Octafish
Octafish's Journal
Profile Information
Gender: Male
Member since: 2003 before July 6th
Number of posts: 55,745
Member since: 2003 before July 6th
Number of posts: 55,745
Journal Archives
Drs. Finck, Humes & Shaw testified more fragments found in Connally’s wrist than missing from CE 399
Posted by Octafish | Mon Jan 21, 2013, 07:57 PM (1 replies)
Then-CIA man James Wilcott testified to Congress that Oswald was a CIA employee.
I'm not really surprised so few Americans know his story:
JAMES WILCOTT'S TESTIMONY James B. Wilcott, a former CIA accountant, swore in a secret session of the House Select Committee on Assassinations that he was told by other CIA employees that Lee Harvey Oswald was paid by the CIA, and that money he himself had disbursed was for "Oswald or the Oswald project." The HSCA report indicated that other CIA employees discounted Wilcott's testimony, but none of their statements were included in the report. The document excerpted below was acquired by John Armstrong after his JFK Lancer NID97 presentation. Selected pages from the National Archives are presented graphically; the remainder, to preserve bandwidth, are excerpted typographically. A link to the complete text of Wilcott's testimony is provided near the bottom of this page. EXECUTIVE SESSION ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY WEDNESDAY, MARCH 22, 1978 House of Representatives, John F. Kennedy Subcommittee of the Select Committee on Assassinations, Washington, D.C. <. . . . > TESTIMONY OF JAMES B. WILCOTT, A FORMER EMPLOYEE OF THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY: Mr. Goldsmith. For the record, would you please state your name and address and occupation? Mr. Wilcott. My name is James B. Wilcott. My address is 2761 Atlantic Street, in Concord, and my occupation is electronic technician. < . . . . > Mr. Goldsmith. And, Mr. Wilcott, is it true that you are a former employee with the CIA and that you are here today testifying voluntarily without a subpoena? Mr. Wilcott. Yes. Mr. Goldsmith. During what years did you work for the CIA? Mr. Wilcott. I worked from the years, May, of 1957 to, April, of 1966. Mr. Goldsmith. And in what general capacity did you work with the CIA? Mr. Wilcott. All in the finance--in accounting all of the time. <. . . .> Mr. Goldsmith. Drawing your attention to the period immediately after the assassination of President Kennedy, at that time, did you come across any information concerning Lee Harvey Oswald's relationship with the CIA? Mr. Wilcott. Yes, I did. Mr. Goldsmith. And will you tell the Committee what that relationship was? Mr. Wilcott. Well, it was my understanding that Lee Harvey Oswald was an employee of the agency and was an agent of the agency. Mr. Goldsmith. What do you mean by the term "agent?" Mr. Wilcott. That he was a regular employee, receiving a full-time salary for agent work for doing CIA operational work. Mr. Goldsmith. How did this information concerning Oswald first come to your attention? Mr. Wilcott. The first time I heard about Oswald being connected in any way with CIA was the day after the Kennedy assassination. Mr. Goldsmith. And how did that come to your attention? Mr. Wilcott. Well, I was on day duty for the station. It was a guard-type function at the station, which I worked for overtime. There was a lot of excitement going on at the station after the Kennedy assassination. Towards the end of my tour of duty, I heard certain things about Oswald somehow being connected with the agency, and I didn't really believe this when I heard it, and I thought it was absurd. Then, as time went on, I began to hear more things in that line. Mr. Goldsmith. I think we had better go over that one more time. When, exactly, was the very first time that you heard or came across information that Oswald was an agent? Mr. Wilcott. I heard references to it the day after the assassination. Mr. Goldsmith. And who made these references to Oswald being an agent of the CIA? Mr. Wilcott. I can't remember the exact persons. There was talk about it going on at the station, and several months following at the station. Mr. Goldsmith. How many people made this reference to Oswald being an agent of the CIA? Mr. Wilcott. At least--there was at least six or seven people, specifically, who said that they either knew or believed Oswald to be an agent of the CIA. Mr. Goldsmith. Was Jerry Fox one of the people that made this allegation? Mr. Wilcott. To the best of my recollection, yes. Mr. Goldsmith. And who is Jerry Fox? Mr. Wilcott. Jerry Fox was a Case Officer for his branch, the Soviet Russia Branch, Station, who purchased information from the Soviets. Mr. Goldsmith. Mr. Wilcott, did I ask you to prepare a list of CIA Case Officers working at the Station in 1963? Mr. Wilcott. Yes, you did. <. . . .> Mr. Goldsmith. At the time that this allegation first came to your attention, did you discuss it with anyone? Mr. Wilcott. Oh, yes. I discussed it with my friends and the people that I was associating with socially. Mr. Goldsmith. Who were your friends that you discussed this with? Mr. Wilcott. George Breen, Ed Luck, and . Mr. Goldsmith. Who was George Breen? Mr. Wilcott. George Breen was a person in Registry, who was my closest friend while I was in . Mr. Goldsmith. Was he a CIA employee? Mr. Wilcott. Yes, he was. Mr. Goldsmith. And would he corroborate your observation that Oswald was an agent? Mr. Wilcott. I don't know. Mr. Goldsmith. At the time that this allegation first came to your attention, did you learn the name of Oswald's Case Officer at the CIA? Mr. Wilcott. No. Mr. Goldsmith. Were there any other times during your stay with the CIA at Station that you came across information that Oswald had been a CIA agent? Mr. Wilcott. Yes. Mr. Goldsmith. When was that? Mr. Wilcott. The specific incident was soon after the Kennedy assassination, where an agent, a Case Officer--I am sure it was a Case Officer--came up to my window to draw money, and he specifically said in the conversation that ensued, he specifically said, "Well, Jim, the money that I drew the last couple of weeks ago or so was money" either for the Oswald project or for Oswald. Mr. Goldsmith. Do you remember the name of this Case Officer? Mr. Wilcott. No, I don't. Mr Goldsmith. Do you remember when specifically this conversation took place? Mr. Wilcott. Not specifically, only generally. Mr. Goldsmith. How many months after the assassination was this? Mr. Wilcott. I think it must have been two or three omths after the assassination. Mr. Goldsmith. And do you remember were this conversation took place? Mr. Wilcott. It was right at my window, my disbursing cage window. Mr. Goldsmith. Did you discuss this information with anyone? Mr. Wilcott. Oh, yes. Mr. Goldsmith. With whom? Mr. Wilcott. Certainly with George Breen, the circle of social friends that we had. Mr. Goldsmith. How do you spell last name? Mr. Wilcott. (spelling). <. . . .> Mr. Goldsmith. Did this Case Officer tell you what Oswald's cryptonym was? Mr. Wilcott. Yes, he mentioned the cryptonym specifically under which the money was drawn. Mr. Goldsmith. And what did he tell you the cryptonym was? Mr. Wilcott. I cannot remember. Mr. Goldsmith. What was your response to this revelation as to what Oswald's cryptonym was? Did you write it down or do anything? Mr. Wilcott. No; I think that I looked through my advance book--and I had a book where the advances on project were run, and I leafed through them, and I must have at least leafed through them to see if what he said was true. CONTINUED (Waybac cache, probably will be scrubbed by some turds' chums) ... http://web.archive.org/web/20030212112648/http://home.wi.rr.com/harveyandlee/Wilcott/Wilcott.htm PS: Thank you, DFW. There is no way the assassination happened the way the Warren Commission contends. The great DUer MinM wrote about a Craig Roberts, a military trained sniper who said he couldn't replicate the feat, even with a top automatic rifle. |
Posted by Octafish | Mon Jan 21, 2013, 05:42 PM (0 replies)
They continue to cover-up: The Railroading of LCDR Terri Pike
Here's an important official United States Navy investigator who's officially forgotten:
The Railroading of LCDR Terri Pike By William Kelly EXCERPT... The ARRB meeting report said that, “Pike explained that most of the relevant records they found were discovered ‘by accident;’ that is to say, they were misfiled in boxes outside where they should have been. This is important for two reasons. 1) If they had been filed where they ‘should’ have been, they would have been routinely destroyed by this point, and 2) as they continue their review of the approximately 900 cu feet of records they have self-identified, they expect they might well continue to discover records of interest to us...LCDR Pike further stated that ONI remained responsible for searching an additional 950 cubic feet of records located in Suitland, Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Seattle and San Francisco, and stated those searches were scheduled for completion during fiscal year 97..." LCDR Pike Faxed the ARRB; indicating that she had finished a declassification review of the.8 cubic feet of defector records, and had prepared a page-by-page index of same. She indicated that transmittal of these documents would occur in the near future. That appears to be the beginning of the end of such cooperation and the end of LCDR Terri Pike, as there are two different copies of this meeting report in two different typefaces, one with the first sentence of the fourth paragraph highlighted by two circles on one and completely redacted in the other. The line redacted reads: “There are a total of 18 folders of material which ONI has determined should go into the JFK collection and have earmarked for delivery to us...” Another redacted paragraph follows: “Pike said that ONI is going through review of all records covered by the EO; in most cases, they have been willing to release in full about 96% of the documents. She said that for the other 4% they expected that the Board has the power to overrule them anyway, but they had to at least make the request. .” The redacted paragraph reads: “Pike concluded her report by suggesting that we might find more of the records we suggested we wanted in BG38 the records of the CNO. She said that currently ONI is currently organizing a review team...to look through this group...however, ARRB staff may also wish to personally review these records for relevant material. She suggested that changes in alert status, etc. might also be found in CNO records...” CONTINUED... http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2011/10/railroading-of-lcdr-terri-pike-over.html "Treason doth never prosper: what ’s the reason? Why, if it prosper, none dare call it treason." -- Sir John Harrington (1561–1612) |
Posted by Octafish | Mon Jan 21, 2013, 01:02 PM (1 replies)
NAZI Echo in Dealey Plaza
For some reason, President Kennedy's motorcade turned from Main Street on to Elm Street, a turn of around 120-degrees that made the President's car slow down and giving his assassins an ideal position for ambush. It also changed the course of the motorcade to pass directly in front of Lee Harvey Oswald's last place of employment, the Texas School Book Depository.
![]() This has a major parallel in history that seldom, if ever, gets mentioned: the assassination by ambush in 1942 of the Nazi leader Reinhard Heydrich, the Butcher of Prague and a principal architect of The Holocaust. A 120-degree turn in the road slowed down Heydrich's car, giving his assassins an ideal position for ambush. ![]() Oliver Stone raised this aspect in his film, "JFK" when Jim Garrison, portrayed by Kevin Kostner, says, "This was a military-style ambush from start to finish... a coup d'etat with Lyndon Johnson waiting in the wings." It takes a platoon leader to see these things. A hairpin turn is an ideal spot for an ambush. The tactic works for removing a tyrant or a president. Another parallel: Both men rode in open cars in hostile country. ![]() Almost forgot to mention: Thanks to DU, this remarkable parallel between the assassination of President Kennedy and that of the NAZI Heydrich has almost been lost to history. I learned about this in researching a reply to a post above. |
Posted by Octafish | Mon Jan 21, 2013, 11:38 AM (2 replies)
The weight of fragments removed from Gov. Connally are not known, Spider Jerusalem.
The Connally Wounding
EXCERPT... Among the many problems with the single bullet theory and Connally's wounds in particular, there is also the issue of whether the metal fragments taken from Connally's wrist and left in his leg could possibly have come from the nearly intact bullet CE 399. JFK autopsy surgeon Commander Humes told the Commission "I can't conceive of where they came from this missile." There is also some doubt about whether the fragments now in evidence (CE 842) comprise all that was removed from Governor Connally's wrist. |
Posted by Octafish | Sun Jan 20, 2013, 01:13 AM (1 replies)
Readers of Philip Melanson and John Newman would disagree.
