why no one should ever believe squat on what the CIA or its lackeys has to say about Castro being involved in the JFK assassination, go to: