An excellent article in Skeptic by Gerald Posner. So, what is the Post’s “connection” between Joannides and Oswald? It is this: Oswald clashed publicly with Carlos Bringuier, a DRE activist in New Orleans in August 1963. I interviewed Bringuier at length in 1992 for Case Closed. That altercation, and a subsequent radio debate, are part of the historical record. But there is no indication Joannides—or anyone in the Miami DRE—was aware of it at the time. Lanuza told the HSCA in 1978 that it was only after JFK’s assassination that they learned of and retrieved Bringuier’s information about Oswald. Gerald's conclusion: The Joannides file, far from proving CIA complicity, confirms what researchers like me have argued for decades: that the agency’s real crime was institutional self-protection, not presidential assassination. Let’s be clear: There was no “Oswald operation.” There was no covert plot. And despite the breathless headlines, there was no CIA connection to the assassin. It’s time to close the case—not with myth, but with fact. Previous Relevant Blogs Posts on Jefferson Morley's Congressional Testimony Jefferson Morley's Congressional NothingBurger An analysis of Congresswoman Luna's Congressional Hearings In Search of the Oswald Operation, Part One An FBI memo that quoted James Angleton is used by Morley to reach an unwarranted conclusion. In Search of the Oswald Operation, Part Two Morley misreads Angleton's testimony before the HSCA. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Three Morley believes a document proves the CIA did not believe that a lone gunman killed JFK. Update on the Heath Memo Additional documents relevant to Part Three. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Four Morley claims that there is some connection between the suicides of Gary Underhill, Charles Thomas, George de Mohrenschildt, and the overdose death of Dorothy Kilgallen. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Five Morley believes that Agustin Guitart was spying on pro-Castro forces in New Orleans Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Jefferson Morley Fact Checking Morley's Fact Check Morley's Fact Check on SpyTalk needs a fact check. SpyTalk on Morley's Nothingburger Gus Russo and Michael Isikoff on the Joannides' personnel file. Jefferson Morley's Unbearable Lightness of Being Now that the entire personnel file of George Joannides has been released, Jefferson Morley has now published his unified theory of nothingness. More Morley Nothingburgers on the way Morley is requesting more documents -- they will reveal nothing about the assassination. Morley's Non-Story Hits the Press Morley got the headlines he wanted to a complete non-story. George Joannides and the HSCA Joannides did not come out of retirement to work with the HSCA. There Was No "Oswald Operation" There is no mention of an "Oswald Operation" in the Joannides' personnel file. The Parkland Doctors, Part Six Morley believes that Dr. Robert McClelland's recollections provides proof of a shot from the front. Here is the truth about McClelland. On the Loss of Occam’s Razor in the JFK Case A reply by Nicholas Nalli to Jefferson Morley. A Case Study in Redaction: The CIA's LIFEAT File Morley suspected a redacted file would reveal major secrets. It didn't. The Schlesinger Memo Unredacted! Several months ago, I posted an article, in association with several researchers, that showed what was contained in the redacted section of Schlesinger's memo. Jefferson Morley's Clairvoyance Morley somehow knows what is in the supposed 2,400 recently-discovered FBI files. Was Israel Behind the JFK Assassination? Morley discusses Israel with Tucker Carlson. Morley's Bad History Lesson Morley believes that the United States can never be great unless it solves the JFK assassination. Morley's List of 13 Documents Will Tell Us Little An analysis of the 13 documents Morley wants to see. The Schlesinger Memo, Again! Morley claims I am a CIA apologist and then misquotes me. For The Sake of Our Sanity - Release the Joannides File It would be worthwhile for the CIA to release the Joannides file just to stop the incessant posts from Jefferson Morley. Did Oswald Stay at a Luxury Hotel in Helsinki? Actually, Oswald stayed at two budget-priced hotels in Helsinki. Morley Keeps Asking the Same Questions He keeps asking the same questions, and we keep posting the same answers. The JFK Assassination and Truth Conspiracy authors are playing fast and loose with the facts. Was Herminio Diaz a Grassy Knoll Assassin? There is no evidence that Diaz was involved in the JFK assassination. Morley Misleads on Arthur Schlesinger's Memo on the CIA There are clues as to what is in a redacted section of Schlesinger's memo. Jefferson Morley's Podcast on New Orleans Lays an Egg Chad Nagle and Dan Storper's article on New Orleans gets everything wrong. Chad Nagle and Dan Storper Lay an Egg Believing Michael Kurtz is problematic. Is Jefferson Morley Seeing Double? Morley wrote that there are two redacted memos on CIA reorganization, but there is only one. He wrote about Goodwin's copy as if it was a different memo, rather than a copy of the Schlesinger memo. Jefferson Morley is wrong about "Who Shot John?" The phrase 'who shot John' does not refer to the JFK assassination. Jefferson Morley is Wrong on William Harvey, Again! Only one word is redacted in Harvey's deposition. Jefferson Morley is Wrong about Operation Northwoods, Again! There are no redactions in the Operation Northwoods document. Did Dorothy Kilgallen Have any Special Knowledge about the JFK Assassination? Kilgallen had nothing to tell. Morley's Interview of Marina Oswald Porter Fizzles! An underwhelming interview of Marina Oswald. Jefferson Morley: Able to Leap Intellectual Chasms in a Single Bound Morley often repeats stories and changes their meanings. There was NO Assassination Plot in Chicago Chad Nagle claims there was an assassination plot against JFK in Chicago in November 1963. One problem: There is no evidence of such a plot. Fred Litwin, CIA Apologist? A response to Morley's Substack post alleging that I am a CIA apologist. A Reply to Jefferson Morley on Bill Harvey A rebuttal to Morley's response to my post Was Bill Harvey in Dallas in November of 1963? Was Bill Harvey in Dallas in November of 1963? There is no credible evidence Harvey was in Dallas in November of 1963. Does it Matter Where Allen Dulles was on November 22, 1963? Morley repeats the claim that Dulles was at a CIA training center during the weekend of the JFK assassination. He wasn't. Jefferson Morley's Claims about Reuben Efron Morley's claims about Efron are all wrong. A Reply to Jefferson Morley regarding Operation Northwoods Morley responded to my article "The Truth about Operation Northwoods." Here is my reply. W. Tracy Parnell on Jefferson Morley W. Tracy Parnell is one of the best JFK assassination researchers out there. Here is his look at Jefferson Morley with several important articles. The Truth about Operation Northwoods Operation Northwoods can only be understood as part of the Kennedys' war against Cuba and Operation Mongoose. Jefferson Morley Responds to my Post on MK-Ultra and Jack Ruby And a response from me. Did Dr. Louis Jolyon West Ask to Examine Jack Ruby in November 1963? There is no evidence that Dr. West petitioned the court to examine Jack Ruby before his trial. Did the CIA use a MK-Ultra Psychiatrist to Interfere with Jack Ruby's Case? There is absolutely no evidence that Dr. Louis Jolyon West interfered with Jack Ruby's case. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads Viewers on Oswald's "Hands Off Cuba!" Handbills, Part Four Jefferson Morley used a fake Oswald handbill in his press conference for the Mary Ferrell Foundation. Redactions, Redactions, Redactions... An examination of redactions in the JFK collection of documents. Jefferson Morley Doesn't Understand Jim Garrison's Homophobic Prosecution of Clay Shaw Morley doesn't understand Alecia Long's arguments about homophobia and Jim Garrison. Jefferson Morley asks why "what the CIA knew about Herminio Diaz is still off limits." Morley misses that a lot of redactions are actually available. Belief in a JFK Conspiracy Drops! Jefferson Morley's press conference presents evidence that belief in a conspiracy has dropped.

A very good opinion piece in the Duluth News Tribune by Cory Franklin : The release earlier this year of the last reported bunch of classified files about the 1963 assassination of President John F. Kennedy yielded information on various mysterious CIA plans worldwide — but no agency involvement in Kennedy’s murder. There was never any actual contact between the CIA and the assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald; no second shooter; no money trail; no phone call or paper trail; no game-changing witnesses; and no evidence of a cover-up after the shooting. The whole turn of events represented a setback, albeit temporary, to the conspiracy-theory community. Fear not, though, theirs is not a crusade to be abandoned lightly. The conspiracists are already gathering and frantically scouring the files, desperately searching for some unrevealed, incriminating scrap of paper the CIA neglected to destroy. And the money quote: For conspiracy theorists, no defeat is final. There’s always more to the story, and no investigation will ever be sufficient. The release of documents, like commissions and books that fail to find a conspiracy, is simply part of larger conspiracies that are somehow capable of manipulating the findings of investigations decades later. Previous Relevant Blog Posts SpyTalk on Morley's Nothingburger A good overview of the Joannides affair. Anna Luna's JFK Conspiracy Circus A good article in SpyTalk Gus Russo on the KGB's Disinformation Campaign An excellent article on how the KGB tried to convince the American public that the CIA killed JFK. The Magic Thinking of Kennedy-ism Rick Perlstein has written an excellent article on the worship of the Kennedys. Garrison vs. the people   A good editorial from the Chicago Daily News. Jim Garrison epitomized "insolence in office"   The New Orleans Times-Picayune  reports on a Clay Shaw speech. The New York Times  on Clay Shaw's Acquittal   An editorial and an opinion piece from the New York Times . Garrison's Investigation - "a smalltime circus sideshow"   An editorial from the Washington Evening Star after Shaw's acquittal. Garrison vs. the people   Several editorials about the acquittal of Clay Shaw. Washington Post Editorial on the Acquittal of Clay Shaw   The Washington Post calls for the removal of Jim Garrison from office. Clay Shaw's Acquittal   News and editorials on the acquittal from the newspapers in New Orleans.

Jefferson Morley has responded to the SpyTalk article by Michael Isikoff and Gus Russo. His reply is full of quotes and document excerpts -- it looks terrific. The only problem is that Morley doesn't address the major issues brought up in the SpyTalk piece. The plain fact of the matter is that the personnel file of George Joannides does not contain any evidence of a supposed operation with Lee Harvey Oswald. I invite anybody to check the documents themselves. There just is nothing there. So, Morley has to make up a strawman. In fact, the Joannides file and other CIA records provide abundant evidence of the CIA’s connection to Oswald. Under the code name AMSPELL, the Cuban Student Directorate was funded by the CIA in 1963 to the tune of $51,000 a month. Here’s an excerpt from a document found in the JFK Library. No one denies that the CIA funded the DRE. Morley then writes: Joannides handled the AMSPELL portfolio from December 1962 to May 1964. Here’s a performance evaluation praising his handling of the Cuban students in that period. No one denies that George Joannides was the CIA case officer of the DRE at JMWAVE. So far so good. Then Morley ties the DRE to New Orleans: In August 1963, the AMSPELL members in New Orleans generated propaganda about Oswald, the local leader of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. Here’s a tape of Oswald’s radio appearance that DRE leader Luis Fernandez Rocha sent to “Howard,” a.k.a. Joannides. Carlos Bringuier was a delegate of the DRE He was not paid nor was he directed by the DRE. The fact that he talked with Oswald at his store and then had an altercation with Oswald on the streets has nothing to do with the DRE or the CIA. This is where Morley is using sleight of hand to make it appear that the hands of the DRE, and thus the CIA, were involved in the Bringuier-Oswald affair. This takes away the agency of Lee Harvey Oswald. And that of Carlos Bringuier. But how does Morley explain the testimony of Bill Stuckey, the man who had Oswald on his radio show in New Orleans. (hat tip: Steve Galbraith) Here is an excerpt from his Warren Commission testimony : Oswald's interview on the radio only occurred because of a chance encounter between Bill Stuckey and Carlos Bringuier at a bank. This was not part of an Oswald operation. It was just part of everyday life. And then Stuckey contacted Ed Butler to ask him to be part of a panel to debate Oswald : After the debate, Butler contacted newspapers and the story was picked up by UPI. However it was only a few newspapers carried it: The Shreveport Journal, August 22, 1963 Was this part of the Oswald operation? To get press coverage in four or five newspapers before the assassination? All the information the DRE possessed about Oswald was out in the press in August of 1963. There was no big post-assassination coup for the DRE in Miami. Morley then goes on to link press coverage of the DRE allegations against Castro after the assassination to Joannides: As former DRE spokesman Jose Antonio Lanuza recently recounted to the Washington Post, the AMSPELL leaders spoke with Joannides on the night of November 22, 1963. The CIA man told them to go to the press and the FBI. The DRE proceeded to generate the first conspiracy theory about JFK’s assassination: that Oswald and Castro were “the presumed assassins.” Morley is right that Lanusa did telephone Joannides right after the assassination. But he did not wait for approval to go to the press. Here is an excerpt from Morley's 2008 book, Our Man in Mexico: Winston Scott and the Hidden History of the CIA : (page 205) This was known to the HSCA : And Morley sort of admits that Oswald was "not directed or manipulated." Isikoff and Russo insist that Oswald was not directed or manipulated into this role by Joannides, which may well be true. Joannides’ undercover work included having a residence in New Orleans in 1963, but I have never said (and the Washington Post did not say) that he had direct contact with Oswald. But Morley sneaks in a reference to a Joannides' residence in New Orleans. But did Joannides have a residence in New Orleans? I don't think so. Morley gets this from two forms in the Joannides' personnel file which mention his "home leave residence": Joannides permanent residence was in Miami, Florida. He indicated that his home leave residence was New Orleans, Louisiana. Don't forget that Joannides was a permanent overseas resident from 1951 to 1962. I asked JFK assassination records expert Robert Reynolds about this document. He replied: GEJ filled out this “Current Residence and Dependency Report“ after his two years in Miami had ended and he was preparing for another tour of duty abroad, There are several examples of this form at the CIA Electronic Reading Room, just enter the form name in quotes. “Home leave residence” indicates where employees stationed abroad might stay in the U.S. when they were on leave. It needn't mean GEJ was ever a resident in New Orleans. He might have had family ties there for instance. And, in fact, George Joannides had a sister who lived in New Orleans. Anna Joannides married Charles Djinis and they lived in the early sixties in New Orleans: New Orleans States-Item, June 9, 1966 I spoke to a relative of George Joannides who confirmed that his sister's family lived in New Orleans. Morley then sums up with generalities: In sum, we don’t know if Joannides had personal contact with Oswald but we do have abundant evidence of an operation that was funded by the CIA; that it generated intelligence, political action, and propaganda about Oswald before JFK was killed; that it generated propaganda after JFK was killed; that it was code named AMSPELL; and that it was run by Joannides, whose existence was denied for decades. At least Morley admits there is no evidence that Joannides had any personal contact with Oswald. But what "intelligence, political action, and propaganda about Oswald, was generated by the DRE? Is Morley talking about the "press relief" that Bringuier sent out after his debate on radio? Was the "press relief" part of the undisclosed Oswald operation? Did the CIA have to instruct Bringuier to issue this statement? Carlos Bringuier in his book Crime Without Punishment , denies that he received any instructions, or money, from the DRE in Miami: (page 425) I was just a Delegate in New Orleans of the DRE. I was not receiving instructions or orders from the CIA, I never received any money from the CIA, if others in the DRE at the Miami office were receiving money from the CIA that was not my case. I was working very hard as a salesman as comanager of "Casa Roca" to bring food for my family, I never received any money from the Miami DRE office or any other office of the DRE, on the contrary my delegation was sending small amounts of money to Miami headquarters. That is the historical truth. And I posted documents that show that Bringuier was not paid by the DRE. Morley wants fact checkers to decide for themselves. Please go ahead and check the record. And I urge everybody to read the Joannides' files. Morley then turns his attention to the HSCA and George Joannides. He claims that I "impugned" Dam Hardway and Robert Blakey. What I did do was to point some out some of the errors in Hardway's testimony before Luna's committee . For instance, Hardway said that "the CIA had firmly represented to the HSCA that all ties between the DRE and the CIA had been terminated prior to 1963." Where and when did they do that? I see no evidence of that at all. In fact, t he HSCA knew that the CIA was funding the DRE and that the funding continued until 1966. Here is an excerpt from an HSCA draft report on the DRE: Hardway also told the Luna Committee that "It was also denied that any CIA officer was assigned to work with them in 1963." But you can see in the HSCA excerpt above that right after the assassination, Lanusa called his case officer at the CIA. And Morley does not address the Tracy Parnell article about Joannides and the HSCA . Lastly, Morley trots out Dr. Robert McClelland to bolster his claim that a gunman fired from the grassy knoll. But, as this blog post pointed out , McClelland's story has changed greatly over the years, and there is no need to take him as the sole arbiter of the medical evidence. JFK researchers should accept the fact that Oswald was long-time Marxist and was infatuated by Castro's Cuba. In their Warren Commission testimony, junior high classmates William Wulf and Edward Voebel said they noticed the teen’s bitterness, as well as his interest in both Communism and violence; he wanted a weapon so badly that he plotted to steal a pistol as a fourteen-year-old. At sixteen, Oswald wrote to the Socialist Party of America, stating that he had “been a Marxist…for well over fifteen months.” If Morley and Luna are correct about Operation Oswald, we have to believe that the CIA persuaded a 14-year-old to pretend to be a Marxist. In the sworn  Warren testimony  of Oswald’s New Orleans uncle, Charles “Dutz” Murret, who visited Lee and Marina’s drab Magazine Street apartment, he mentioned many oddities about Lee, but one that sticks out is that there was just one framed photo on the wall of Chez Lee: that of Fidel Castro. Obviously sent to Oswald by the CIA. And the person who knew Oswald best at time, his brutalized wife Marina,   told her biographer  how the couple had a furious row when she became pregnant. Lee demanded that, if a boy arrived, his name would be “Fidel,”  and Marina "reasserted herself in all her old magnificent asperity. 'There is no Fidel and there will be no Fidel in our family.'" Sadly for the public, all the foregoing available information was absent from the analysis by Morley, Luna, and  The Washington Post .  To reiterate, Jefferson Morley has failed to back up his claim that there was a CIA operation involving Lee Harvey Oswald. The Joannides' personnel file does not sustain any of Morley's allegations over the years. Update Morley had this to say about Dr. George Burkley: (It’s worth noting here that JFK’s personal physician, Dr. George Burkley, also repeatedly declined to endorse the official finding that Oswald killed the president.) I strongly suggest that Morley read my multi-part series on Dr. Burkley: A Letter from Bill Baxley about Oliver Stone   Bill Baxley, former Attorney General of Alabama, sent me a letter about Oliver Stone. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads on Admiral George Burkley   Oliver Stone's so-called documentary series, JFK: Destiny Betrayed , makes several outrageous allegations about Admiral George Burkley, JFK's personal physician, as well as a slanderous accusation. "JFK Revisited" Misleads on Dr. Burkley's Suspicions of a Conspiracy   Oliver Stone's so-called documentary, JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass , misleads viewers into believing that JFK's doctor, Admiral George Burkley, said that there were multiple gunmen. "JFK Revisited" Misleads on the ARRB's Quest for Dr. Burkley's Lawyer's Papers   Oliver Stone's so-called documentary, JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass , misleads viewers on the context of discussions between Burkley's family and the ARRB regarding supposed papers in the possession of his lawyer. "JFK Revisited" Recklessly Accuses George Burkley of being Involved in a Cover-Up   Reckless charges are made against George Burkley with no evidence. "JFK Revisited" Misleads on Admiral Burkley and the HSCA   Oliver Stone's so-called documentary, JFK Revisited: Through the Looking Glass , greatly misleads viewers on Admiral George Burkley and his interactions with the HSCA. "JFK Revisited" Misleads on Admiral George Burkley and Conspiracy Theorists Oliver Stone's so-called documentary puts words in Burkley's mouth. Burkley doubted the Warren Report because he felt that Oswald might have had too much money to be accounted for -- not because of the medical evidence. Previous Relevant Blogs Posts on Jefferson Morley's Congressional Testimony Jefferson Morley's Congressional NothingBurger An analysis of Congresswoman Luna's Congressional Hearings In Search of the Oswald Operation, Part One An FBI memo that quoted James Angleton is used by Morley to reach an unwarranted conclusion. In Search of the Oswald Operation, Part Two Morley misreads Angleton's testimony before the HSCA. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Three Morley believes a document proves the CIA did not believe that a lone gunman killed JFK. Update on the Heath Memo Additional documents relevant to Part Three. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Four Morley claims that there is some connection between the suicides of Gary Underhill, Charles Thomas, George de Mohrenschildt, and the overdose death of Dorothy Kilgallen. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Five Morley believes that Agustin Guitart was spying on pro-Castro forces in New Orleans Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Jefferson Morley SpyTalk on Morley's Nothingburger Gus Russo and Michael Isikoff on the Joannides' personnel file. Jefferson Morley's Unbearable Lightness of Being Now that the entire personnel file of George Joannides has been released, Jefferson Morley has now published his unified theory of nothingness. More Morley Nothingburgers on the way Morley is requesting more documents -- they will reveal nothing about the assassination. Morley's Non-Story Hits the Press Morley got the headlines he wanted to a complete non-story. George Joannides and the HSCA Joannides did not come out of retirement to work with the HSCA. There Was No "Oswald Operation" There is no mention of an "Oswald Operation" in the Joannides' personnel file. The Parkland Doctors, Part Six Morley believes that Dr. Robert McClelland's recollections provides proof of a shot from the front. Here is the truth about McClelland. On the Loss of Occam’s Razor in the JFK Case A reply by Nicholas Nalli to Jefferson Morley. A Case Study in Redaction: The CIA's LIFEAT File Morley suspected a redacted file would reveal major secrets. It didn't. The Schlesinger Memo Unredacted! Several months ago, I posted an article, in association with several researchers, that showed what was contained in the redacted section of Schlesinger's memo. Jefferson Morley's Clairvoyance Morley somehow knows what is in the supposed 2,400 recently-discovered FBI files. Was Israel Behind the JFK Assassination? Morley discusses Israel with Tucker Carlson. Morley's Bad History Lesson Morley believes that the United States can never be great unless it solves the JFK assassination. Morley's List of 13 Documents Will Tell Us Little An analysis of the 13 documents Morley wants to see. The Schlesinger Memo, Again! Morley claims I am a CIA apologist and then misquotes me. For The Sake of Our Sanity - Release the Joannides File It would be worthwhile for the CIA to release the Joannides file just to stop the incessant posts from Jefferson Morley. Did Oswald Stay at a Luxury Hotel in Helsinki? Actually, Oswald stayed at two budget-priced hotels in Helsinki. Morley Keeps Asking the Same Questions He keeps asking the same questions, and we keep posting the same answers. The JFK Assassination and Truth Conspiracy authors are playing fast and loose with the facts. Was Herminio Diaz a Grassy Knoll Assassin? There is no evidence that Diaz was involved in the JFK assassination. Morley Misleads on Arthur Schlesinger's Memo on the CIA There are clues as to what is in a redacted section of Schlesinger's memo. Jefferson Morley's Podcast on New Orleans Lays an Egg Chad Nagle and Dan Storper's article on New Orleans gets everything wrong. Chad Nagle and Dan Storper Lay an Egg Believing Michael Kurtz is problematic. Is Jefferson Morley Seeing Double? Morley wrote that there are two redacted memos on CIA reorganization, but there is only one. He wrote about Goodwin's copy as if it was a different memo, rather than a copy of the Schlesinger memo. Jefferson Morley is wrong about "Who Shot John?" The phrase 'who shot John' does not refer to the JFK assassination. Jefferson Morley is Wrong on William Harvey, Again! Only one word is redacted in Harvey's deposition. Jefferson Morley is Wrong about Operation Northwoods, Again! There are no redactions in the Operation Northwoods document. Did Dorothy Kilgallen Have any Special Knowledge about the JFK Assassination? Kilgallen had nothing to tell. Morley's Interview of Marina Oswald Porter Fizzles! An underwhelming interview of Marina Oswald. Jefferson Morley: Able to Leap Intellectual Chasms in a Single Bound Morley often repeats stories and changes their meanings. There was NO Assassination Plot in Chicago Chad Nagle claims there was an assassination plot against JFK in Chicago in November 1963. One problem: There is no evidence of such a plot. Fred Litwin, CIA Apologist? A response to Morley's Substack post alleging that I am a CIA apologist. A Reply to Jefferson Morley on Bill Harvey   A rebuttal to Morley's response to my post Was Bill Harvey in Dallas in November of 1963? Was Bill Harvey in Dallas in November of 1963?   There is no credible evidence Harvey was in Dallas in November of 1963. Does it Matter Where Allen Dulles was on November 22, 1963?   Morley repeats the claim that Dulles was at a CIA training center during the weekend of the JFK assassination. He wasn't. Jefferson Morley's Claims about Reuben Efron   Morley's claims about Efron are all wrong. A Reply to Jefferson Morley regarding Operation Northwoods   Morley responded to my article "The Truth about Operation Northwoods." Here is my reply. W. Tracy Parnell on Jefferson Morley   W. Tracy Parnell is one of the best JFK assassination researchers out there. Here is his look at Jefferson Morley with several important articles. The Truth about Operation Northwoods   Operation Northwoods can only be understood as part of the Kennedys' war against Cuba and Operation Mongoose. Jefferson Morley Responds to my Post on MK-Ultra and Jack Ruby   And a response from me. Did Dr. Louis Jolyon West Ask to Examine Jack Ruby in November 1963?   There is no evidence that Dr. West petitioned the court to examine Jack Ruby before his trial. Did the CIA use a MK-Ultra Psychiatrist to Interfere with Jack Ruby's Case?   There is absolutely no evidence that Dr. Louis Jolyon West interfered with Jack Ruby's case. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads Viewers on Oswald's "Hands Off Cuba!" Handbills, Part Four   Jefferson Morley used a fake Oswald handbill in his press conference for the Mary Ferrell Foundation. Redactions, Redactions, Redactions...   An examination of redactions in the JFK collection of documents. Jefferson Morley Doesn't Understand Jim Garrison's Homophobic Prosecution of Clay Shaw Morley doesn't understand Alecia Long's arguments about homophobia and Jim Garrison. Jefferson Morley asks why "what the CIA knew about Herminio Diaz is still off limits." Morley misses that a lot of redactions are actually available. Belief in a JFK Conspiracy Drops! Jefferson Morley's press conference presents evidence that belief in a conspiracy has dropped.

Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna came up with a bombshell yesterday; She announced that the KGB files on Lee Harvey Oswald would be released in the fall. “I’ve been told that the KGB had actually observed Oswald in Russia when he was there as a citizen, and he was actually not a good shot,” Luna told Cuomo. “This is not also the only piece of information that we have.” The KGB observed Oswald in Russia? Who told her? That's news to absolutely no one. This is yet another indicator that she does not know the case. I wish she would abstain from commenting on the assassination (sometimes abstinence is the best policy) and just focus on documents. Even the Warren Report realized that the KGB would have an intense interest in Oswald: (page 272) This was based upon this letter: The HSCA also suspected that Oswald was kept under surveillance in the Soviet Union: Of course, Norman Mailer got access to a lot of records held in Belarus about the surveillance of Oswald while living in Minsk. Here is an excerpt from a New York Times article from November 2, 2012: At the end of the cold war, the leadership of the K.G.B., demoralized and seeking favor with the pro-Western reformers then coming to power in post-Soviet states, briefly opened its files on the accused assassin of John F. Kennedy, Lee Harvey Oswald. The material was so intimate as to be painful to read, showing unequivocally that the K.G.B. had Oswald under intense surveillance, even at night, for the two and a half years he lived in the Soviet Union as a defector. “They go to bed,” a transcript states at one point, according to the only Western researcher to read it, Norman Mailer. The agency had a peephole into Oswald’s bedroom here, taking advantage of a thin wall between it and a neighboring apartment, where a watcher sat. Here is what the ARRB said about the records in Belarus: There are also records held in Moscow: I hope that Luna can get both sets of files -- the surveillance files of the Oswalds in Minsk, and the investigative files of the KGB. I would also like to get the KGB files about their operations to convince Americans that the CIA was behind the assassination. Luna should stop talking about the assassination and focus on JFK assassination records. She could add to the credibility of her committee by having Robert Reynolds and Larry Haapanen testify in public, and stop the conspiracy nonsense. Previous Relevant Blog Posts about Congresswoman Luna The MAGA Crowd Gets The JFK Assassination Conspiracy They Need Luna, Bannon, and Tucker believe some crazy things about the assassination. Luna's Ridiculous Hearing Luna's second hearing -- I don't know what was worse - the silly testimony of the witnesses or the brainless questions of the committee members. Jefferson Morley's Congressional NothingBurger An analysis of Congresswoman Luna's Congressional Hearings Is Congresswoman Luna a Luna-tic? Congresswoman Luna doesn't really know much about the JFK assassination. Is Congresswoman Luna a Luna-tic? Part Two Have a look at the book on Luna's desk Anna Luna's JFK Conspiracy Circus A link to an excellent article by Michael Isikoff. Congresswoman Luna Finds a New Witness Here is the conspiracy witness who knows the truth.

JFK assassination conspiracy theories used to be dominated by the left. They badly wanted to blame elements of the right, or the military-industrial complex, or the CIA to bolster their world views. Roger Stone and Alex Jones played a big role in getting the right to embrace a JFK conspiracy so that they could blame the "deep state." Here is an excerpt from I was a Teenage JFK Conspiracy Freak : (page 24 - 36) And, once you stop caring about the truth, it's just a short hop, skip and a jump to conspiracy theory. Warren Hinckle, editor of left-wing Ramparts magazine in the 1960s, wrote, "...conspiracy theories, unlike old soldiers, never really fade away; someone is forever coming along to give them a fresh coat of paint." Now the political right has caught on to the JFK conspiracy and they've brought out the primer. After all, they like to talk about the “deep state,” and a JFK conspiracy plays into their theories of a malignant, out-of-control government. Lew Rockwell, Ron Paul’s Congressional chief of staff from 1978-1982 and contributing editor of many of Ron Paul’s racist newsletters, now runs a website (lewrockwell.com) that has published hundreds of ridiculous articles on the JFK assassination. No topic is too crazy for Rockwell—the strange deaths of witnesses; Zapruder film alteration; JFK’s phonied-up autopsy; JFK murder was an inside job; LBJ had JFK killed. He’ll even publish kook authors like former-wrestler-turned-politician Jesse Ventura. Another bizarre website that has recently started running silly JFK articles is the pseudo-military veterans site veteranstoday.com. Not nearly as popular as Lewrockwell.com (ranked 19,105 in the United States), the site is virulently anti-Israel, regularly runs 9/11 truther stories, and is a partner organization to Press TV—the press arm of the Iranian government. And Alex Jones’ InfoWars has also gone down the JFK rabbit hole. In December 2012, Judyth Vary Baker appeared as a guest to promote her book, Me and Lee. Baker professes to have been the mistress of Lee Harvey Oswald while he was living in New Orleans. She claims they were involved in a plot to kill Castro using some sort of “cocktail” that would infect his immune system. Other people involved included David Ferrie and orthopedic surgeon Mary Sherman. Oswald went to Mexico City to deliver the poison to someone who would deliver it to Cuba. The handoff never happened and the mission moved to killing Kennedy. Oswald intentionally missed Kennedy while the other conspirators killed him. It’s a great story but the only thing missing is evidence. Baker did work at the Reily Coffee Company where Oswald worked as a laborer, cleaning and oiling the machines. There’s no evidence they even met, nor can Baker supply evidence for any other part of her story. The dalliance of the right with the JFK assassination continued in 2016 when Presidential candidate Donald Trump charged that Ted Cruz’s father, Rafael Cruz, helped Lee Harvey Oswald hand out pro-Castro leaflets in New Orleans in 1963. This story initially ran in the National Enquirer and Trump repeated it on Fox & Friends . The story was just plain wrong. The man helping Lee Harvey Oswald was most probably recruited from the Louisiana State Employment Service. It’s hard to believe that he was Rafael Cruz who was decidedly anti-Castro by 1963. Of course, InfoWars ran with the story. The confluence of conspiracy theorist-turned propagandist is not just a function of the left. Roger Stone, one of Donald Trump’s chief supporters, was probably the source of that silly National Enquirer story on Ted Cruz’s father. That was pure propaganda to help the campaign, but he has a history as a conspiracy theorist. His 2013 book, The Man Who Killed Kennedy: The Case Against LBJ , argued that then Vice-President Lyndon Johnson was the mastermind behind the JFK assassination. The only way Stone can build such a case is by relying on a series of factoids. Stone regurgitates an old story—that Lyndon Johnson told Madeleine Brown, his supposed mistress, at a party at the home of rich oil man Clint Murchison the night before the assassination that “after tomorrow those SOBs will never embarrass me again. That’s no threat. That’s a promise.” Supposedly, guests at the party included J. Edgar Hoover, Richard Nixon, former Chairman of the Chase Manhattan Bank John McCloy, and H.L. Hunt, the rich Texas oilman. Journalist Hugh Aynesworth points out in his scathing review of Stone’s book in the Washington Times that “Murchison hadn’t been in Dallas in more than two years.” He notes that “further investigation showed that on the evening of Nov. 21, 1963, Hoover was in Washington, Brown was in Houston, McCloy never left New York, and Nixon, who was in Dallas that night, was seen by several reporters near midnight at a function with Pepsi-Cola Corp. bigwigs at the Baker Hotel in downtown Dallas.” And Lyndon Johnson was in Houston until 10:00 pm that night when he then flew to Ft. Worth. A photo shows him at the Texas Hotel at 11:50 pm and Aynesworth notes that that was “at least two hours from where Murchison actually was.” Many years ago, Aynesworth confronted Brown about her story and she told him, “I don’t care if you believe me or not. A lot of people do and I’ve sold a lot of books.” Stone repeats many other factoids in his book. He believes JFK assassination witnesses have died mysteriously; that Johnson changed Kennedy’s Vietnam policies; that Lee Harvey Oswald knew Jack Ruby; that Oswald was a CIA pawn; that Oswald was an FBI informant; that security procedures were purposely scaled back in Dealey Plaza, that conspirators planned the motorcade route; and that Oswald was a poor shot. Stone also throws in the anti-Zionist conspiracy theory that Lyndon Johnson coordinated with the Israelis in the sinking of the USS Liberty in 1967. And, of course, the Robert Kennedy assassination was a conspiracy as well. As Hugh Aynesworth writes, “If a reader doesn’t let facts get in the way, it could be an interesting adventure.” Stone’s story was picked up by the Daily Caller , —a conservative news and opinion website founded by Tucker Carlson. Their story was then picked up by InfoWars . From there, Roger Stone went to Fox News and his first stop was an appearance on Fox & Friends. Of course, Sean Hannity couldn’t resist, so Stone was a guest on his show on November 13th, 2013. He was treated with kid gloves and there was no pushback against any of Stone’s ridiculous accusations. Stone was also interviewed by Glenn Beck and Larry King (on his show Larry King Now which is carried by RT, the Russian propaganda channel). In late 2017, when President Donald Trump decided to keep some JFK files secret, Stone knew this was because of “an effort by “deep state” policies to cover their “asses.” He went on InfoWars to plead his case with Alex Jones and they both “painted the intelligence community as part of a secret group trying to exert its authority over the government and democracy.” Guess who agreed with Roger Stone about the “deep state?” None other than Oliver Stone. A conspiracy carved in stones So there you have it. The left could never face the fact that a Castro-loving Marxist killed John Kennedy. Now the right can’t accept it—because it was really the “deep state.” And the left could never face the fact that an Israel-hating Palestinian killed Robert Kennedy. Now the right can claim RFK wanted to expose the “deep state” and thus had to be eliminated. The JFK assassination has become a metaphor for politics. You can tell lies; you can spin incredibly ridiculous stories; you can make outlandish claims that are grounded in complete falsehoods; and there will still be people who believe and quote your every word. Since I wrote that Trump has been re-elected/ Alex Jones had faded away, but Tucker Carlson has fully embraced JFK assassination conspiracy theories. Was Israel Behind the JFK Assassination? Jefferson Morley and Tucker Carlson discuss Israel. Tucker Carlson, Again! Did the CIA give Jack Ruby cancer? Tucker Carlson Reaches a New Low Oliver Stone and Peter Kuznick were guests. RFK Jr. and Tulsi Gabbard Bring Conspiracy Nonsense into the Trump Administration Gabbard liked Douglass's book, JFK and the Unspeakable . Tucker Carlson Continues to Embarrass Himself Ron Paul tells Carlson the U.S. lost its government on November 22, 1963. RFK Jr. Puts Words in Allen Dulles's Mouth RFK Jr. is interviewed by Tucker Carlson and makes up some quotes. And Congresswoman Paulina Luna has bought into all of the Morley nonsense and has held two embarrassing Congressional hearings. Luna's Ridiculous Hearing Luna's second hearing -- I don't know what was worse - the silly testimony of the witnesses or the brainless questions of the committee members. Jefferson Morley's Congressional NothingBurger An analysis of Congresswoman Luna's Congressional Hearings Is Congresswoman Luna a Luna-tic? Congresswoman Luna doesn't really know much about the JFK assassination. Is Congresswoman Luna a Luna-tic? Part Two Have a look at the book on Luna's desk Anna Luna's JFK Conspiracy Circus A link to an excellent article by Michael Isikoff. Congresswoman Luna Finds a New Witness Here is the conspiracy witness who knows the truth. Now, the MAGA folk are in overdrive. Here is Steve Bannon : Steve Bannon : It shouldn't be lost on anybody. Why was Mark Caputo on Morning Joe and saying about another reporter's story on Epstein? He was there for the Kennedy exclusive, which we now know the CIA has actively lied to you about their involvement with Oswald and everything related to the Kennedy investigation. Can't you see the irony? Actually, how many decades after President Kennedy assassinated, actually, let me change that -- murdered in broad daylight and in cold blood in Dallas, Texas, that the CIA has been lying about their involvement with Oswald before the fact, lied, that breaks on Axios. John Solomon's going to be here with all other revelations about the CIA over the weekend, with Brendan. Everything we have, if we don't take down the deep state the next three and a half years on Trump's watch, we're screwed, with all the things right there, because you look at the kinetic part of the Third World War, Ukraine, in the Middle East, at the heart of it's the deep state driving this. We have to take it apart. The Kennedy revelation is a bombshell. The CIA, which we said for years, now they admit, they admit that Angleton and all of them looked you in the eye, went to Congress, went to, went to they were under subpoena. Forget the Warren Commission. That was a crime scene itself, the Warren Commission, between the FBI and the CIA, the great institutions in this country that people depended upon, looked you in the eye and lied to you because of their actions, the covering up of their actions. This is why the devolution of the United States of America, you can take one day, 22 November, 1963 -- Boom. Yup, the deep state killed Kennedy and we only have three and a half years left to act. Of course, Paulina Luna has been chirping like a songbird this week : Here is a transcript: Rep. Anna Paulina Luna : Because of my work and efforts in the previous Congress, I was charged with a task force to investigate some of the most grisly crimes in US history, starting out with the assassination of John F Kennedy. What I can tell you, and I would say that this model of transparency in the declassification of the JFK records is literally what they should be doing with Jeffrey Epstein. The Administration released tens of thousands of documents. And I will say credit due where it's deserved -- the CIA director Radcliffe was the only CIA director in US history who was able to release something called the Joannides' files. What this file proved, and it had been hidden for over 60 years was, without a doubt, and this is not my analysis, this is not my opinion, this is based on evidence that we have backings on. Without a doubt, the CIA engaged in a cover up of the JFK assassination. The CIA lied to Congress. Joannides, who was a CIA operative, did indeed have contact and was observing Lee Harvey Oswald, who, in my opinion, was a patsy and cover for multiple shooters in the assassination of John F Kennedy. If you would have said that last year, a couple of years ago, they would have called you a conspiracy theorist. Yet, every single person in this room knows conspiracy theory is only a matter of time before it's proven correct. And here is Tucker Carlson, at the same event as Luna : Here is a short excerpt from a transcript: (7:38) Tucker Carlson : ... that has never prohibited me from saying, "I think the CIA has done some horrible things, murdered a bunch of people, participated in the murder of a sitting U.S. President." It's got a whole trail of crimes -- that doesn't make me a disloyal American. It doesn't make me anti-American in any sense. I was born here. My family's been here for hundreds of years. I love this country. That's why I live here. The CIA "participated in the murder of a sitting U.S. President." And here is Roger Stone, also at the same conference : Here is an excerpt from a transcript: (16:10) Roger Stone : He has released virtually all of the documents, of videos and transcripts ,pertaining to the murder of President John F Kennedy on November 22 1963. But it is only because of the persistence and the courage of Congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna, that the CIA last week was forced, after six decades of denying, they had any knowledge of Lee Harvey Oswald, that they were finally forced to admit that they were tracking him. They were reading all of his correspondence, and they were essentially handling him in the 48 days before the assassination of President John F Kennedy, "Tracking" Oswald? Reading "all" of Oswald's correspondence? Handling him? What next? Well, Jefferson Morley is now an ally of Steve Bannon . The left and right have come together in unity! Thanks to people like Jefferson Morley, the MAGA folks now have the JFK conspiracy they so desperately need. But talk about a house of cards! Previous Relevant Blogs Posts on Jefferson Morley's Congressional Testimony Jefferson Morley's Congressional NothingBurger An analysis of Congresswoman Luna's Congressional Hearings In Search of the Oswald Operation, Part One An FBI memo that quoted James Angleton is used by Morley to reach an unwarranted conclusion. In Search of the Oswald Operation, Part Two Morley misreads Angleton's testimony before the HSCA. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Three Morley believes a document proves the CIA did not believe that a lone gunman killed JFK. Update on the Heath Memo Additional documents relevant to Part Three. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Four Morley claims that there is some connection between the suicides of Gary Underhill, Charles Thomas, George de Mohrenschildt, and the overdose death of Dorothy Kilgallen. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Five Morley believes that Agustin Guitart was spying on pro-Castro forces in New Orleans Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Jefferson Morley SpyTalk on Morley's Nothingburger SpyTalk ran a terrific article by Gus Russo and Michael Isikoff. Jefferson Morley's Unbearable Lightness of Being Now that the entire personnel file of George Joannides has been released, Jefferson Morley has now published his unified theory of nothingness. More Morley Nothingburgers on the way Morley is requesting more documents -- they will reveal nothing about the assassination. Morley's Non-Story Hits the Press Morley got the headlines he wanted to a complete non-story. George Joannides and the HSCA Joannides did not come out of retirement to work with the HSCA. There Was No "Oswald Operation" There is no mention of an "Oswald Operation" in the Joannides' personnel file. The Parkland Doctors, Part Six Morley believes that Dr. Robert McClelland's recollections provides proof of a shot from the front. Here is the truth about McClelland. On the Loss of Occam’s Razor in the JFK Case A reply by Nicholas Nalli to Jefferson Morley. A Case Study in Redaction: The CIA's LIFEAT File Morley suspected a redacted file would reveal major secrets. It didn't. The Schlesinger Memo Unredacted! Several months ago, I posted an article, in association with several researchers, that showed what was contained in the redacted section of Schlesinger's memo. Jefferson Morley's Clairvoyance Morley somehow knows what is in the supposed 2,400 recently-discovered FBI files. Was Israel Behind the JFK Assassination? Morley discusses Israel with Tucker Carlson. Morley's Bad History Lesson Morley believes that the United States can never be great unless it solves the JFK assassination. Morley's List of 13 Documents Will Tell Us Little An analysis of the 13 documents Morley wants to see. The Schlesinger Memo, Again! Morley claims I am a CIA apologist and then misquotes me. For The Sake of Our Sanity - Release the Joannides File It would be worthwhile for the CIA to release the Joannides file just to stop the incessant posts from Jefferson Morley. Did Oswald Stay at a Luxury Hotel in Helsinki? Actually, Oswald stayed at two budget-priced hotels in Helsinki. Morley Keeps Asking the Same Questions He keeps asking the same questions, and we keep posting the same answers. The JFK Assassination and Truth Conspiracy authors are playing fast and loose with the facts. Was Herminio Diaz a Grassy Knoll Assassin? There is no evidence that Diaz was involved in the JFK assassination. Morley Misleads on Arthur Schlesinger's Memo on the CIA There are clues as to what is in a redacted section of Schlesinger's memo. Jefferson Morley's Podcast on New Orleans Lays an Egg Chad Nagle and Dan Storper's article on New Orleans gets everything wrong. Chad Nagle and Dan Storper Lay an Egg Believing Michael Kurtz is problematic. Is Jefferson Morley Seeing Double? Morley wrote that there are two redacted memos on CIA reorganization, but there is only one. He wrote about Goodwin's copy as if it was a different memo, rather than a copy of the Schlesinger memo. Jefferson Morley is wrong about "Who Shot John?" The phrase 'who shot John' does not refer to the JFK assassination. Jefferson Morley is Wrong on William Harvey, Again! Only one word is redacted in Harvey's deposition. Jefferson Morley is Wrong about Operation Northwoods, Again! There are no redactions in the Operation Northwoods document. Did Dorothy Kilgallen Have any Special Knowledge about the JFK Assassination? Kilgallen had nothing to tell. Morley's Interview of Marina Oswald Porter Fizzles! An underwhelming interview of Marina Oswald. Jefferson Morley: Able to Leap Intellectual Chasms in a Single Bound Morley often repeats stories and changes their meanings. There was NO Assassination Plot in Chicago Chad Nagle claims there was an assassination plot against JFK in Chicago in November 1963. One problem: There is no evidence of such a plot. Fred Litwin, CIA Apologist? A response to Morley's Substack post alleging that I am a CIA apologist. A Reply to Jefferson Morley on Bill Harvey   A rebuttal to Morley's response to my post Was Bill Harvey in Dallas in November of 1963? Was Bill Harvey in Dallas in November of 1963?   There is no credible evidence Harvey was in Dallas in November of 1963. Does it Matter Where Allen Dulles was on November 22, 1963?   Morley repeats the claim that Dulles was at a CIA training center during the weekend of the JFK assassination. He wasn't. Jefferson Morley's Claims about Reuben Efron   Morley's claims about Efron are all wrong. A Reply to Jefferson Morley regarding Operation Northwoods   Morley responded to my article "The Truth about Operation Northwoods." Here is my reply. W. Tracy Parnell on Jefferson Morley   W. Tracy Parnell is one of the best JFK assassination researchers out there. Here is his look at Jefferson Morley with several important articles. The Truth about Operation Northwoods   Operation Northwoods can only be understood as part of the Kennedys' war against Cuba and Operation Mongoose. Jefferson Morley Responds to my Post on MK-Ultra and Jack Ruby   And a response from me. Did Dr. Louis Jolyon West Ask to Examine Jack Ruby in November 1963?   There is no evidence that Dr. West petitioned the court to examine Jack Ruby before his trial. Did the CIA use a MK-Ultra Psychiatrist to Interfere with Jack Ruby's Case?   There is absolutely no evidence that Dr. Louis Jolyon West interfered with Jack Ruby's case. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads Viewers on Oswald's "Hands Off Cuba!" Handbills, Part Four   Jefferson Morley used a fake Oswald handbill in his press conference for the Mary Ferrell Foundation. Redactions, Redactions, Redactions...   An examination of redactions in the JFK collection of documents. Jefferson Morley Doesn't Understand Jim Garrison's Homophobic Prosecution of Clay Shaw Morley doesn't understand Alecia Long's arguments about homophobia and Jim Garrison. Jefferson Morley asks why "what the CIA knew about Herminio Diaz is still off limits." Morley misses that a lot of redactions are actually available. Belief in a JFK Conspiracy Drops! Jefferson Morley's press conference presents evidence that belief in a conspiracy has dropped.

SpyTalk, one of the better websites on American intelligence, has a superb article on the recent non-disclosures by Jefferson Morley. “It’s astounding — I can’t believe they reported any of this. It’s a complete non-story,” said Fred Litwin , a veteran assassination researcher who is dedicated to debunking the endless parade of conspiracy theories about the Kennedy shooting. The entire exercise, he wrote on his blog this week, amounts to a new “unified theory of nothingness.” Another respected JFK conspiracy debunker, W. Tracy Parnell, offered a deeply detailed, cutting take on the supposed exposé: “As is often the case, much of what Morley said about Joannides may be dismissed because it is not accurate.” It's well worth your time to read the entire article. Previous Relevant Blogs Posts on Jefferson Morley's Congressional Testimony Jefferson Morley's Congressional NothingBurger An analysis of Congresswoman Luna's Congressional Hearings In Search of the Oswald Operation, Part One An FBI memo that quoted James Angleton is used by Morley to reach an unwarranted conclusion. In Search of the Oswald Operation, Part Two Morley misreads Angleton's testimony before the HSCA. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Three Morley believes a document proves the CIA did not believe that a lone gunman killed JFK. Update on the Heath Memo Additional documents relevant to Part Three. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Four Morley claims that there is some connection between the suicides of Gary Underhill, Charles Thomas, George de Mohrenschildt, and the overdose death of Dorothy Kilgallen. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Five Morley believes that Agustin Guitart was spying on pro-Castro forces in New Orleans Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Jefferson Morley Jefferson Morley's Unbearable Lightness of Being Now that the entire personnel file of George Joannides has been released, Jefferson Morley has now published his unified theory of nothingness. More Morley Nothingburgers on the way Morley is requesting more documents -- they will reveal nothing about the assassination. Morley's Non-Story Hits the Press Morley got the headlines he wanted to a complete non-story. George Joannides and the HSCA Joannides did not come out of retirement to work with the HSCA. There Was No "Oswald Operation" There is no mention of an "Oswald Operation" in the Joannides' personnel file. The Parkland Doctors, Part Six Morley believes that Dr. Robert McClelland's recollections provides proof of a shot from the front. Here is the truth about McClelland. On the Loss of Occam’s Razor in the JFK Case A reply by Nicholas Nalli to Jefferson Morley. A Case Study in Redaction: The CIA's LIFEAT File Morley suspected a redacted file would reveal major secrets. It didn't. The Schlesinger Memo Unredacted! Several months ago, I posted an article, in association with several researchers, that showed what was contained in the redacted section of Schlesinger's memo. Jefferson Morley's Clairvoyance Morley somehow knows what is in the supposed 2,400 recently-discovered FBI files. Was Israel Behind the JFK Assassination? Morley discusses Israel with Tucker Carlson. Morley's Bad History Lesson Morley believes that the United States can never be great unless it solves the JFK assassination. Morley's List of 13 Documents Will Tell Us Little An analysis of the 13 documents Morley wants to see. The Schlesinger Memo, Again! Morley claims I am a CIA apologist and then misquotes me. For The Sake of Our Sanity - Release the Joannides File It would be worthwhile for the CIA to release the Joannides file just to stop the incessant posts from Jefferson Morley. Did Oswald Stay at a Luxury Hotel in Helsinki? Actually, Oswald stayed at two budget-priced hotels in Helsinki. Morley Keeps Asking the Same Questions He keeps asking the same questions, and we keep posting the same answers. The JFK Assassination and Truth Conspiracy authors are playing fast and loose with the facts. Was Herminio Diaz a Grassy Knoll Assassin? There is no evidence that Diaz was involved in the JFK assassination. Morley Misleads on Arthur Schlesinger's Memo on the CIA There are clues as to what is in a redacted section of Schlesinger's memo. Jefferson Morley's Podcast on New Orleans Lays an Egg Chad Nagle and Dan Storper's article on New Orleans gets everything wrong. Chad Nagle and Dan Storper Lay an Egg Believing Michael Kurtz is problematic. Is Jefferson Morley Seeing Double? Morley wrote that there are two redacted memos on CIA reorganization, but there is only one. He wrote about Goodwin's copy as if it was a different memo, rather than a copy of the Schlesinger memo. Jefferson Morley is wrong about "Who Shot John?" The phrase 'who shot John' does not refer to the JFK assassination. Jefferson Morley is Wrong on William Harvey, Again! Only one word is redacted in Harvey's deposition. Jefferson Morley is Wrong about Operation Northwoods, Again! There are no redactions in the Operation Northwoods document. Did Dorothy Kilgallen Have any Special Knowledge about the JFK Assassination? Kilgallen had nothing to tell. Morley's Interview of Marina Oswald Porter Fizzles! An underwhelming interview of Marina Oswald. Jefferson Morley: Able to Leap Intellectual Chasms in a Single Bound Morley often repeats stories and changes their meanings. There was NO Assassination Plot in Chicago Chad Nagle claims there was an assassination plot against JFK in Chicago in November 1963. One problem: There is no evidence of such a plot. Fred Litwin, CIA Apologist? A response to Morley's Substack post alleging that I am a CIA apologist. A Reply to Jefferson Morley on Bill Harvey   A rebuttal to Morley's response to my post Was Bill Harvey in Dallas in November of 1963? Was Bill Harvey in Dallas in November of 1963?   There is no credible evidence Harvey was in Dallas in November of 1963. Does it Matter Where Allen Dulles was on November 22, 1963?   Morley repeats the claim that Dulles was at a CIA training center during the weekend of the JFK assassination. He wasn't. Jefferson Morley's Claims about Reuben Efron   Morley's claims about Efron are all wrong. A Reply to Jefferson Morley regarding Operation Northwoods   Morley responded to my article "The Truth about Operation Northwoods." Here is my reply. W. Tracy Parnell on Jefferson Morley   W. Tracy Parnell is one of the best JFK assassination researchers out there. Here is his look at Jefferson Morley with several important articles. The Truth about Operation Northwoods   Operation Northwoods can only be understood as part of the Kennedys' war against Cuba and Operation Mongoose. Jefferson Morley Responds to my Post on MK-Ultra and Jack Ruby   And a response from me. Did Dr. Louis Jolyon West Ask to Examine Jack Ruby in November 1963?   There is no evidence that Dr. West petitioned the court to examine Jack Ruby before his trial. Did the CIA use a MK-Ultra Psychiatrist to Interfere with Jack Ruby's Case?   There is absolutely no evidence that Dr. Louis Jolyon West interfered with Jack Ruby's case. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads Viewers on Oswald's "Hands Off Cuba!" Handbills, Part Four   Jefferson Morley used a fake Oswald handbill in his press conference for the Mary Ferrell Foundation. Redactions, Redactions, Redactions...   An examination of redactions in the JFK collection of documents. Jefferson Morley Doesn't Understand Jim Garrison's Homophobic Prosecution of Clay Shaw Morley doesn't understand Alecia Long's arguments about homophobia and Jim Garrison. Jefferson Morley asks why "what the CIA knew about Herminio Diaz is still off limits." Morley misses that a lot of redactions are actually available. Belief in a JFK Conspiracy Drops! Jefferson Morley's press conference presents evidence that belief in a conspiracy has dropped.

With apologies to Milan Kundera Now that the entire personnel file of George Joannides has been released, Jefferson Morley has now published his unified theory of nothingness . As I have already written, there is absolutely nothing in the Joannides' personnel file that substantiates any of the allegations made by Morley over the years. There was no "Oswald Operation." There is nothing in the CIA's medal citation that says he received the award for "deceiving" the HSCA. And there is no mention of Lee Harvey Oswald. The only thing that we learned is that Joannides did have a cover using the name "Howard." The CIA officer who told the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) that Howard was not Joannides' alias never checked the Joannides' file. He just relied on an internal database of registered aliases. [Barry] Harrelson graciously took the call. With good recall of his work with the ARRB, he asked for a couple of days to review his notes. When we spoke again he acknowledged his 1998 memo was wrong about “Howard.” He explained that he had not seen Joannides’ personnel file at the time he wrote it. He said he only checked the Agency’s database of registered aliases. The fake driver’s license in the name of “Howard Gebler” had not shown up in that search, he said. His memo was inaccurate, he admitted, but not intentionally. So, it was sloppy work, rather than an intention to deceive. Harrelson probably didn't search the databases himself. But perhaps he was asking for the wrong name. Morley wrote a memo to the ARRB asking about Howard, and he included this memo: Fernandez-Rocha typed the alias as Guebler, rather than Gebler. In April 1997, the ARRB sent a request to Barry Harrelson to search for the following names : Did the CIA search the database for Guebler and come up empty? And now Morley has convinced the Washington Post to embrace his allegations about the CIA and Joannides . But, I'll get to that article later in this post. Morley starts off by claiming that the CIA is finally coming into compliance with the JFK Records Act: With the release of a portion of a long-suppressed CIA file on July 3, the saga of the JFK assassination files has entered a new phase. The longtime gatekeepers of CIA records on the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in 1963 have been replaced by Director John Ratcliffe. CIA records related to JFK’s assassination not previously shared with the National Archives are now being released. For the first time since 2017, the CIA is coming into compliance with the 1992 JFK Records Act, which mandates “immediate” release of all JFK files in the government’s possession. But Morley will not tell his readers that the ARRB reviewed the Joannides' personnel file in 1998, released about 12 pages, and deemed the rest to be irrelevant. And the ARRB knew that Joannides' was the case officer for the DRE and that he had worked with the HSCA. Morley makes his usual claim about an Oswald Operation: The Joannides file is a breakthrough in the understanding of how the 35th president was shot dead in public and no one was ever brought to justice for the crime. It reveals the existence of a covert operation involving Oswald, authorized by senior CIA officials, that was not disclosed to any investigation of Kennedy’s murder. But what was this covert operation? And where is this evidence? Morley does say this: A fake driver’s license shows how Joannides’ operation targeting the accused assassin was taken “off the books” in early 1963. Here is the memo about the driver's license: How is this evidence of an operation? Morley is convinced that the "Howard" alias was intended to be "invisible." That was a telling detail. Joannides was using an unregistered alias in his undercover assignment as “Howard” in 1963. He and his superiors (presumably including Deputy Director Helms) did not put his alias for handling the AMSPELL program into the agency’s internal record keeping system. His alias as “Howard” was not discoverable, even 35 years later. It was as if Joannides’ new assignment was intended to be invisible to the rest of the CIA. Starting in December 1962, his work with the Cuban students was, in the lingo of espionage, highly compartmentalized, if not “off the books.” But, of course the alias was "discoverable" because there are memos about the alias. Had the CIA really wanted to hide the alias, there wouldn't be memos in the system. And the Gebler alias wasn't really "off the books." You can see the DRE document above with the Joannides alias in plain view. Morley also quotes Dan Hardway who testified before the Luna Committee in May : “Thanks to the work of the ARRB, though,” Hardway went on, “we now know that not only was DRE still a CIA operation all through 1963, but its controlling case officer was also none other than George Joannides." But, Hardway is just plain wrong and he should know it. The HSCA knew that the CIA was funding the DRE and that the funding continued until 1966. Here is an excerpt from an HSCA draft report on the DRE: Hardway also told the Luna Committee that "It was also denied that any CIA officer was assigned to work with them in 1963." Here is another excerpt from that same HSCA draft report: The report notes that "with this discovery, someone immediately called the DRE's case officer at the Miami CIA station." I still wonder why the HSCA could not figure out that Joannides was the DRE case officer. Did they not ask Lanusa? Of course, Lanusa did not wait for Joannides - he immediately called the press. Even Morley admits that, "These headstrong young people accepted CIA funding but often resisted CIA control." Morley claims that the CIA denied funding the DRE in 1963: In January 1998, Harrelson sent his memo to the board in which he asserted the Agency had no relationship with the Cuban Student Directorate in 1963. But that memo says nothing of the kind . It just says that the DRE was not taking direction and that the CIA was reducing the level of funding: Morley also claims that the CIA did not reduce funding for the DRE: But policy differences did not cause the Agency to reduce its funding nor curb the Directorate’s criticism of JFK. But he then goes on to link to this memo : So we see here that the CIA was not going to support the DRE's military plans. Morley also does not quote from this HSCA report on the DRE : And here is a memo from 1965 about the relationship between the CIA and the DRE: Here is another paragraph from the same memo: Morley says that the budget for the DRE was $51,000 per month. The Cuban students were generously funded with $51,000 a month (the equivalent of $500,000 a month in today’s dollars) under a secret CIA program code-named  AMSPELL . But by mid-1964, the budget had shrunk. Here is an excerpt from the May 1964 report: Morley also discusses a propaganda article in SEE Magazine in November 1963: “The C.I.A. Needs Men — Can You Qualify?” asked one headline, next to an Old West-style poster bearing the bearded likeness of Fidel Castro. “Wanted, Dead or Alive” for “Crimes Against Humanity,” said the poster. “$10,000,000 reward.” The issue was dated November 1963. Morley makes it sound like the two articles are related and are next to each other. But this DRE memo says the article on the CIA was "unrelated" and was on a different page: Morley also repeats again his ridiculous claim about Helms and the CIA: That was the CIA’s story for 62 years [disavowing knowledge of the "Howard" alias]. The claim was consistent with what Deputy Director Helms told the Warren Commission in 1964: Its officers had no real knowledge of Oswald before JFK’s assassination. But that is NOT what Helms told the Warren Commission. Helms was only commenting on the amount of information the CIA had from the State Department : Mr. Dulles:  Looking back now that you have the full record, do you feel that you received from the State Department adequate information at the time that they were aware of Oswald's defection and later activities in the Soviet Union, did you get at the time full information from the State Department on those particular subjects? Mr. McCone : Well, I am not sure that we got full information, Mr. Dulles. The fact is we had very little information in our files. Mr. Helms : It was probably minimal. A few minutes later, Helms clarified the point : Representative Ford : In this case, Oswald attempted to defect, he did not, he subsequently sought the right to return to the United States, he had contact with the Embassy. Was the Central Intelligence Agency informed of these steps, step by step, by the Department of State? Mr. McCone : You might answer that. Mr. Helms : Mr. Ford, in order to answer this question precisely I would have to have the file in front of me. I have not looked at it in some time so I don't have it all that clearly in mind. But it is my impression that we were not informed step by step. When I say that there is no requirement that I am aware of that the State Department should inform us and when I said a moment a go that we had minimal information from them, this was not in any sense a critical statement but a statement of fact. A large part of Morley's article concerns Carlos Bringuier and Lee Harvey Oswald. Morley does not believe that Oswald possessed any agency -- or rather that he possessed too much "Agency." First, Morley says that the DRE sent "Howard" the tape of Oswald's debate with Bringuier. But here is what the HSCA said about that: Lanusa told the HSCA that the tape was already in the file (see above). Morley also reproduces this .jpg: The two stories are at odds, unless the DRE folks made a copy for Joannides. And then Morley asks this question: What did Joannides report to his superiors about contacts between his AMSPELL network and the future accused assassin of the president of the United States? It is not even clear that Joannides knew the name Oswald before JFK was killed. It was Lanusa who recognized the Oswald name after the assassination and then searched the files and found Bringuier's letter and the tape of the debate. Secondly, Morley believes that Joannides directed the DRE people to blame Castro for the assassination: Joannides’ job description for 1963 said he sponsored the Cuban students for “political action, propaganda, intelligence collection and a hemisphere-wide apparatus.” On November 22, they delivered. But, as we have already seen, Lanusa did not wait for CIA approval to contact the press. He couldn't wait. Nobody had to tell Bringuier, Lanusa, or other people involved with the DRE to blame Castro. And Lanusa was busy: Lanuza, the retired schoolteacher who served as spokesman for the DRE in 1963, told me in multiple interviews that he spent hours calling his contacts in the national press on the night of November 22. They included Hal Hendrix, the Pulitzer Prize-winning correspondent for the Miami News (who went on to work for the CIA in Chile), Ruby Hart Phillips at the New York Times, and Mary Louise Wilkinson of the Miami News. He also contacted Clare Booth Luce, conservative columnist and wife of Henry Luce, CEO of the Time-Life publishing empire, who was a financial supporter of the DRE, and told her about Oswald’s connection to Castro. But Carlos Bringuier had been trying hard to tell everybody that Oswald was an avowed supporter of Fidel Castro   since the debate with Bill Stuckey: Was the "press relief" part of the undisclosed Oswald operation? Did the CIA have to instruct Bringuier to issue this statement? And we know that Lee Harvey Oswald was an avowed Marxist and was obsessed with Fidel Castro's Cuba. And right after the assassination, Bringuier continued, as one would expect. Here is an excerpt from an article in the New Orleans Times-Picayune  from November 24, 1963: Does Morley believe that Bringuier had to wait to have Joannides tell him to blame Castro for the JFK assassination? Wouldn't it be natural for Bringuier and other anti-Castro Cuban leaders to immediately blame Castro? And Morley seems to understand this. Here is a quote from his book,   Our Man in Mexico: Winston Scott and the Hidden History of the CIA : (page 175) All the former DRE leaders emphasized that they did not take orders from the CIA, and there is good reason to take them at their word. In 1963, they were passionate young anticommunists who feared their homeland was in danger of slipping under one-party control forever. They did not need a CIA man from Washington to tell them to take against against a public supporter of Castro like Oswald. If one goal of the supposed Joannides' operation was to blame Castro for the assassination, it totally failed. Having DRE leaders tell the press that Castro was the assassination mastermind did very little. The supposed CIA plotters would have better spent their time and energy trying to convince the FBI that Castro was behind the assassination. And Carlos Bringuier in his book Crime Without Punishment , denies that he received any money from the DRE in Miami: (page 425) I was just a Delegate in New Orleans of the DRE. I was not receiving instructions or orders from the CIA, I never received any money from the CIA, if others in the DRE at the Miami office were receiving money from the CIA that was not my case. I was working very hard as a salesman as comanager of "Casa Roca" to bring food for my family, I never received any money from the Miami DRE office or any other office of the DRE, on the contrary my delegation was sending small amounts of money to Miami headquarters. That is the historical truth. This is confirmed by CIA documents listing salaries of DRE people -- Bringuier's name is not on the list . And Bringuier is not even listed on this organizational chart of the DRE: In addition, Bringuier wrote that he never met George Joannides: (page 419) In her book Ms. Mellen portray me as a FBI or CIA informant and tried to associate me with George Joannides, according to her and others, as a CIA operative. I heard the name Joannides for the first time while researching some of Jefferson Morley's allegations and this Mr. Joannides had passed away. I never met, talked or had any direct or indirect contact with Mr. George Joannides but these recyclers of lies keep repeating the same lies. In Morley's world, Bringuier and Oswald are just pawns of George Joannides and their actions can only be explained by an imaginary CIA operation. Now on to the Washington Post article which is a complete embarrassment . The headline is just plain untrue. The CIA has only revealed that Howard was an alias for Joannides. Nothing more. And he conflates Bringuier with the DRE. Yesterday, I sent Tom Jackman an email asking him to speak with me. He did not call me, nor does it appear that he called anybody who could have rebutted Morley's allegations. And, just about everything in the article has been rebutted previously on my blog or by Tracy Parnell. For instance: Previously released records show that the CIA had begun reading Oswald’s mail in 1959, when he defected to the Soviet Union, a move that attracted American media attention. Oswald returned to the U.S. in 1962 with a new wife and daughter in tow and settled in Dallas. Morley has found that the CIA continued to monitor Oswald. Morley Claim . --   The CIA was reading Oswald's mail. Fact . --  True, but the focus on Oswald as a target is misleading. The CIA ran a program called HT-Lingual  which intercepted some mail going to and coming from the Soviet Union. On November 9, 1959, Lee Harvey Oswald's name was added to the watch list because of his defection to the Soviet Union. The Church Committee estimated that 75% of the letters that were opened were chosen at random, not because the name was on the watch list.  The program intercepted a letter from Marguerite Oswald to her son and that was it. After the assassination, additional items of potential relevance to the assassination investigation were recovered from the HT-Lingual files, but those additional items did not include any correspondence to or from Oswald himself.   But Jackman does have one new story. Jose Lanusa told him that Oswald wrote a letter to the DRE: “It was handwritten, two pages,” Lanuza recalled. “It was crap. A ranting thing. ‘I am willing to go to Miami to help you guys.’ It was all building up a legend. I was constantly getting letters from gringos who wanted to come in and dress up in military garb and show up in my office.” He filed it away. Lanusa says he filed the Oswald letter away and then gave it to the FBI -- but there is no record anywhere of this letter. This the first time he has ever mentioned this. For over twenty years Morley has been chasing the ghost of George Joannides. He has found nothing except for a driver's license using the name Howard. That's it. The supposed Oswald operation is just a "thought pattern" in Morley's mind. Stay tuned for more thought patterns. Previous Relevant Blogs Posts on Jefferson Morley's Congressional Testimony Jefferson Morley's Congressional NothingBurger An analysis of Congresswoman Luna's Congressional Hearings In Search of the Oswald Operation, Part One An FBI memo that quoted James Angleton is used by Morley to reach an unwarranted conclusion. In Search of the Oswald Operation, Part Two Morley misreads Angleton's testimony before the HSCA. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Three Morley believes a document proves the CIA did not believe that a lone gunman killed JFK. Update on the Heath Memo Additional documents relevant to Part Three. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Four Morley claims that there is some connection between the suicides of Gary Underhill, Charles Thomas, George de Mohrenschildt, and the overdose death of Dorothy Kilgallen. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Five Morley believes that Agustin Guitart was spying on pro-Castro forces in New Orleans Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Jefferson Morley More Morley Nothingburgers on the way Morley is requesting more documents -- they will reveal nothing about the assassination. Morley's Non-Story Hits the Press Morley got the headlines he wanted to a complete non-story. George Joannides and the HSCA Joannides did not come out of retirement to work with the HSCA. There Was No "Oswald Operation" There is no mention of an "Oswald Operation" in the Joannides' personnel file. The Parkland Doctors, Part Six Morley believes that Dr. Robert McClelland's recollections provides proof of a shot from the front. Here is the truth about McClelland. On the Loss of Occam’s Razor in the JFK Case A reply by Nicholas Nalli to Jefferson Morley. A Case Study in Redaction: The CIA's LIFEAT File Morley suspected a redacted file would reveal major secrets. It didn't. The Schlesinger Memo Unredacted! Several months ago, I posted an article, in association with several researchers, that showed what was contained in the redacted section of Schlesinger's memo. Jefferson Morley's Clairvoyance Morley somehow knows what is in the supposed 2,400 recently-discovered FBI files. Was Israel Behind the JFK Assassination? Morley discusses Israel with Tucker Carlson. Morley's Bad History Lesson Morley believes that the United States can never be great unless it solves the JFK assassination. Morley's List of 13 Documents Will Tell Us Little An analysis of the 13 documents Morley wants to see. The Schlesinger Memo, Again! Morley claims I am a CIA apologist and then misquotes me. For The Sake of Our Sanity - Release the Joannides File It would be worthwhile for the CIA to release the Joannides file just to stop the incessant posts from Jefferson Morley. Did Oswald Stay at a Luxury Hotel in Helsinki? Actually, Oswald stayed at two budget-priced hotels in Helsinki. Morley Keeps Asking the Same Questions He keeps asking the same questions, and we keep posting the same answers. The JFK Assassination and Truth Conspiracy authors are playing fast and loose with the facts. Was Herminio Diaz a Grassy Knoll Assassin? There is no evidence that Diaz was involved in the JFK assassination. Morley Misleads on Arthur Schlesinger's Memo on the CIA There are clues as to what is in a redacted section of Schlesinger's memo. Jefferson Morley's Podcast on New Orleans Lays an Egg Chad Nagle and Dan Storper's article on New Orleans gets everything wrong. Chad Nagle and Dan Storper Lay an Egg Believing Michael Kurtz is problematic. Is Jefferson Morley Seeing Double? Morley wrote that there are two redacted memos on CIA reorganization, but there is only one. He wrote about Goodwin's copy as if it was a different memo, rather than a copy of the Schlesinger memo. Jefferson Morley is wrong about "Who Shot John?" The phrase 'who shot John' does not refer to the JFK assassination. Jefferson Morley is Wrong on William Harvey, Again! Only one word is redacted in Harvey's deposition. Jefferson Morley is Wrong about Operation Northwoods, Again! There are no redactions in the Operation Northwoods document. Did Dorothy Kilgallen Have any Special Knowledge about the JFK Assassination? Kilgallen had nothing to tell. Morley's Interview of Marina Oswald Porter Fizzles! An underwhelming interview of Marina Oswald. Jefferson Morley: Able to Leap Intellectual Chasms in a Single Bound Morley often repeats stories and changes their meanings. There was NO Assassination Plot in Chicago Chad Nagle claims there was an assassination plot against JFK in Chicago in November 1963. One problem: There is no evidence of such a plot. Fred Litwin, CIA Apologist? A response to Morley's Substack post alleging that I am a CIA apologist. A Reply to Jefferson Morley on Bill Harvey   A rebuttal to Morley's response to my post Was Bill Harvey in Dallas in November of 1963? Was Bill Harvey in Dallas in November of 1963?   There is no credible evidence Harvey was in Dallas in November of 1963. Does it Matter Where Allen Dulles was on November 22, 1963?   Morley repeats the claim that Dulles was at a CIA training center during the weekend of the JFK assassination. He wasn't. Jefferson Morley's Claims about Reuben Efron   Morley's claims about Efron are all wrong. A Reply to Jefferson Morley regarding Operation Northwoods   Morley responded to my article "The Truth about Operation Northwoods." Here is my reply. W. Tracy Parnell on Jefferson Morley   W. Tracy Parnell is one of the best JFK assassination researchers out there. Here is his look at Jefferson Morley with several important articles. The Truth about Operation Northwoods   Operation Northwoods can only be understood as part of the Kennedys' war against Cuba and Operation Mongoose. Jefferson Morley Responds to my Post on MK-Ultra and Jack Ruby   And a response from me. Did Dr. Louis Jolyon West Ask to Examine Jack Ruby in November 1963?   There is no evidence that Dr. West petitioned the court to examine Jack Ruby before his trial. Did the CIA use a MK-Ultra Psychiatrist to Interfere with Jack Ruby's Case?   There is absolutely no evidence that Dr. Louis Jolyon West interfered with Jack Ruby's case. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads Viewers on Oswald's "Hands Off Cuba!" Handbills, Part Four   Jefferson Morley used a fake Oswald handbill in his press conference for the Mary Ferrell Foundation. Redactions, Redactions, Redactions...   An examination of redactions in the JFK collection of documents. Jefferson Morley Doesn't Understand Jim Garrison's Homophobic Prosecution of Clay Shaw Morley doesn't understand Alecia Long's arguments about homophobia and Jim Garrison. Jefferson Morley asks why "what the CIA knew about Herminio Diaz is still off limits." Morley misses that a lot of redactions are actually available. Belief in a JFK Conspiracy Drops! Jefferson Morley's press conference presents evidence that belief in a conspiracy has dropped.

Robert Tanenbaum, in his book That Day in Dallas, discusses in his text, and includes in his appendix, a purported memo from John McCone to James Rowley. This memo is clearly a fake and I discussed it in my first review of his book. Here is the letter that was included in his book: What is interesting is that the Yellow highlights are exactly the same as the yellow highlights found in the document as printed in Robert Groden's book, Absolute Proof, Tanenbaum doesn't comment on the document but it seems clear that he took the document from Groden. Tanenbaum was recently a guest on Matt Crumpton's Solving JFK podcast: Here is an excerpt from a transcript: (11:11) Robert Tanenbaum: James Rowley was the chief of the Secret Service at the time. Rowley wrote a note to McCone, who was head of the CIA now since 61, and the letter, the letter to Rowley, which McCone wrote in response, was March 3, '64, March 3. '64. McCone responds to Rowley and McCone says, "you know, we're concerned about leaks, also about Lee Harvey Oswald, because the people, you know it had to do with his training and his suspect activity," and he said, McCone, that the leaks are very important, because if anyone believes these leaks, the wrong persons, the leaks could lead the media to erroneously claim that the CIA and perhaps others were directly involved in the Dallas action. The Dallas action is how they refer to the assassination of President Kennedy. And then on page two, the top of page two of this three page, letter, third page is a signature page, McCone wrote the following, "while the persons involved in the assassination were in the employ of this agency, the CIA," imagine that, what I'm telling you -- this is evidence. "While the persons involved in the assassination were in the employ of this agency, as well as the FBI," he brushes it aside and says "it's impossible to monitor and maintain 24 hour a day responsibility over our agents." I checked out this document to make sure it was legitimate. It passed every test. It was found where it should have been found. The numbers on it were consistent with the numbers of the pages before and after. And the reason I mentioned this is was the government's initial reaction was, so that's a fake letter. It's a legitimate letter. It passed muster on every aspect of of what we're talking about here. It was used in 1978 and it was used in 1991 in Russell's book, Dick Russell's book. So it's not something I found and no one else has had -- it's been out there since '78. Yes, sir go ahead. Matt Crumpton: So yeah, that the McCone-Rowley memo, like what you just laid out, that document sort of confirms all of these other things that you sort of already know. But to your point, it is, I would say disputed as a document. Now the reason it's disputed is two reasons, okay, and so I'd like to zoom in on that with you, if I can. One of those reasons is they asked the National Archives where it was. The National Archives said they can't find it. Well, on that reason, strike that out. That is not a good argument, because one of my friends, Canadian attorney Andrew Isler, who's an expert in the JFK Records Act, went to the National Archives looking for these final determination forms from the ARRB. And long story short, he was there for three days, and they couldn't find the thing that he asked for. But turns out it was in one of the boxes. It was labeled something different. So the fact that National Archives can't find something is meaningless in terms of ascertaining whether or not it exists. Their whole situation is a disaster. Also, there's a part of the ARRB that allowed agencies to turn documents over before the act was operational, and if they did that, then the documents would not be put in with the other JFK records. So so okay, that part of it is not an issue. The other part that people hang on as an argument, I just don't really know, is the it says, like, CO, like, there's some sort of numbering on in the top right corner. And say, that's not consistent with CIA numbering. I really don't know. But what I do know is there's someone else who worked on the HSCA. I'm not at liberty to say this person's name. You know this person. Robert Tanenbaum: I have a tape from him. He found it, and he covered every issue, along with a Mr. Blunt, who was, who was regarded as the best of all the researchers. They before I ever would talk about it, I went through every aspect, including all of these numbers and so on and so forth. First of all, who would, who would lie about the content of this letter? It's another embarrassment of our government, because there are at least one, two, three, four areas where they knowingly lied and approvable, and I'll get to in a second. But go ahead, though, I think it's important to have this discussed and let out, Matt Crumpton: Right. So so on this document, there's another person who basically told me, I know that the McCone-Rowley document is real because I was there and I saw it with my own eyes, and I obtained a copy of it for myself. And I don't want to go on the record, because I could be held, you know, criminally liable because of that. And so my question is, did you see it with your own eyes at the HSCA, or you came across it later? Robert Tanenbaum: Oh, no, no, I did not see it with my own eyes. I was, it was described to me in accuracy. I said, explain to me how you would know it was real or not real. And they went through this with me, and they talked about all the numbers. These are serious people here. These people had nothing else to do when they found the document and if it was a phony and it just so happens to be a major admission by the head of the CIA. This is a remarkable conversation. Notice that both Crumpton and Tanenbaum refuse to name names. Who told Crumpton the document is real? Why would that person be criminally liable? Perhaps that person wants to remain anonymous because of the embarrassment associated with the document. Tanenbaum says he has a tape from the person who found the document. Well, who was it? He won't say. Even James DiEugenio admits that the document is phony. I am surprised that Matt Crumpton hasn't figured out that the document is fake. He tries a little too hard to dismiss the fact that the National Archives searched for the document back in 2004 and couldn't find it. Yes, they might have missed it, but had it really existed, they probably would have found it. After all, it did have a document number - but, as the Archives found out, that number pointed to another document. Another podcast with Robert Groden and Robert Tanenbaum discusses the document: Here is an excerpt from a transcript: (1:39:37) Robert Groden: But he had something, and I have it now, and you mentioned it before -- that's the smoking, why we call the smoking gun document. It's the McCone-Rowley document. This was his copy of it. This particular copy of it was said to be destroyed by the House Committee years after he left and about a week before I left. Mark Groubert: Whose copy was it? Robert Groden: It was the HS. I'm sorry, it was the HSCA, the House Assassinations Committee. Mark Groubert: Okay. Robert Groden: And this, that's the document. This is -- the copy that you're seeing here is the clear copy that I published in in my book, Absolute Proof. Bob also has it in his book, That Day in Dallas. It's perhaps the single most important document in the entire case. It blows the whistle on everything -- it gives you the who, what, where and why about Oswald and the CIA and Bob had it. Thank God he had it, because I have it too. I have two copies of it. One was sent by mail to me. The other one I got was given to me by the HSCA. Mark Groubert: But, where do you think it came from, Bob? Robert Groden: I think, I think it's legitimate. I think it's totally ... Mark Groubert: No, no. I'm saying who gave it to you? In the mail, or the HSCA? Robert Groden: Somebody, somebody at the HSCA. I was there at a Christmas party before they closed their doors, and I noticed that there was a door open to a closet, Mark Groubert: Yeah. Robert Groden: And there's a whole bunch of photographic stuff in there. And I asked this, can I have a look? Is any of this of mine? And he said, "yeah, help yourself. Take what you want." So, I took two things. I took I took the large exhibits that I had created for the Committee, which were shown in the hearings, and I took a file that said Lee Harvey Oswald. In that file was their copy of this. They did have it. And it was used in a book, you mentioned before Bob about The Man Who Knew Too Much. Mark Groubert: Oh, the Dick Russell book -- but only in the first edition, I think. It was in 1991 right? Robert Groden: But the thing is, when he first used it, he only quoted parts of it verbatim. Mark Groubert: This is Dick Russell. Robert Groden: Nothing of real importance. Mark Groubert: You're talking about Dick Russell's book, The Man Who Knew Too Much. Robert Groden: The copy that he saw was in the National Archives, and I have a feeling it was strongly redacted. Otherwise he would have used that stuff too. Mark Groubert: In the second edition you're talking about. It doesn't have it in the second edition, it's in the first, right? Robert Groden: Right. Yeah, that's correct, but it's very, very important. If somebody has either of our books, please look it up and read it very carefully and understand that it was simply a memorandum between one man and another, it is not an official document and does not have an official form -- of one of the things that they they talked about, It was Oswald's clearances, his security clearances. They lied about it. He was above top secret. Mark Groubert: What is above top, what is above top secret? There's another level? Robert Groden: At least two levels above it. One of them is crypto. So, Robert Groden found the document in a closet. Really? The HSCA left a file on Lee Harvey Oswald in a closet and Groden took the file. Someone also sent him the file, but he doesn't say who. Groden also brings up the factoid that Oswald had a 'crypto' clearance. Here is a link to the document without Groden's yellow highlighting: Groden's book, Absolute Proof, provides some information about the document: (page 7) While the document is an HSCA document, Groden believes this Church Committee cover letter is associated with it: (page 8) There is nothing in this cover letter that indicates it has anything to do with the McCone-Rowley memo. Groden has a section in his book entitled, "Authenticating the Smoking Gun," (page 11) in which he notes that Dick Russell discussed the McCone-Rowley memo in his book, The Man Who Knew Too Much: (page 675) Now, in the video above, Groden says that Russell must have had a heavily-redacted copy because he only quotes part of the memo. However, Russell didn't have the document at all -- he was quoting from an article in a monthly tabloid newspaper, Modern People. The article was entitled "Oswald Was Brainwashed" by James L. Moore, and it contained the quote that Russell used in his book. Researcher Gary Buell wrote: Dick Russell, on p. 675 of his book The Man Who Knew Too Much quotes from a memo dated March 3, 1964 from CIA Director McCone to Secret Service Chief James Rowley. He says this document is "on record in the National Archives". He quotes that Oswald might have been "chemically or electronically 'controlled'...a sleeper agent. Subject spent 11 days hospitalized for a 'minor ailment' which should have required no more than three days hospitalization at best." He footnotes this with #11. Footnote #11 in the back of the book seems unrelated. This is apparently an error in the book. Footnote #10 however references an article published in the tabloid Modern People "Oswald Was Brainwashed" by James L. Moore. This article, which Dick was kind enough to send me, is apparently the actual source for the McCone-Rowley memo, which must now be considered to be questionable, lacking any independent evidence for the existence of the memo beyond a tabloid article. The Modern People article contains further quotes from this alleged memo, of a sensational nature. I quote: "Oswald... was trained by this agency, under cover of the Office of Naval Intelligence, for Soviet assignments. In 197, subject (Oswald) was active in aerial reconnaissance of mainland China and maintained a security clearance up to the 'confidential' level. "While in the Soviet Union, he was on special assignment in the area of Minsk. It would not be advantageous at this time divulge the specifics of that assignment. Speculation within this agency--and this is only speculation at this point--is that Oswald became unstable following surgery April 1, 1961, in the Minsk Hospital." This is followed by the "sleeper agent" passage that Russell quotes. I have been unable to find any reference to this memo that does not track back either to Dick Russell or Modern People. James L. Moore has made other claims that --while they could be true--cannot be verified. He claimed possession of a secret 350 page report on RHIC-EDOM. He has also claimed to be the real author of the Skeleton Key to the Gemstone Files, generally believed to be authored by Stephanie Caruana. Subsequently, I obtained a scanned copy of the document from Jim Moore. He says he got it from a Tennessee FBI man and does not vouch for its authenticity. I emailed copies of this document to Debra Conway and Dick Russell, both of whom are skeptical, as I am. By the way, I asked Moore about the Confidential stamp. He says it was not on the original document. He added it, as he said he did to other material in his office at the tabloid, I suppose to say hands-off to his office mates. Moore claimed he was the author of a skeleton key to the gemstone file, another absurd and infamous fraud. You can read a letter that Jim Moore wrote about the document here. Russell dropped the reference to the McCone-Rowley memo in the second edition of The Man Who Knew Too Much. He probably realized it was not legit. It is absolutely astounding to see Tanenbaum and Groden insist that the McCone-Rowley memo is legitimate. In fact, Groden just presented on the memo in the U.K.: And I see that both Groden and Tanenbaum are scheduled to speak at this year's JFK Lancer conference in Dallas in November. I wonder if they will face any serious questions.