Their work brings to light what people like Allen Dulles and George Joannides worked to hide.
Spy Saga: Lee Harvey Oswald and U.S. Intelligence http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/027593571X and Oswald and the CIA http://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0786701315 These are very important works with much important information about Oswald that the members of the Warren Commision never heard. What's interesting here is how, for some reason, you never refer to Melanson and Newman when bringing up Oswald, stopbush. If you wanted readers to get a more complete picture of what is known, you would. |
Posted by Octafish | Sat Jan 19, 2013, 11:32 PM (0 replies)
CIA assigned 1963 Oswald minder George Joannides the 1977 job of liaison with HSCA.
Those who think Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone have their reasons. Personally, I believe they are on the wrong side of both the facts and history.
Key to my belief are works by several authorities, including John M. Newman and Jefferson Morley. Their work continued the investigation begun by Philip Melanson and Jim Garrison, who may not have been aware of Joannides' involvement, but recognized the CIA-Oswald connections in both Mexico City and New Orleans. They report Oswald appears to have been impersonated in Mexico City and CIA failed to disclose this information to Warren Commission or the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA). The person charged with providing that information to the HSCA in 1977 was George Joannides, who also happened to have known Oswald's most important contacts, the anti-Castro Cuban expatriates Joannides oversaw in New Orleans as their CIA paymaster in 1963. Small world! One thing about this that’s most un-democratic is how CIA won’t divulge those records, even after ordered to do so by a Federal Judge John Tunheim, who led the Assassination Records Review Board, in the 1990s. So, on behalf of history, the Truth and the People, Newman and Morley have had to sue CIA. And in the interest of national security, the case has been appealed until it has effectively been quashed -- over 300 pages of Joannides' work stuff from ca. 1963. Then there are the other files... |
Posted by Octafish | Fri Jan 18, 2013, 05:13 PM (0 replies)
LBJ made clear where he stood when it came to the BFEE
![]() From 1973, talking about 1968: So Johnson suffered the election in silence, swallowing his nitroglycerin tablets to thwart continual chest pains, endorsing McGovern through a hill country weekly newspaper, meeting cordially with the candidate at the ranch. The newspapers showed a startling picture of Johnson, his hair almost shoulder-length. Former aide Bob Hardesty takes credit for this development. "We were working together one day," Hardesty recalls, "and he said, in passing, 'Robert, you need a haircut.' I told him, 'Mr. President, I'm letting my hair grow so no one will be able to mistake me for those SOB's in the White House.' He looked startled, so I explained, 'You know, that bunch around Nixon—Haldeman, Ehrlichman—they all have very short hair.' He nodded. The next time I saw him his hair was growing over his collar." SOURCE: "The Last Days of the President: LBJ in retirement" by Leo Janos, The Atlantic, July 1973 http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/73jul/janos.htm Stand up. Let your freak flag fly. |
Posted by Octafish | Fri Jan 18, 2013, 03:52 PM (12 replies)
''Arrogant'' CIA Disobeys Orders from Kennedy
Thank you for the heads-up on Ray McGovern's essay, proverbialwisdom. The great DUer bobthedrummer met Mr. McGovern and asked him about these things.
