Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: JFK Conference: Dan Hardway Detailed how CIA Obstructed HSCA Investigation [View all]Octafish
(55,745 posts)19. More from Dan Hardway's presentation...
Picking up from where left off in OP:
...Interestingly enough, in preparing for this presentation I've got to tell you about this one I was looking I spent a lot of time getting ready for this by looking to see if such a file ever existed. I never found it, but I did find this other file that was written in March 29, 1967, which was right around the same time that Roselli was being debriefed a few weeks after the article first appeared. It's a memo a one-page memo about the Johnny Matter or the John Case. It's from Howard Osborn the Director of Security, which is where I got into this in the first place, which was Bill Harvey's security files. It's a memorandum for the record. It's a CYA memo.
This one of the documents that amazes me that it ever saw the light of day. And in this memo, Mr. Osborne notes that he was approached by the (CIA) Inspector General, who was trying to locate William Harvey. Mr. Osborne then asked the IG why he needed to locate him? The IG told him that the (CIA) director, Richard Helms had quote had instructed him to investigate any and all aspects of the Johnny Case. The director of security, referring to the person whom he said knew the most about it, and promised that he -- the DOS -- would give him quote all documentation held by me. But the memo doesn't end there. The IG left and the DOS reports that he immediately went to see Richard Helms. He told Helms about the IG visit. He notes that he quote, and I'm going to quote the memo here, he told him that I assumed I had his approval to take this action, since I considered myself currently under his admonition to bury this material. He said that he was glad that I had checked with him and that he fully approved my action.
It seems that the White House, Congress and Drew Pearson are digging into the allegation that the agency played a role in an attempt to assassinate Castro. And he wants to be in a position to state that his inspector general has investigated the matter thoroughly. What wonderfully masterful, bureaucratic, ambiguous phrasing.
What was it that the director of central intelligence, Richard Helms, fully approved? Was it the DOS agreement to turn over materials to the IG, which had not happened yet, or the DOS's burying of the materials that he had previously been admonished to do by Helms? And, along the same lines, we have to note that the director of security did note in the report that Helms had wanted the matter investigated fully. What he wanted, was quote to be in a position to say that his inspector general had investigated the matter thoroughly.
I also found it interesting that according to this memo that one of the members of the IG team that was doing this investigation was none other than the HSCA minder, Scott Breckenridge, who constantly assured us that the CIA had thoroughly searched their records and responded to our requests and cooperated with our investigation. And they had done so thoroughly.
I confronted David Phillips in an interview on Aug. 24, 1978, not long after Barney Hidalgo and John McCone statement of having remembered Bishop.
(David Atlee Phillips) was extremely agitated about a line of questioning that I did on the source of all the disinformation on the sources of all the disinformation after the assassination. And the fact that I could track them all back to being either current or past agents that he had used, assets that he had used. But, he was forced to admit that many of his sources were not only former assets, but that he had managed in prior years, in the early 60s, but they were also assets that he was personally managing in the fall of 1963.
He was asked, and could not explain, why that information came from anti-Castro Cuban groups and individuals pointing to the Cuban connections all seemed to come from his assets that he had handled personally. He acknowledged that was the case. He also acknowledged that back-channel communication methods existed between Mexico City headquarters and Miami, but our information and access was cut off and we were running out time and we were unable to pursue that inquiry further.
(David Atlee Phillips) seemed to be shaking at one point he had three cigarettes lit simultaneously during that part of the investigation, conducted by me, Charles Burke, and Gaeton Fonzi. I did all the questioning. The other two helped us to take notes. He had three cigarettes lit at one point
And the one question that I would love to have an answer to that Ive never been able to settle in my mind was whether David Phillips was actually that nervous, or rather that was all staged for our benefit. With David Phillips, you'll never know because he was that good he was that good of an actor...
PS: Thank you, johnnyreb. Yours is quite a number, truth.
...Interestingly enough, in preparing for this presentation I've got to tell you about this one I was looking I spent a lot of time getting ready for this by looking to see if such a file ever existed. I never found it, but I did find this other file that was written in March 29, 1967, which was right around the same time that Roselli was being debriefed a few weeks after the article first appeared. It's a memo a one-page memo about the Johnny Matter or the John Case. It's from Howard Osborn the Director of Security, which is where I got into this in the first place, which was Bill Harvey's security files. It's a memorandum for the record. It's a CYA memo.
This one of the documents that amazes me that it ever saw the light of day. And in this memo, Mr. Osborne notes that he was approached by the (CIA) Inspector General, who was trying to locate William Harvey. Mr. Osborne then asked the IG why he needed to locate him? The IG told him that the (CIA) director, Richard Helms had quote had instructed him to investigate any and all aspects of the Johnny Case. The director of security, referring to the person whom he said knew the most about it, and promised that he -- the DOS -- would give him quote all documentation held by me. But the memo doesn't end there. The IG left and the DOS reports that he immediately went to see Richard Helms. He told Helms about the IG visit. He notes that he quote, and I'm going to quote the memo here, he told him that I assumed I had his approval to take this action, since I considered myself currently under his admonition to bury this material. He said that he was glad that I had checked with him and that he fully approved my action.
It seems that the White House, Congress and Drew Pearson are digging into the allegation that the agency played a role in an attempt to assassinate Castro. And he wants to be in a position to state that his inspector general has investigated the matter thoroughly. What wonderfully masterful, bureaucratic, ambiguous phrasing.
What was it that the director of central intelligence, Richard Helms, fully approved? Was it the DOS agreement to turn over materials to the IG, which had not happened yet, or the DOS's burying of the materials that he had previously been admonished to do by Helms? And, along the same lines, we have to note that the director of security did note in the report that Helms had wanted the matter investigated fully. What he wanted, was quote to be in a position to say that his inspector general had investigated the matter thoroughly.
I also found it interesting that according to this memo that one of the members of the IG team that was doing this investigation was none other than the HSCA minder, Scott Breckenridge, who constantly assured us that the CIA had thoroughly searched their records and responded to our requests and cooperated with our investigation. And they had done so thoroughly.
I confronted David Phillips in an interview on Aug. 24, 1978, not long after Barney Hidalgo and John McCone statement of having remembered Bishop.
(David Atlee Phillips) was extremely agitated about a line of questioning that I did on the source of all the disinformation on the sources of all the disinformation after the assassination. And the fact that I could track them all back to being either current or past agents that he had used, assets that he had used. But, he was forced to admit that many of his sources were not only former assets, but that he had managed in prior years, in the early 60s, but they were also assets that he was personally managing in the fall of 1963.
He was asked, and could not explain, why that information came from anti-Castro Cuban groups and individuals pointing to the Cuban connections all seemed to come from his assets that he had handled personally. He acknowledged that was the case. He also acknowledged that back-channel communication methods existed between Mexico City headquarters and Miami, but our information and access was cut off and we were running out time and we were unable to pursue that inquiry further.
(David Atlee Phillips) seemed to be shaking at one point he had three cigarettes lit simultaneously during that part of the investigation, conducted by me, Charles Burke, and Gaeton Fonzi. I did all the questioning. The other two helped us to take notes. He had three cigarettes lit at one point
And the one question that I would love to have an answer to that Ive never been able to settle in my mind was whether David Phillips was actually that nervous, or rather that was all staged for our benefit. With David Phillips, you'll never know because he was that good he was that good of an actor...
PS: Thank you, johnnyreb. Yours is quite a number, truth.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
56 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
JFK Conference: Dan Hardway Detailed how CIA Obstructed HSCA Investigation [View all]
Octafish
Dec 2013
OP
It's hard to argue against facts, so have a little sympathy for those who try so hard to distract
sabrina 1
Dec 2013
#21
I suppose, but it's a bit futile to try to hide facts because they have a way of surfacing even if
sabrina 1
Dec 2013
#24
People at Duquesne asked Jefferson Morley and David Talbot about Los Angeles...
Octafish
Dec 2013
#8
check this out....review of Morley's book about Joannides. this thread reminded me of Winston Scott
Gabi Hayes
Dec 2013
#12
Thank you for the heads-up, Gabi Hayes! CTKA does not hold back, even for one of its own...
Octafish
Dec 2013
#28
Mary Meyer was the person to whom I referred, re: Angleton swooping in on the scene after her
Gabi Hayes
Dec 2013
#29
hey! my painting! just goes to show what a bit of moldy rye will do to your perspective. wonder
Gabi Hayes
Dec 2013
#36
I remember being flabbergasted by deMohrenschildt's demise, as well as the rest of his story,
Gabi Hayes
Dec 2013
#30
Thank you, Octafish. I appreciate all the information you bring from the Duquesne Conference.
Zen Democrat
Dec 2013
#26
Presenting sponsor was the Heinz History Center, a Smithsonian affiliated institution...
Octafish
Dec 2013
#27
Douglas Horne of the ARRB sees JFK at war with the national security establishment...
Octafish
Dec 2013
#39
It's no wonder the CIA/former OSS team would obsfucate, obstruct and obliterate the HSCA
bobthedrummer
Dec 2013
#40
Thank you for the "what that means" hyperlink. The National Security Archive is a trusted site for
bobthedrummer
Dec 2013
#43
6-member Duquesne Media Panel ALL said the topic is taboo in national news media.
Octafish
Dec 2013
#48