Robert Tanenbaum was the Deputy Chief Counsel for the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA). He resigned after a brouhaha over budgets and inappropriate investigative techniques. Prior to serving on the HSCA he was assistant District Attorney in New York County in the office of DA Frank Hogan. I just received his new book, That Day in Dallas: Lee Harvey Oswald Did NOT Kill JFK , and I must say I am not impressed. The supposed crack prosecutor of New York provides a tepid review of some of the evidence in the case and uses arguments that might well have come from a high-school paper on the assassination. Dan Hardway has already damaged Robert Tanenbaum's credibility. Tanenbaum still tells the same story about Phillips - there are no comments in this book about Hardway's post. That Day in Dallas is only 132 pages long. A large part of the book recounts Tanenbaum's personal story as a prosecutor and the forces that shaped his viewpoints. Tanenbaum believes there is something divine about his mission - it all started after he had been informed in high school that his mother had died: (pages 31 - 32) After the ordeal of the funeral, I began taking long walks alone trying to figure out how to process it all. Then the insight happened with acute clarity. What was required was that I make a spiritual deal with the Almighty: Provide for me evil, and I will bring it to justice, no special aid in so doing. I will always act in a righteous fashion. Notwithstanding evil's cruelty, I will force it to be accountable in due process oriented, court disciplined proceedings. As I performed athletically, so will I similarly perform in the courts of law in a manner that will extend over the years to come -- college, law school, and the courtroom -- to prosecute the unjust. I will be prepared, and make it happen in due course. This would become my mission, my identity, my calling card, my life. I believe I have remained faithful to it since the day it became clear. I believe I am continuing to fulfill that promise in the publication of this book and the evidence within. Notwithstanding evil's cruelty, I will force it to be accountable. I will be prepared. and make it happen. This sense of mission permeates the book. Up front, Tanenbaum offers up "deep testimonies of credibility," which includes: (pages 2 - 3) I am aware that every turn involved an unquestionably divine degree of intervention. From the things that led me to a specific university, which led to an interview I should have never been able to get with Frank Hogan, to Rick Albrecht doing what you'll see he did, to doors that flung open, and pieces of the puzzle that came together later in life, like the final round in Slumdog Millionaire where every detail led to an uncanny knowledge of, or exposure to, the answers everyone was seeking. I am not only fighting flesh and blood, but I'm determined to live out a deal I made on high to deal with the devil and spend my life fighting evil in all its form, with every tool I've been given. Tanenbaum doesn't really get into discussing the JFK assassination until page 62 and, if you exclude the short appendix, that means that the heart of the book is only sixty pages long. And a large part of that is based on the research of Josiah Thompson. Tanenbaum has precious little to say himself. This first part of my review covers what is in Tanenbaum's book. Part Two will look at what is not in Tanenbaum's book. So, here is a sampling of what is in Tanenbaum's book. 1. The Parkland Doctors Tanenbaum notes that "if the WC [Warren Commission] was engaged in a virtuous search for truth, then there is no rational reason to omit the Parkland experts." (page xii) The only Parkland doctors mentioned in Tanenbaum's book were Dr. Kemp Clark, Dr. Robert McClelland, Dr. Malcolm Perry, and Dr. Marion Jenkins. But all of these doctors testified before the Warren Commission. So, which experts did the Warren Commission omit? Tanenbaum doesn't say, but clearly he is talking about Dr. Charles Crenshaw, since Tanenbaum wrote the foreword to Crenshaw's book, JFK Has Been Shot . Page xii of JFK Has Been Shot There was no reason to invite Dr. Crenshaw to testify before the Warren Commission. He was a very minor player in the emergency room -- so minor that many people forgot he was even there. If Crenshaw had something important to say in 1963 - 1964, he could have called up the Commission. But he kept his huge story secret for decades. And there is no need to take Dr. Crenshaw seriously. Please have a look at my five-part series on the Parkland doctors. The Parkland Doctors, Part One Attending physicians often make mistakes in determining the nature of gunshot wounds. Should we care what the Parkland doctors think? The Parkland Doctors, Part Two A look at what the Parkland doctors wrote and what they said. The Parkland Doctors, Part Three The Boston Globe  interviewed some of the Parkland doctors in 1981. The Parkland Doctors, Part Four A 1992 article in the Journal of the American Medical Association  has some interesting comments from a few of the Parkland doctors. The Parkland Doctors, Part Five An interesting interview with Dr. Robert McClelland. 2. The CIA and the HSCA Tanenbaum alleges that the CIA did not give access to its files: (page 117) The FBI and the CIA stonewalled the Committee. Both agencies refused to cooperate and grant us the opportunity to access their files and unredacted memos regarding the assassination. The CIA, you may recall, postured that not only would it not provide the documents but that we could read redacted material only at Langley while prohibiting us from photocopying or taking any notes, respectively. But here is what Dan Hardway wrote about the CIA : Other details in Tanenbaum’s fantastic tale are also impossible to verify in the record. Tanenbaum worked much of the magic in his well-spun Pittsburgh tale by collapsing time and conflating events in regard to these details. His claim that the CIA denied access to documents is mirrored by his claim that what the HSCA eventually got was access to redacted copies from which they could not take notes. The CIA followed the law and made the Committee wait until staff members received security clearances before giving them access to classified documents. Once staffers had passed background checks, the CIA gave staff members unexpurgated access to everything we asked for, at least until close to the end of the HSCA’s life when they began to seriously stonewall on Mexico City.[28] The staff members took extensive notes from classified documents and many, although not all, of those notes are now in the National Archives. As noted above, Tanenbaum’s claim that the CIA flatly denied access is true only if you leave out the fact that, in the time-frame he is talking about, no one on the staff had their security clearance and the HSCA had not yet requested access to documents. Thus Tanenbaum creates a very false impression of what was happening. 3. The Single Bullet Theory Tanenbaum says that the single bullet theory is "the shot heard 'round the world and echoed through time and eternity, and every public-facing report": (page 62) According to the theory, JFK was shot twice in the back. One bullet struck the back of his head, and another bullet struck his back approximately 5 3/4 inches below the neckline between a 22.5-degree and a 17-degree declination, establishing a downward tract. It appears that Tanenbaum is quoting from something, but he doesn't say where this was taken from. He then includes the autopsy face sheet: Tanenbaum then concludes that "... that bullet, were it one, to satisfy the Published Theory, would then have to somehow move upward 11 degrees in JFK"s body, in violation of basic science and common sense, and exit JFK's throat." (page 62) Yet Tanenbaum doesn't understand that the description of the neck/back wound was more accurate than the sketch. Of course, Tanenbaum wouldn't dare publish the actual photograph of JFK's back wound. 4. The Magic Bullet Tanenbaum presents this Warren Commission exhibit to discuss the "magic bullet." (page 64 - 65) Here is how Tanenbaum describes this exhibit: In the government exhibit, it shows five bullets that the government test-fired and what the effects should have been on the Magic Bullet. In the exhibit, the Magic Bullet #1 is in supremely pristine condition. Bullets that were denoted #2 and #3 and which were shot into cotton wadding, expectantly show no damage. Bullet #4 in the exhibit was shot into a goat's rib and shows some deformity. But bullet #5 in the exhibit was shot into a cadaver's wrist and fractured its radius. As a result, it shows enormous deformity. That exhibit was a standard part of Dr. Cyril Wecht's presentation. The tests conducted at the Edgewood Arsenal showed that a direct hit by a pristine bullet on Connally's wrist would have produced both a badly deformed bullet, and much more damage to the wrist: Cadaver wrist after being shot by a pristine bullet, And so, Dr. Olivier concluded that Connally's wrist was not hit by a pristine bullet. Surely Mr. Tanenbaum must know that CE 399 started to yaw after it exited JFK's throat, and that it didn't hit Connally's rib head on with full velocity. Maybe he doesn't know. 4. Forensic Reenactment Tanenbaum writes that the Warren Commission "determined to support its position [that JFK's head could have moved backwards after the fatal shot] by arranging for the following exercise. For the demonstration, it created ten gelatinized skeletal skulls modeled on human skeletal structure to be shot by rifle the same height and distance as LHO allegedly enacted." (page 70) Indeed all ten skeletal heads were shot. Contrary to WC hopefuls, all ten heads moved forward, not backward. Big Surprise. But the purpose of the test of firing into human skulls at Arsenal was not to test the jet effect. Back then nobody had yet to come up with the theory. Here is the purpose of the tests: And here are the results: And their discussion: 5. Lee Bowers Tanenbaum quotes several witnesses he believes help prove a shot from the grassy knoll. He has this to say about Lee Bowers: Bowers was working the railway switching tower, heard the shot, and observed a flash of light and smoke as a result of the rifle shot. But Bowers never said anything about a flash of light to the Warren Commission, and he never said he saw smoke. When he spoke to Mark Lane, a few years later, his story had slightly changed: Maybe a flash of light, or smoke, or something out of the ordinary. Who knows? 6. The Acoustics Evidence Tanenbaum's discussion of the acoustics evidence is jejune: (pages 85 - 86) Acoustics experts at Bolt Beranack [sic] & Newman based in Cambridge, Massachusetts (a partnership of Richard Bolt, Leo Beranek, and Robert Newman), and the Queens College Department of Computer Sciences originated their investigations from Police Officer McClain's [actually is McLain] motorcycle recording device, Acoustics. Fifteen years later, that investigation corroborates that witnesses told law enforcement within one hour of the assassination. That's his whole discussion. He might have missed a few details, no? 7. The CIA and the Single Bullet Theory Did the CIA order the single bullet theory? (page 91 - 92) The manual bolt action necessary to fire separate successive shots from the alleged murder weapon, the Mannlicher Carcano rifle, takes 2.3 seconds: ergo -- the Mannlicher Carcano could not have fired both shots. Now confronted with the absence of its Mannlicher Carcano rifle, the CIA in March of 1964 ordered that a one bullet theory would still support its predetermined outcome -- three shots fired from the sixth floor "sniper's nest" window inside the Book Depository building by the lone gunman, LHO. No footnote for any of this [there are no footnotes in the book at all]. What on earth is he talking about? 8. The HSCA's Sealed Records Tanenbaum refers three times to the sealing of HSCA Records. Here's the first (page 6) The HSCA, however, was NOT interested in searching for truth and not interested in discussing it further. It was a “conversation over” situation. Actually, I retract that statement—the conversation wasn’t over at all. In fact, it was just beginning—beginning to be distorted magnificently through a complicated parade of smoke and mirrors. The Committee would ultimately fabricate a significant portion of its forensic medical panel summary report, and to protect this fabrication from being discovered or revealed, it sealed all the underlying documents—for fifty years. Then at page 95 Tanenbaum writes: At page 37 of the HSCA’s Forensic Medical Panel Report, HSCA, in substance, concluded that, "regarding the gaping hole in the back of the president’s head, the Parkland doctors must have been mistaken because all of the twenty-six witnesses present at the autopsy of JFK in Bethesda observed no gaping hole in the back of the president’s head.” [ There is no such quote ] HSCA, at its expiration, sealed its investigative records for fifty years. And then at page 118: Sadly, the Committee maintained that all of the Parkland Hospital doctors attending JFK in trauma room 1 must have been mistaken when they noted that JFK had a gaping hole in the back of his head, specifically in the parietal/occipital area, because all 26 witnesses at the autopsy of JFK at Bethesda allegedly saw no such injury. Then the HSCA maneuvered to seal the underlying documents, the records, for 50 years. Is this really why the HSCA documents were not released until the ARRB went into action? The plain fact of the matter is that Congress needed to pass a law releasing HSCA documents and they didn't. In 1983, legislation was introduced to open the records, but the House of Representatives never voted on the resolution. There was opposition from Louis Stokes, who along with Robert Blakey, had issues on the confidentiality of some of the HSCA's information. Stokes told the press that the "unpublished material consists largely of raw FBI reports that might defame innocent people." Stokes told Ebony Magazine that personnel records of people the HSCA hired and fired should remain confidential. He had particular concerns about the names of confidential informants in the Martin Luther King case "to whom we promised confidentiality in return for their testimony." It would be nice to know from Robert Tanenbaum who at the HSCA was responsible for the alleged cover-up. 9. Bardwell Odum and CE 399 Tanenbaum disputes the chain of custody of CE 399: (page 100) In 1967, the government released a 34-page letterhead memo dated 7/7/64. It purported to show that on 6/12/64, FBI agent Bardwell Odum went to Parkland Hospital and showed CE 399, the pristine bullet, to Tomlinson and Wright. They allegedly told Odum that the bullet looked similar to the one Tomlinson found on the stretcher in Parkland Hospital. When Odum was interviewed, he stated he never had possession of CE 399, never spoke to Tomlinson or Wright, and never went to Parkland Hospital! But the interview with Odum took place in 2002, some 38 years after the fact. Odum was 82 years old at the time, and memory loss might have played a role. Tanenbaum won't tell you that Tomlinson identified CE 399 in an interview with Raymond Marcus in 1966. 10. The Rowley Memo Tanenbaum discusses in his text, and includes in his appendix, a purported letter from John McCone to James Rowley. Here is the letter that was included in his book: This memo is not a legitimate memo. Back in 2006, a Usenet member wrote NARA about the memo: We appreciate your interest in the JFK Assassination Records Collection. Your request was forwarded to our office because we have custody of the JFK Assassination Records Collection. We have received several requests for information about the McCone/Rowley Memo in the past. Our staff conducted an extensive search of the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection. In addition to searches on the JFK Database, we carried out physical searches of the files. The file series searched included Lee Harvey Oswald's 201 file; the CIA Miscellaneous File; the United States Secret Service's official case file on the assassination; the Russ Holmes Work File; and the Assassination Records Review Board's files related to the CIA. We were unable to locate a copy of, or any reference to, this document in the Collection. In addition, the reference number on the top right of the document was taken from a Secret Service report: Real: Fake: In fact, that reference number is a case number for the JFK assassination. My friend Larry Haapanen also points out that the CIA did not have an office in Fort Worth in 1964 and that such a memo would have a higher security level than confidential. It is astounding that Robert Tanenbaum would be fooled by such an obvious fake. 11. Ruth Paine, CIA Operative? These two paragraphs caught my eye: (page 110) Moreover, George de Mohrenschildt, a white Russian aristocrat, wealthy businessman, and fervent anti-communist, befriended Oswald. He became Oswald’s caretaker and squired him for about the next six months while Oswald was in Dallas. De Mohrenschildt had a close relationship with Harold Byrd, a rightwing Dallas oilman and co-founder of the Civil Air Patrol where Oswald trained as a cadet. Byrd despised JFK and owned the Texas School Book Depository where, six weeks before the assassination, CIA operative, Ruth Paine, obtained Oswald’s employment. Byrd was also close to Air Force General Charles Cabell, a CIA deputy director, and Bay of Pigs organizer. JFK fired Cabell after the Bay of Pigs debacle. Cabell’s brother was Dallas Mayor Earle Cabell, who helped pick and disseminate the motorcade route through Dealey Plaza. He was also deemed a CIA asset. I just don't understand the relevance of a Harold Byrd connection. And to call Ruth Paine a CIA operative without one shred of evidence is just plain defamatory and irresponsible. And was it relevant that Mayor Cabell once signed a secrecy agreement with the CIA? Cabell had nothing to do with the motorcade route. Discussion I could go on and on with further examples. I don't know why Tanenbaum felt compelled to write such a book. I don't think he will convince many people. Perhaps he is hoping to trade on his resume and that the uninformed might well be impressed. Coming up: Part Two looks at what is not in Tanenbaum's book. Oh, somewhere in this favored land the sun is shining bright, The band is playing somewhere, and somewhere hearts are light; And somewhere men are laughing, and somewhere children shout, But there is no joy in Conspiracy Land—mighty Tanenbaum has struck out.