Here's more on the subject from DU2: "Arrogant" CIA Disobeys Orders in Viet Nam ![]() A bit of history from the last weeks of President Kennedy's life, courtesy of The Education Forum by DUer John Simkin : 'SPOOKS' MAKE LIFE MISERABLE FOR AMBASSADOR LODGE 'Arrogant' CIA Disobeys Orders in Viet Nam Richard Starnes The Washington Daily News, Wednesday, October 2, 1963, p.3 SAIGON, Oct.2 - The story of the Central Intelligence Agency's role in South Viet Nam is a dismal chronicle of bureaucratic arrogance, obstinate disregard of orders, and unrestrained thirst for power. Twice the CIA flatly refused to carry out instructions from Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge, according to a high United States source here. In one of these instances the CIA frustrated a plan of action Mr. Lodge brought with him from Washington because the agency disagreed with it. This led to a dramatic confrontation between Mr. Lodge and John Richardson, chief of the huge CIA apparatus here. Mr. Lodge failed to move Mr. Richardson, and the dispute was bucked back to Washington. Secretary of State Dean Rusk and CIA Chief John A. McCone were unable to resolve the conflict, and the matter is now reported to be awaiting settlement by President Kennedy. It is one of the developments expected to be covered in Defense Secretary Robert McNamara's report to Mr. Kennedy. Others Critical, Too Other American agencies here are incredibly bitter about the CIA. "If the United States ever experiences a 'Seven Days in May' it will come from the CIA, and not from the Pentagon," one U.S. official commented caustically. ("Seven Days in May" is a fictional account of an attempted military coup to take over the U.S. Government.) CIA "spooks" (a universal term for secret agents here) have penetrated every branch of the American community in Saigon, until non-spook Americans here almost seem to be suffering a CIA psychosis. An American field officer with a distinguished combat career speaks angrily about "that man at headquarters in Saigon wearing a colonel's uniform." He means the man is a CIA agent, and he can't understand what he is doing at U.S. military headquarters here, unless it is spying on other Americans. Another American officer, talking about the CIA, acidly commented: "You'd think they'd have learned something from Cuba but apparently they didn't." Few Know CIA Strength Few people other than Mr. Richardson and his close aides know the actual CIA strength here, but a widely used figure is 600. Many are clandestine agents known only to a few of their fellow spooks. Even Mr. Richardson is a man about whom it is difficult to learn much in Saigon. He is said to be a former OSS officer, and to have served with distinction in the CIA in the Philippines. A surprising number of the spooks are known to be involved in their ghostly trade and some make no secret of it. "There are a number of spooks in the U.S. Information Service, in the U.S. Operations mission, in every aspect of American official and commercial life here, " one official - presumably a non-spook - said. "They represent a tremendous power and total unaccountability to anyone," he added. Coupled with the ubiquitous secret police of Ngo Dinh Nhu, a surfeit of spooks has given Saigon an oppressive police state atmosphere. The Nhu-Richardson relationship is a subject of lively speculation. The CIA continues to pay the special forces which conducted brutal raids on Buddhist temples last Aug. 21, altho in fairness it should be pointed out that the CIA is paying these goons for the war against communist guerillas, not Buddhist bonzes (priests). Hand Over Millions Nevertheless, on the first of every month, the CIA dutifully hands over a quarter million American dollars to pay these special forces. Whatever else it buys, it doesn't buy any solid information on what the special forces are up to. The Aug. 21 raids caught top U.S. officials here and in Washington flat-footed. Nhu ordered the special forces to crush the Buddhist priests, but the CIA wasn't let in on the secret. (Some CIA button men now say they warned their superiors what was coming up, but in any event the warning of harsh repression was never passed to top officials here or in Washington.) Consequently, Washington reacted unsurely to the crisis. Top officials here and at home were outraged at the news the CIA was paying the temple raiders, but the CIA continued the payments. It may not be a direct subsidy for a religious war against the country's Buddhist majority, but it comes close to that. And for every State Department aide here who will tell you, "Dammit, the CIA is supposed to gather information, not make policy, but policy-making is what they're doing here," there are military officers who scream over the way the spooks dabble in military operations. A Typical Example For example, highly trained trail