Yes, get ready for more nothingburgers from Jefferson Morley. He sent out this tweet : Bill Harvey William Harvey is a favorite target for conspiracy theorists and I have written about him a number of times: Was Bill Harvey in Dallas in November of 1963? A Reply to Jefferson Morley on Bill Harvey Jefferson Morley is Wrong on William Harvey, Again! Here is a quote from Gus Russo from my book, A Heritage of Nonsense : (pages 297 - 298 in the Kindle edition) Bill Harvey was an exceptional CIA officer with an exceptional drinking problem. He was key to the building of the CIA’s Berlin Tunnel, the unmasking of KGB spy Kim Philby, and was honored with the CIA’s Distinguished Service Medal. But you won’t hear any of that from the conspiracy nuts who think he killed JFK. Harvey’s five-a-day martini problem had escalated after the Kennedys kicked him off of the Cuba Project assassination operation, and the CIA exiled him to Rome. It was the martinis that had likely loosened his lips when he told AG Robert Kennedy that he, Kennedy, was an amateur at covert operations (he was). The exchanges grew so ugly that it almost came to fisticuffs.  Over the years, I have interviewed over two dozen people who were close to Harvey, both as family and fellow CIA officers (e.g., CIA’s Anita Potocki, Mark Wyatt, Sam Halpern, David Murphy, Dick Helms, Ted Shackley, Dino Brugioni, etc., as well as spending two days in Indianapolis with his widow, CG Harvey, and other family members. CG kindly sent me a box of Bill’s papers.) I also interviewed friends and family of Harvey’s “son,” Johnny Rosselli, the patriotic mobster.  Here’s the skinny: Harvey despised RFK for his ego-maniacal and sloppy running of the sensitive Cuba ops. His colleagues at the Agency were in unanimous agreement on that (details in my books). But he was not a killer of anyone, let alone the President. He was in fact another patriot, one who believed that the Kennedys had bit off far more than they could chew (they had), and he worried that RFK’s ineptitude at espionage could start the nukes flying.  The sad irony is that Robert Kennedy ultimately came to agree with Harvey. About a month before his own assassination, he told Peace Corps executive/journalist Bill Moyers, “I have myself wondered at times if we did not pay a very great price for being more energetic than wise about a lot of things, especially Cuba.” The great price was his brother Jack’s life. He knew that his Cuba Project had not only infuriated the hard-drinking CIA man, but also propelled a violent pro-Cuba terrorist also named Harvey—Lee Harvey Oswald—into a murderous rampage that gained him the recognition he had long craved. Morley is on a fishing expedition. There is no evidence that Harvey was involved in the JFK assassination, and we know where he was when JFK was murdered. CIA File of Herminio Diaz Garcia Some conspiracy theorists believe that Garcia was a grassy knoll assassin. I have discussed this in a few blog posts: Jefferson Morley asks why "what the CIA knew about Herminio Diaz is still off limits." Was Herminio Diaz a Grassy Knoll Assassin? There is absolutely no evidence to tie Diaz to the assassination, except for some propaganda from Fabian Escalante who ran Cuban intelligence. The file that Morley wants is not in the JFK collection, and I see no reason for it to be released. CIA documents on the Fair Play for Cuba Committee I am not sure what Morley will find here. He is probably interested in the AMSANTA operation. In one of his newsletters, he was most interested in this document, which has now been released with no redactions. I don't know what Morley will find, but he will do his upmost to try and tie something to Lee Harvey Oswald. The CIA did take an interest in the Fair Play for Cuba Committee's activities in other countries : Or perhaps he will try to say that COINTELPRO was a joint FBI-CIA program : Tunheim's letter to Biden doesn't mention COINTELPRO. He felt that the ARRB had been misled because they had not been told that Joannides was the case officer for the DRE in 1963. But, of course, the ARRB was told by the CIA that Joannides was the case officer for the DRE: But, let's not get ahead of ourselves. Conclusion More nothingburgers are on the way. Once these files reveal nothing, Morley will demand more files from the CIA and the FBI. How long Congresswoman Luna will keep going along with these requests remains to be seen. Previous Relevant Blogs Posts on Jefferson Morley's Congressional Testimony Jefferson Morley's Congressional NothingBurger An analysis of Congresswoman Luna's Congressional Hearings In Search of the Oswald Operation, Part One An FBI memo that quoted James Angleton is used by Morley to reach an unwarranted conclusion. In Search of the Oswald Operation, Part Two Morley misreads Angleton's testimony before the HSCA. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Three Morley believes a document proves the CIA did not believe that a lone gunman killed JFK. Update on the Heath Memo Additional documents relevant to Part Three. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Four Morley claims that there is some connection between the suicides of Gary Underhill, Charles Thomas, George de Mohrenschildt, and the overdose death of Dorothy Kilgallen. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Five Morley believes that Agustin Guitart was spying on pro-Castro forces in New Orleans Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Jefferson Morley Morley's Non-Story Hits the Press Morley got the headlines he wanted to a complete non-story. George Joannides and the HSCA Joannides did not come out of retirement to work with the HSCA. There Was No "Oswald Operation" There is no mention of an "Oswald Operation" in the Joannides' personnel file. The Parkland Doctors, Part Six Morley believes that Dr. Robert McClelland's recollections provides proof of a shot from the front. Here is the truth about McClelland. On the Loss of Occam’s Razor in the JFK Case A reply by Nicholas Nalli to Jefferson Morley. A Case Study in Redaction: The CIA's LIFEAT File Morley suspected a redacted file would reveal major secrets. It didn't. The Schlesinger Memo Unredacted! Several months ago, I posted an article, in association with several researchers, that showed what was contained in the redacted section of Schlesinger's memo. Jefferson Morley's Clairvoyance Morley somehow knows what is in the supposed 2,400 recently-discovered FBI files. Was Israel Behind the JFK Assassination? Morley discusses Israel with Tucker Carlson. Morley's Bad History Lesson Morley believes that the United States can never be great unless it solves the JFK assassination. Morley's List of 13 Documents Will Tell Us Little An analysis of the 13 documents Morley wants to see. The Schlesinger Memo, Again! Morley claims I am a CIA apologist and then misquotes me. For The Sake of Our Sanity - Release the Joannides File It would be worthwhile for the CIA to release the Joannides file just to stop the incessant posts from Jefferson Morley. Did Oswald Stay at a Luxury Hotel in Helsinki? Actually, Oswald stayed at two budget-priced hotels in Helsinki. Morley Keeps Asking the Same Questions He keeps asking the same questions, and we keep posting the same answers. The JFK Assassination and Truth Conspiracy authors are playing fast and loose with the facts. Was Herminio Diaz a Grassy Knoll Assassin? There is no evidence that Diaz was involved in the JFK assassination. Morley Misleads on Arthur Schlesinger's Memo on the CIA There are clues as to what is in a redacted section of Schlesinger's memo. Jefferson Morley's Podcast on New Orleans Lays an Egg Chad Nagle and Dan Storper's article on New Orleans gets everything wrong. Chad Nagle and Dan Storper Lay an Egg Believing Michael Kurtz is problematic. Is Jefferson Morley Seeing Double? Morley wrote that there are two redacted memos on CIA reorganization, but there is only one. He wrote about Goodwin's copy as if it was a different memo, rather than a copy of the Schlesinger memo. Jefferson Morley is wrong about "Who Shot John?" The phrase 'who shot John' does not refer to the JFK assassination. Jefferson Morley is Wrong on William Harvey, Again! Only one word is redacted in Harvey's deposition. Jefferson Morley is Wrong about Operation Northwoods, Again! There are no redactions in the Operation Northwoods document. Did Dorothy Kilgallen Have any Special Knowledge about the JFK Assassination? Kilgallen had nothing to tell. Morley's Interview of Marina Oswald Porter Fizzles! An underwhelming interview of Marina Oswald. Jefferson Morley: Able to Leap Intellectual Chasms in a Single Bound Morley often repeats stories and changes their meanings. There was NO Assassination Plot in Chicago Chad Nagle claims there was an assassination plot against JFK in Chicago in November 1963. One problem: There is no evidence of such a plot. Fred Litwin, CIA Apologist? A response to Morley's Substack post alleging that I am a CIA apologist. A Reply to Jefferson Morley on Bill Harvey   A rebuttal to Morley's response to my post Was Bill Harvey in Dallas in November of 1963? Was Bill Harvey in Dallas in November of 1963?   There is no credible evidence Harvey was in Dallas in November of 1963. Does it Matter Where Allen Dulles was on November 22, 1963?   Morley repeats the claim that Dulles was at a CIA training center during the weekend of the JFK assassination. He wasn't. Jefferson Morley's Claims about Reuben Efron   Morley's claims about Efron are all wrong. A Reply to Jefferson Morley regarding Operation Northwoods   Morley responded to my article "The Truth about Operation Northwoods." Here is my reply. W. Tracy Parnell on Jefferson Morley   W. Tracy Parnell is one of the best JFK assassination researchers out there. Here is his look at Jefferson Morley with several important articles. The Truth about Operation Northwoods   Operation Northwoods can only be understood as part of the Kennedys' war against Cuba and Operation Mongoose. Jefferson Morley Responds to my Post on MK-Ultra and Jack Ruby   And a response from me. Did Dr. Louis Jolyon West Ask to Examine Jack Ruby in November 1963?   There is no evidence that Dr. West petitioned the court to examine Jack Ruby before his trial. Did the CIA use a MK-Ultra Psychiatrist to Interfere with Jack Ruby's Case?   There is absolutely no evidence that Dr. Louis Jolyon West interfered with Jack Ruby's case. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads Viewers on Oswald's "Hands Off Cuba!" Handbills, Part Four   Jefferson Morley used a fake Oswald handbill in his press conference for the Mary Ferrell Foundation. Redactions, Redactions, Redactions...   An examination of redactions in the JFK collection of documents. Jefferson Morley Doesn't Understand Jim Garrison's Homophobic Prosecution of Clay Shaw Morley doesn't understand Alecia Long's arguments about homophobia and Jim Garrison. Jefferson Morley asks why "what the CIA knew about Herminio Diaz is still off limits." Morley misses that a lot of redactions are actually available. Belief in a JFK Conspiracy Drops! Jefferson Morley's press conference presents evidence that belief in a conspiracy has dropped.

By Nicholas R. Nalli, Ph.D. Those of us who have not been living under a rock the past couple of months are probably aware that the Kennedy Assassination has recently regained the attention of mainstream news coverage in the aftermath of the release of the remaining classified JFK files by the Trump Administration.  With the release of the remaining files, which #47 ordered within the first week of his second term, there has been renewed interest in the case, albeit with new perspectives.  The full declassification of the remaining documents and redactions by President Trump no doubt was partially at the beckoning of JFK’s nephew (and now U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services), Robert F. Kennedy Jr., but also as a lingering unfulfilled promise from his first term.  Oliver Stone and his consultant, Jim DiEugenio, have both been making the rounds, as well as others, many, if not most, insinuating that it was a deep-state operation. Among these is Jefferson Morley, an independent journalist and noted JFK author, who has emerged as one of the more prominent and articulate advocates keeping various aspects of the case relevant, appearing before the House Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets  this spring (along with Stone and DiEugenio) and making other appearances in the mainstream media.  Mr. Morley has long advocated for the declassification of the JFK documents and is among those I would consider to be rational “Warren Commission Critics” or “buffs” (as they prefer to be called, but some of whom being full-blown conspiracy theorists), including Josiah “Tink” Thompson, the late Dr. Donald Thomas, Dr. Cyril Wecht, and Edward J. Epstein, along with a handful of others. Government Transparency and Conspiracy Theories Like many JFK buffs, Morley takes umbrage with the label “conspiracy theorist,” and it’s not difficult to understand why: Within the broader universe of conspiracy theories, many zany fringe ideas reside, including those who deny the moon landing and climate change, who believe that extraterrestrial aliens landed at Roswell, chemtrails are being dispersed by the government into the atmosphere, and that the hated U.S. President George W. Bush (remember him?) was behind the 9/11 World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks.  I again empathize with the more rational JFK buffs, Morley and Thompson among them, and will attest that they are not zanies.  But I might remind them that Moon Landing Deniers and 9/11 Truthers also do not consider themselves conspiracy theorists. Unfortunately, anyone claiming or   implying that President Kennedy was assassinated by a host of unknown men-in-black (who not only planned and executed the operation with exacting precision, but also covered it up for 61+ years, successfully pinning it on an insignificant, innocent-but-appearing-guilty fall guy), still falls squarely within that category.  According to Merriam-Webster online: conspiracy theory :  a theory that explains an event or set of circumstances as the result of a secret plot by usually powerful conspirators. (e.g., the  conspiracy theories  surrounding Kennedy's assassination) It should be noted that the term “conspiracy theory” does not include actual, real conspiracies, examples of which include the Lincoln Assassination and the 9/11 terrorist attacks, both of which were committed by conspiracies with a small “c”. To be clear, Morley’s Statement for the Record dated 1 April 2025 for the House Task Force  does not descend to the level of “conspiracy theories” given that he doesn’t there venture into the realm described above.   Here Morley simply makes a legitimate criticism of the withholding of information in the assassination of President Kennedy by past U.S. intelligence officers (most of whom are now deceased), specifically information pertaining to Lee Oswald, the man found by both the Warren Commission and House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA) to have been the lone gunman in the assassination of Kennedy. Past Withholding of Information Within the recent declassified documents, Morley has unearthed occasions where he believes that Richard Helms, James Angleton, and George Joannides (all long deceased CIA Officers) were hiding information they had on Oswald.  But Oswald had brushed against American intelligence in his activities (discussed a bit more below) and thus there were issues with protecting classified information, including sources and methods.  There was no “Oswald operation” but excess secrecy, which coupled with “cover your ass” (CYA) actions, made it look suspicious. As an example, it is now well known (at least to JFK buffs) that, on the order of his superior, FBI Agent James Hosty (who was assigned to Oswald), destroyed circumstantial evidence that potentially exhibited what is now known as “leakage behavior.”[1]   The evidence in question was a “pointed” note left for Hosty by Oswald at his Dallas FBI field office just 10 days before the assassination.  Testimony and speculation about what the note said has varied.  The existence of the note was kept hidden from the Warren Commission, and when it became known years later, Hosty shrugged it off. However, his receptionist, Mrs. Fenner, with whom Oswald left the note, testified that it contained an overt threat that he (Oswald) would blow up  the FBI building if Hosty did not back off from harassing him and his wife.[2]  (!) Hosty devoted considerable space in his book questioning Fenner’s credibility,[3] but to his credit he otherwise admitted that the note was “angry” in tone and that it demanded that he stop harassing him.[4]   Hosty also noted that during the interrogation in Dallas, Oswald told him “I’m sorry for blowing up at you.  And I’m sorry for writing that letter to you.”[5]  But if the note was innocuous, then why would Oswald apologize for it during an interrogation, and why would he connect it with his “blowing up” at Hosty? What’s interesting about Mrs. Fenner’s account is that the specific threat is in character with the historical Lee Oswald without her being privy to that information. Just six weeks earlier Oswald brandished his revolver before the Soviet consulate in Mexico City while apparently nearly suffering a nervous breakdown, telling them in tears that the “notorious FBI” was following him and going to kill him, which is why he had to carry a gun.[6] While in New Orleans earlier that year, Oswald also instructed teenagers about guerrilla sabotage tactics, specifically how to derail a train  and set off a bomb  on the Huey Long Bridge.[7]  (!!) Some “lone-gunman proponents” out there might still dispute that the “Hosty note” made any incriminating violent threat, but whatever the note said, it was considered damaging enough that Hosty’s FBI superior went ballistic[8] and ordered that the note, material evidence in a capital murder case involving the President of the United States, be destroyed.[9]  And regardless of what type of threat the note contained, it takes chutzpah to leave an angry written directive for an FBI Agent at his office… and this is something that may very well have been a red flag (leakage behavior) before  the assassination. Of course, it should come as no surprise to us that U.S. intelligence agencies (viz., FBI and CIA) would’ve taken an interest in Lee Oswald.  He tried to defect to the Soviet Union and revoke his USA citizenship; he indicated that he would share classified military information of “special interest” to  the Soviets in Moscow[10]; regularly corresponded with Communist groups after returning to the USA; made news in NOLA after creating a scene at the Trade Mart distributing pro-Castro Communist propaganda; appeared on a NOLA radio debate and on television affirming that he was a Marxist; took a bus to Mexico City where he spent six days visiting the Soviet and Cuban consulates, during which time  he happened to make contact with Valerie Vladimirovich Kostikov (outwardly a consular officer, but clandestinely a KGB Agent from Dept 13 which handled sabotage and assassinations), consorted with radical leftists, obstinately demanded entry to Castro’s Cuba, brandished a firearm in front of the Soviets, and had an “altercation” with the Cuban consulate (to put it mildly… more on that in another thread) mere weeks before the assassination, among many other things. It would appear that the 24-year-old former Marine lived quite an activist life; indeed, it’s no small wonder conspiracy theorists over the years have conjectured that he was some sort of Intelligence Agent.  But many of the details of these past actions by the assassin were either withheld by intelligence agencies or dismissed by the Warren Commission as being irrelevant in the case, amounting to nothing more than the bizarre behavior of a “lone nut.”  Much more has since come to light that throw doubt on this “lone nut” characterization of Oswald, and on this point again, I think Morley and I would agree … Science and Occam’s Razor However, in his recent article, titled “Who Lost Occam’s Razor?”  (published in the JFK Facts  blog), Morley claims that the “Inside-the-Beltway journos” (i.e., mainstream news media) “wax dismissive” and have been indifferent toward the “new evidence about JFK’s murder,” noting that there has been a lot of new material released that nobody would’ve been able to thoroughly review yet.[11] More specifically, Morley takes issue with a comment made by New York Times  Film Critic A. O. Scott’s regarding Occam’s Razor and the JFK assassination boondoggle: Occam’s razor, the venerable philosophical principle that the truest explanation is likely to be the simplest, has been thrown away.  We’re living in the age of Occam’s chain saw, when the preferred answer is the one that makes the loudest noise and generates the most debris. “Occam’s Razor” has been variously described as the “principle of simplicity”,[12] but that’s an oversimplification (no pun intended).  More exactly, it refers to a fundamental premise within rational inquiry (especially science), namely that given two competing hypotheses that explain a phenomenon equally well, the simpler hypothesis is more likely the true one (and thus the better one).  Morley provides a similar definition in his article, so we are certainly on the same page here. Every great physical theory has essentially been about reducing an infinite multitude of observed phenomena to a simple universal formula (e.g., Newton’s Law of Universal Gravitation in classical mechanics), set of coupled equations (e.g., Maxwell’s Equations in classical electrodynamics), or governing principles (e.g., the principle of least action for all of physics), and there is always an aura of elegant simplicity in the result. Scott is simply positing that, in our current age, Occam’s Razor is being “thrown out” in favor of sensationalism, mysticism, and conspiracy theorizing, and this generally applies to contemporary topics, the JFK assassination simply being one of the vanguards of this present state of affairs.  It is this latter point where Morley disagrees, and where he goes on to suggest that it’s the other way around, hence the question posed in the title of his article. As a case in point, Morley refers to my 2018 Heliyon  article on the physics of JFK’s head wound  providing two excerpts and then wryly asking if the reader has questions… or a headache.  Interestingly enough, I again completely emphasize with Mr. Morley here.  