watchers are an important part of the effort to end Viet Cong infiltration from across the Laos and Cambodia borders. But if the trailer watchers spot incoming Viet Congs, they report it to the CIA in Saigon, and in the fullness of time, the spooks may tell the military. One very high American official here, a man who has spent much of his life in the service of democracy, likened the CIA's growth to a malignancy, and added he was not sure even the White House could control it any longer. Unquestionably Mr. McNamara and Gen. Maxwell Taylor both got an earful from people who are beginning to fear the CIA is becoming a Third Force co-equal with President Diem's regime and the U.S. Government - and answerable to neither. There is naturally the highest interest here as to whether Mr. McNamara will persuade Mr. Kennedy something ought to be done about it. SOURCE: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=7... ADDENDUM from Education Forum writer: “The most important consequence of the Cold War remains the least discussed. How and why American democracy died lies beyond the scope of this introductory essay. It is enough to note that the CIA revolt against the presidency of John Fitzgerald Kennedy – the single event which did more than any other to hasten its end – was, quite contrary to over forty years of censorship and deceit, both publicly anticipated and publicly opposed. No American journalist worked more bravely to thwart the anticipated revolt than Scripps-Howard’s Richard Starnes. His ‘reward’ was effectively to become a non-person, not just in the work of mainstream fellow-journalists and historians, but also that of nominally oppositional Kennedy assassination writers. It could have been worse: John J. McCone, Director of Central Intelligence, sought his instant dismissal; while others within the agency doubtless had more drastic punishment in mind, almost certainly of the kind meted out to CBS’ George Polk fifteen years earlier. This time, shrewder agency minds prevailed. Senator Dodd was given a speech to read by the CIA denouncing Starnes in everything but name. William F. Buckley, Jr., suddenly occupied an adjacent column. In short, Starnes was allowed to live, even as his Scripps-Howard career was put under overt and intense CIA scrutiny - and quietly, systematically, withered on the Mockingbird vine.” From “Light on a Dry Shadow,” the preface to ‘Arrogant’ CIA: The Selected Scripps-Howard Journalism of Richard T. Starnes, 1960-1965 (provisionally scheduled for self-publication in November 2006). As far as I am aware, the remarkable example (above) of what Claud Cockburn called “preventative journalism” has never appeared in its entirety anywhere on the internet. Instead, readers have had to make do with the next-day riposte of the NYT’s Arthur Krock. The latter, it should be noted, was a veteran CIA-mouthpiece and messenger boy. Dick Starnes was 85 on July 4, 2006. He remains, in bucolic retirement, a wonderfully fluent and witty writer; and as good a friend as any Englishman could wish for. I dedicate the despatch’s web debut to Judy Mann, in affectionate remembrance. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=7534 -------------------- The Education Forum is an outstanding resource for those interested in President Kennedy, his administration, and his assassination. From what we've learned in the last few years is that Lodge also was disregarding orders -- from President Kennedy. More here: Vietnam and Iraq Wars Started by Same People http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3193142 Know your BFEE: Hitler’s Bankers Shaped Vietnam War http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3832033&mesg_id=3832033&page= JFK Would NEVER Have Fallen for Phony INTEL! http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5501005&mesg_id=5501005 |
Posted by Octafish | Fri Jan 18, 2013, 01:32 PM (1 replies)
JFK never ordered the bubble top off.
From footage found in a dumpster outside ABC Dallas in the late 90's:
![]() Video: http://www.metacafe.com/watch/171830/secret_service_jfk / Afterward, in William Manchester's book, Death of a President, we see the "official story" of what happened: "Kennedy grew weary of seeing bodyguards roosting behind him every time he turned around, and in Tampa on November 18 (1963), just four days before his death, he dryly asked Agent Floyd Boring to 'keep those Ivy League charlatans off the back of the car.' Boring wasn't offended. There had been no animosity in the remark." (1988 Harper & Row/Perennial Library edition, pp. 37-38) The thing is PRESIDENT KENNEDY NEVER SAID THAT. Not until 35 years later do we learn the truth, though, when the great investigator Vincent Palamara asked the Secret Service agents who were there what happened in 1963: Agents Go On Record |
Posted by Octafish | Thu Jan 17, 2013, 10:24 PM (4 replies)