There have been many an occasion when I suffered similar “fatigue” when trying to digest a technical article, solve a research problem, or complete an assignment.  There were many times when I felt (and probably was) in over my head. And in my younger, more idealistic days I always vowed to myself that I would write technical material in a more accessible manner than these earlier gauche authors that I had to suffer through.  Although I have tried to live up to this endeavor, I have probably ended up falling short on more than one occasion and unwittingly joined the ranks of my predecessors. It should be understood that although the Heliyon paper was open-access (providing free access to everyone and not simply those with the privilege of having library subscriptions to technical journals), it was nevertheless a peer-reviewed technical article published within the scientific literature, so it was still oriented toward a scientific/academic audience.  An increasing number of scientific journals have been moving toward open-access, and as such they now include a “Plain Language Summary” along with the Abstract at the beginning of published articles… and that’s a good thing IMO. That said, however, the conclusion of the paper that JFK was shot in the head from behind does indeed adhere to Occam’s Razor, specifically in the interpretation of Zapruder Frames Z312–Z313, where the forward head-snap of JFK’s head is clearly evident  concurrent with the head wound.[13]  The simplest (and best) explanation for this observation was an impulse caused by a high-speed bullet fired from the rear. The mathematical description in the Heliyon paper was meant to provide a quantitative analysis so that a more definitive forensic statement could be made.  As the venerable Lord Kelvin put it:[14] In physical science, a first essential step in the direction of learning any subject is to find principles of numerical reckoning and practicable methods for measuring some quality connected with it.  I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about and express it in numbers you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind: it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely, in your thoughts, advanced to the stage of science, whatever the matter may be. — Thomson, W. (1891).  Popular Lectures and Addresses , Vol. I, p. 80. In the application of Occam’s Razor to physics, Albert Einstein is reputed to have included an addendum to the Razor: “As simple as possible…  but not more so. ” What Einstein meant is that although the simplest theory is often the most probable (or preferred), that theory must nevertheless explain all  the data excluding noise, and sometimes the physical world behaves in counterintuitive, complex ways.[15] A Cautionary Tale So, let’s get back to the question about “who lost Occam’s Razor” in the JFK case. Tink Thompson had some salient observations indirectly addressing this issue in a short (six and a half minute) 2011 JFK assassination documentary (by Errol Morris, published online by The   New York Times ), where he brilliantly uses the example of the “Umbrella Man” to make the point.  If anyone hasn’t seen it, I strongly recommend doing so: “Who Was the Umbrella Man?” | JFK Assassination Documentary | The New York Times . In a nutshell, Thompson relays to us the story about solving the mystery of the Umbrella Man in the mid-1970s.  Following the publication of the Warren Report, the identity (and “purpose”) of the darkly dressed man standing in Dealey Plaza with a black umbrella opened near the Stemmons Freeway sign (exactly where the President and Governor are first shot), remained a mystery.  Because of his location, and because it was otherwise a sunny day with nary a cloud in the sky, conspiracy theorists (Tink’s words for them) jumped to the conclusion that the Umbrella Man played a role in the Conspiracy against the President (and consequently, the Warren Commission was complicit in covering up his existence).  Oliver Stone in his 1991 blockbuster JFK  insinuated that the Umbrella Man was there to give a signal to the “triangulated” snipers, and that the U.S. Secret Service would never have allowed him to open his umbrella on the street (this recasting of the Secret Service as some sort of gestapo has lingered on with latter-day conspiracy authors). But Tink followed up on the lead, and the Umbrella Man would eventually appear before the HSCA to explain what he was really about, namely a silent protest against JFK’s father for his appeasement policies in World War II, symbolized by UK Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s umbrella.  Tink found this eventual revelation amusing, but he more importantly draws the following “moral of the story” at the end of the video: What it means is, if you have any fact which you think is really sinister...  Forget it man.  Because you can never, on your own, think up all the non-sinister, perfectly valid explanations for that fact.  A cautionary tale! Nailed it, Detective Thompson! This gets at why we should always seek to apply Occam’s Razor, namely that a “sinister fact” involving a Conspiracy and underlying plot is implicitly going to be complicated by definition, involving numerous moving parts. The endeavor of science may be thought of as the process of selecting the best  explanation from an infinity of inferior counter-explanations.  A scientific theory is the best-known  explanation for a set of phenomena, although occasionally a “better” not-yet-known explanation may later be found. As a closing note, Tink also says the following at the beginning of his short JFK assassination documentary on the Umbrella Man: In historical research there may be a dimension similar to the quantum dimension in physical reality. If you put any event under a microscope, you will find a whole dimension of completely weird, incredible things going on. It’s as if there’s the macro-level of historical research, where things sort of obey natural laws and usual things happen and unusual things don’t happen… and then there’s this other level where everything is really weird. This initial commentary by Tink gets at the heart of conspiracy theorizing, namely that if you take any “event” from history (or even events from an ordinary day in the life…) and you put it under a microscope, you will eventually find oddities, peculiarities, coincidences, etc.  But in such cases, one does not irrationally consider such things as “significant,” “directed,” or part of a “simulation.” Any given set of data contains both “signal” (the actual pattern) and “noise” (random, meaningless fluctuations not relevant to the pattern).  It appears that we humans, in our survival instinct, sometimes err on the side of finding signal (or patterns) within what is otherwise noise.[16] Relying on Occam’s Razor, a scientist seeks to find models or theories that capture the signal but not  meaningless noise.  Models that capture both the signal and the noise are typically far more complicated (i.e., requiring more parameters) and are considered to be “overfitted.” Within the JFK Assassination, the Umbrella Man was “noise,” not signal.  It is the attempt to overfit a “model” (explanation) to such noise that invariably leads to conspiracy theories.  It is ironic and a pity that Thompson did not take his own “cautionary tale” to heart when he published his latest book, Last Second in Dallas  in 2021, where he contorts evidence to fit a preconceived notion of multiple shooters, as I discussed at length previously . [17] Mr. Morley may be dissatisfied with the Warren Commission’s conclusion, but he appears (I hope) to be less committed to the fantastical notion of multiple mysterious snipers firing every which way in Dealey Plaza, which Tink Thompson and others have obstinately committed to, Occam’s Razor be damned. Although I believe that the U.S. federal government was mostly forthcoming at the time of the Warren Commission Report (and even more so by the time of the HSCA), Morley’s advocacy for complete transparency at this late stage, some 61+ years after the fact, is something we can all agree on. Acknowledgements I would like to thank Fred Litwin and Paul Hoch for their encouragement and support in this article.  All opinions expressed herein are those of the Author. [1]  Schuurman, B., Bakker, E., Gill, P. and Bouhana, N. (2018), Lone Actor Terrorist Attack Planning and Preparation: A Data-Driven Analysis † ,  ‡ . J Forensic Sci,  63: 1191-1200.  https://doi.org/10.1111/1556-4029.13676 [2]  Summers, A. (2013): Not in Your Lifetime: The Defining Book on the JFK Assassination , Open Road Integrated Media, New York, NY, ISBN: 978-1-4804-3548-3, pp. 348-349. [3]  Hosty, J. P. Jr. (1996): Assignment: Oswald,  Arcade Publishing, New York, NY, First Edition, ISBN: 1-55970-311-3, pp. 194-198. [4]  Ibid, p. 27. [5]  Ibid, p. 22. [6]  Russo, G. and S. Molton (2008): Brothers in Arms: The Kennedys, the Castros, and the Politics of Murder , Bloomsbury, New York, NY, First U.S. Edition, ISBN: 1-59691-532-3, p. 309. [7]  Mailer, N. (1995): Oswald's Tale: An American Mystery , Random House, New York, NY, First Trade Edition}, ISBN: 0-979-42535-7, pp. 570-571. [8]  Hosty (1996), pp. 29-30, op. cit. [9]  Summers (2013), op. cit. [10]  Epstein, E. J. (1978): Legend: The Secret World of Lee Harvey Oswald, Ballantine Books, New York, NY, First Edition, ISBN: 0-345-27883-6, p. 98. [11]  Morley, J. (2025): Who lost Occam’s Razor?,  JFK Facts,  24 May 2025, https://jfkfacts.substack.com/p/who-lost-occams-razor . [12]  McFadden, J. (2023). Razor sharp: The role of Occam's razor in science.  Ann NY Acad Sci , 1530, 8–17.  https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.15086 [13]  Nalli, N. R. (2021): The Ghost of the Grassy Knoll Gunman and the Futile Search for Signal in Noise, Secrets of a Homicide: John F. Kennedy Assassination News, Commentary & Opinion , June 2021, http://jfkfiles.blogspot.com/2021/06/the-ghost-of-grassy-knoll-gunman.html , cf. Animated GIFs 1–3. [14]  Extracted from https://www.someweekendreading.blog/Lord-Kelvin-on-quantitative-knowledge/ . [15]  Cf. Wolpert, L. (1994): The Unnatural Nature of Science, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, second printing, ISBN: 0-674-92981-0. [16]  E.g., van Prooijen JW, van Vugt M. (2018): Conspiracy Theories: Evolved Functions and Psychological Mechanisms. Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 13(6):770-788, doi: 10.1177/1745691618774270. [17]  Nalli (2021), op cit. About Nicholas Nalli Dr. Nick Nalli is a scientist who has previously published a number of articles on the science of the JFK Assassination, including Gunshot-wound Dynamics Model for John F. Kennedy Assassination , Sniper Target Tracking Analysis of John F. Kennedy Assassination , and The Ghost of the Grassy Knoll Gunman and the Futile Search for Signal in Noise .  He continues to take interest in the case, especially the scientific and geopolitical aspects.

You have to hand it to Jefferson Morley -- he knows how to get headlines. Having first crack at the Joannides' personnel files allowed him to control the narrative. Never mind that it was all vacuous -- various outlets fell for his story. Here is the story that kicked it all off : Of course, the text of the story does not support the headline. There is nothing in the new documents that add to the story about the DRE or Oswald. Nothing. Here is Caputo's tweet about the story : Just what operation is Caputo talking about? I replied as follows: And here is his reply: But his tweet clearly discussed an "operation." Was he not aware that Morley has talked about an "Oswald Operation" for years? Caputo was interviewed on MSNBC : Here is an excerpt from a transcript: Mark Caputo : His name was George Joannides, and he's one of the more interesting characters to emerge later in the narrative of what we understand about the JFK assassination, and the way in which the government hid documents and evidence and information about it. For years, he was unknown. Then in 1992, the movie Oliver Stone film JFK came out, created such an uproar that Congress, in a rare act of unanimity, passed the JFK Records Act, requiring disclosure of all records from all agencies related to the JFK assassination by 2017. That got delayed by various reasons, by two presidents, President Trump and President Biden. Albeit information was slowly released, but not all the information. We're still waiting on, all the information. And in 1998 this little piece of paper caught a researcher's eye. Jefferson Morley is his name, and he noticed that there was a person named Howard who appeared in these documents, heading this student group called the Cuban student group, or known by its initials, its Spanish language initials, the DRE, based in Miami. However, they had operations in New Orleans. It was a bunch of Cuban exiles who were anti-Castro and about 105 days before the assassination in Dallas in 1962, these Cuban students went up in a confrontation in New Orleans with Lee Harvey Oswald, and then they wound up debating Lee Harvey Oswald on local television. Oswald then went to Mexico, then later on, was accused of shooting President Kennedy. But after the assassination, immediately after, partly because of the work of the student group and the media attention, everyone knew Lee Harvey Oswald as a communist. And the question was, well, do the CIA have anything to do with the student group? And the CIA, the entire time, said, "Oh no, we had nothing to do with this We didn't know anything about it." Turns out they did. George Joannides, the Miami based operative or officer who was the branch chief or Assistant Branch Chief specializing in psychological warfare -- I'm not making this up, was the guy who ran this group and went by the code name Howard. When then asked for years who Howard was, George Joannides had been appointed by the CIA to be a liaison with the house Investigative Committee 15 years after the assassination, and Joannides told all the investigators from the House Committee, I have no idea who Howard is. We have no record on him. Well, that's because Joannides himself was Howard. He was then given an award for helping obfuscate with Congress and lying to Congress about his involvement. The CIA also lied about that as well, and in 1991 he passed away. But as a result of that dogged work by Jefferson Morley, trying to unearth those files, we now know, as a result of Thursday's release, that Joannides was indeed Howard, and he did lead that group, and that's what the records show. Much of what Caputo told MSNBC is just plain wrong. The HSCA knew that the DRE was funded by the CIA . The ARRB had looked at the Joannides personnel file and had declassified what it thought was relevant. Lee Harvey Oswald was a self-avowed Marxist - Carlos Bringuier, without any help or encouragement from the DRE -- was talking about this right after his encounter with Oswald. No one from the HSCA asked about Howard. No one asked Joannides . The New York Post headline takes the cake : Nothing in the text supports the headline. The Daily Beast also picked up the story : The CIA has dropped a bombshell report admitting the agency had monitored former President John F. Kennedy’s assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, before he gunned Kennedy down. CIA agent George Joannides—who specialized in psychological warfare and directed a group called the Cuban Student Directorate—had contact with Oswald in the months before the Dallas tragedy, The conservative outlet Newsmax covered the story : Fortunately, most news services did NOT pick up the story. Nothing on Fox, CNN and other major outlets. But it does help to control the narrative, and Morley has proven to be an expert in that. The fact that his narrative is devoid of facts escapes him. Tracy Parnell also discusses the press coverage here. By the way, the Carlos Bringuier was the DRE delegate in New Orleans, But he was NOT paid by the CIA. Here is a document that lists the DRE salaries paid by the CIA: Previous Relevant Blogs Posts on Jefferson Morley's Congressional Testimony Jefferson Morley's Congressional NothingBurger An analysis of Congresswoman Luna's Congressional Hearings In Search of the Oswald Operation, Part One An FBI memo that quoted James Angleton is used by Morley to reach an unwarranted conclusion. In Search of the Oswald Operation, Part Two Morley misreads Angleton's testimony before the HSCA. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Three Morley believes a document proves the CIA did not believe that a lone gunman killed JFK. Update on the Heath Memo Additional documents relevant to Part Three. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Four Morley claims that there is some connection between the suicides of Gary Underhill, Charles Thomas, George de Mohrenschildt, and the overdose death of Dorothy Kilgallen. In Search of an Oswald Operation, Part Five Morley believes that Agustin Guitart was spying on pro-Castro forces in New Orleans Previous Relevant Blog Posts on Jefferson Morley George Joannides and the HSCA Joannides did not come out of retirement to work with the HSCA. There Was No "Oswald Operation" There is no mention of an "Oswald Operation" in the Joannides' personnel file. The Parkland Doctors, Part Six Morley believes that Dr. Robert McClelland's recollections provides proof of a shot from the front. Here is the truth about McClelland. On the Loss of Occam’s Razor in the JFK Case A reply by Nicholas Nalli to Jefferson Morley. A Case Study in Redaction: The CIA's LIFEAT File Morley suspected a redacted file would reveal major secrets. It didn't. The Schlesinger Memo Unredacted! Several months ago, I posted an article, in association with several researchers, that showed what was contained in the redacted section of Schlesinger's memo. Jefferson Morley's Clairvoyance Morley somehow knows what is in the supposed 2,400 recently-discovered FBI files. Was Israel Behind the JFK Assassination? Morley discusses Israel with Tucker Carlson. Morley's Bad History Lesson Morley believes that the United States can never be great unless it solves the JFK assassination. Morley's List of 13 Documents Will Tell Us Little An analysis of the 13 documents Morley wants to see. The Schlesinger Memo, Again! Morley claims I am a CIA apologist and then misquotes me. For The Sake of Our Sanity - Release the Joannides File It would be worthwhile for the CIA to release the Joannides file just to stop the incessant posts from Jefferson Morley. Did Oswald Stay at a Luxury Hotel in Helsinki? Actually, Oswald stayed at two budget-priced hotels in Helsinki. Morley Keeps Asking the Same Questions He keeps asking the same questions, and we keep posting the same answers. The JFK Assassination and Truth Conspiracy authors are playing fast and loose with the facts. Was Herminio Diaz a Grassy Knoll Assassin? There is no evidence that Diaz was involved in the JFK assassination. Morley Misleads on Arthur Schlesinger's Memo on the CIA There are clues as to what is in a redacted section of Schlesinger's memo. Jefferson Morley's Podcast on New Orleans Lays an Egg Chad Nagle and Dan Storper's article on New Orleans gets everything wrong. Chad Nagle and Dan Storper Lay an Egg Believing Michael Kurtz is problematic. Is Jefferson Morley Seeing Double? Morley wrote that there are two redacted memos on CIA reorganization, but there is only one. He wrote about Goodwin's copy as if it was a different memo, rather than a copy of the Schlesinger memo. Jefferson Morley is wrong about "Who Shot John?" The phrase 'who shot John' does not refer to the JFK assassination. Jefferson Morley is Wrong on William Harvey, Again! Only one word is redacted in Harvey's deposition. Jefferson Morley is Wrong about Operation Northwoods, Again! There are no redactions in the Operation Northwoods document. Did Dorothy Kilgallen Have any Special Knowledge about the JFK Assassination? Kilgallen had nothing to tell. Morley's Interview of Marina Oswald Porter Fizzles! An underwhelming interview of Marina Oswald. Jefferson Morley: Able to Leap Intellectual Chasms in a Single Bound Morley often repeats stories and changes their meanings. There was NO Assassination Plot in Chicago Chad Nagle claims there was an assassination plot against JFK in Chicago in November 1963. One problem: There is no evidence of such a plot. Fred Litwin, CIA Apologist? A response to Morley's Substack post alleging that I am a CIA apologist. A Reply to Jefferson Morley on Bill Harvey   A rebuttal to Morley's response to my post Was Bill Harvey in Dallas in November of 1963? Was Bill Harvey in Dallas in November of 1963?   There is no credible evidence Harvey was in Dallas in November of 1963. Does it Matter Where Allen Dulles was on November 22, 1963?   Morley repeats the claim that Dulles was at a CIA training center during the weekend of the JFK assassination. He wasn't. Jefferson Morley's Claims about Reuben Efron   Morley's claims about Efron are all wrong. A Reply to Jefferson Morley regarding Operation Northwoods   Morley responded to my article "The Truth about Operation Northwoods." Here is my reply. W. Tracy Parnell on Jefferson Morley   W. Tracy Parnell is one of the best JFK assassination researchers out there. Here is his look at Jefferson Morley with several important articles. The Truth about Operation Northwoods   Operation Northwoods can only be understood as part of the Kennedys' war against Cuba and Operation Mongoose. Jefferson Morley Responds to my Post on MK-Ultra and Jack Ruby   And a response from me. Did Dr. Louis Jolyon West Ask to Examine Jack Ruby in November 1963?   There is no evidence that Dr. West petitioned the court to examine Jack Ruby before his trial. Did the CIA use a MK-Ultra Psychiatrist to Interfere with Jack Ruby's Case?   There is absolutely no evidence that Dr. Louis Jolyon West interfered with Jack Ruby's case. "JFK: Destiny Betrayed" Misleads Viewers on Oswald's "Hands Off Cuba!" Handbills, Part Four   Jefferson Morley used a fake Oswald handbill in his press conference for the Mary Ferrell Foundation. Redactions, Redactions, Redactions...   An examination of redactions in the JFK collection of documents. Jefferson Morley Doesn't Understand Jim Garrison's Homophobic Prosecution of Clay Shaw Morley doesn't understand Alecia Long's arguments about homophobia and Jim Garrison. Jefferson Morley asks why "what the CIA knew about Herminio Diaz is still off limits." Morley misses that a lot of redactions are actually available. Belief in a JFK Conspiracy Drops! Jefferson Morley's press conference presents evidence that belief in a conspiracy has dropped.