David Atlee Phillips: Family Secrets
Gary Buell
novelist James Atlee Phillips, and nephew of the late spy David Atlee
Phillips. This is what Shawn Phillips had to say:
The "Confession", you refer to was not in so many words as such. I cannot
remember the time frames involved, but this was what was told to me by my
father, James Atlee Phillips, who is deceased.
He said that David had called him with reference to his (Davids),
invitation to a dinner, by a man who was purportedly writing a book on the
CIA. At this dinner, was also present a man who was identified only as the
"Driver". David told Jim that he knew the man was there to identify him as
Raul Salcedo, whose name you should be familiar with, if your research is
accurate in this matter. David then told Jim that he had written a letter
to the various media, as a "Preemptive Strike" , against any and all
allegations about his involvement in the JFK assassination. Jim knew that
David was the head of the "Retired Intelligence Officers of the CIA", or
some such organization, and that he was extremely critical of JFK, and his
policies. Jim knew at that point, that David was in some way, seriously
involved in this matter and he and David argued rather vehemently,
resulting in a silent hiatus between them that lasted almost six years
according to Jim. Finally, as David was dying of irreversible lung cancer,
he called Jim and there was apparently no reconciliation between them, as
Jim asked David pointedly, "Were you in Dallas on that day"? David said,
"Yes", and Jim hung the phone up.
End quote. I had contacted Shawn, a musician, through his manager who had
relayed my email. This is the first that I have ever heard about the
possibility that David Phillips may have used the alias Raul Salcedo. He
is widely believed, of course, to have used the alias Maurice Bishop but
there have been reports that he had used others. According to the book
"The Bay of Pigs and the CIA" by Juan Carlos Rodriguez he also used the
name "Harold Bishop". I quote:
"High-ranking officials in the State Department and in the Attorney
General's Office, plus the CIA officer in charge of the program, who said
his name was Harold Bishop, took part in those initial meetings. In fact
"Bishop" was David Atlee Phillips. Naturally he had to be there. He had
created Radio Swan and Operation Peter Pan."
Cuban intelligence has reported that Phillips also used the alias Harold
Benson. From Document 027 on the history-matters website we learn that
Major Nicolas Sirgado, a Cuban agent, had met a man in London in the last
quarter of 1967 who identified himself as a CIA case officer by the name
of Harold Benson. From photographs he later identified Benson as Phillips.
What else did Benson/Phillips have to say?
" ... he told me to the effect that on the occasion of a visit he made to
Arlington Cemetary to visit President Kennedy's tomb, he had seized the
opportunity to urinate on Kennedy's grave..."
Robert Olin
I forget the author - Gaton Fonzi ??? he was an investigator for the House
investigation. The "driver" was a Cuban who had been handled by Bishop as
he headed an anti Casto group in Flordia and had seen Phillips (Bishop) with
Oswald. Phillips appeared to be handling Oswald ie giving him
instructions. I believe that they had Oswald thinking he was infiltrating
right wing extremist groups, as they set him up for the fall.
Pissed on JFK's grave? If Kennedy hadn't resisted they invasion of Cuba we
might all be dead, as we now know that they had battlefield nukes already to
go. Can you imagine the consequences of an invading force of 50,000
Americans being nuked on a couple Cuban beaches?
RO
"Gary Buell" <gary...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:56f0defe.03011...@posting.google.com...
Martin Shackelford
Intelligence Officers, incidentally.
Martin
James K. Olmstead
ago, however I beleive they have moved.
jko
"Martin Shackelford" <msh...@concentric.net> wrote in message
news:3E29B965...@concentric.net...
John McAdams
>jer...@my-deja.com (GMcNally) wrote in message news:<a163e09.03011...@posting.google.com>...
>> gary...@yahoo.com (Gary Buell) wrote in message news:<56f0defe.03011...@posting.google.com>...
>> Matt,
>>
>> > Cuban intelligence has reported that Phillips also used the alias
>> > Harold Benson. From Document 027 on the history-matters website we
>> > learn that Major Nicolas Sirgado, a Cuban agent, had met a man in
>> > London in the last quarter of 1967 who identified himself as a CIA
>> > case officer by the name of Harold Benson. From photographs he later
>> > identified Benson as Phillips. What else did Benson/Phillips have to
>> > say?
>>
>> We should grant Cuban intelligence credibility? Why?
>>
>> Why would you trust them to tell you the truth?
>>
>> Jerry
>
>Sadly, Cuban intelligence seems to be more credible on this subject
>that American intelligence. Which is not to say that anything the
>Cubans say should be taken on faith. The CIA, on the other hand, has
>been shown to have lied about Oswald in Mexico City, particularly
>regarding the tapes of Oswald, or whoever.
>>
No, the CIA has not "been caught lying" about any tapes.
They said "the tapes" were destroyed. But one tape was known to exist
after the assassination.
It's really pretty silly to claim that when a bureaucracy says "all
this stuff was destroyed" that they were lying when one or another
little piece turns up.
.John
Kennedy Assassination Home Page
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm
John McAdams
>gary...@yahoo.com (Gary Buell),
>
> wrote in message news:<56f0defe.03011...@posting.google.com>...
>> One week ago I received an email from Shawn Phillips, son of the late
>> spy novelist James Atlee Phillips, and nephew of the late spy David
>> Atlee Phillips. This is what Shawn Phillips had to say:
>>
>> The "Confession", you refer to was not in so many words as such. I
>> cannot
>> remember the time frames involved, but this was what was told to me by
>> my father, James Atlee Phillips, who is deceased.
>
>How convenient.
>
>> He said that David had called him with reference to his (Davids),
>> invitation to
>> a dinner, by a man who was purportedly writing a book on the CIA. At
>> this
>> dinner, was also present a man who was identified only as the
>> "Driver".
>
>This is a garbled account of an attempt to set-up Phillips by Lowell
>Schweicker by bringing a former Alpha66 leader to an AFIO meeting.
>
>Phillips got the impression that the stranger was somebody's driver.
>
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/bishop.txt
>David
>> told Jim that he knew the man was there to identify him as Raul
>> Salcedo, whose
>> name you should be familiar with, if your research is accurate in this
>> matter.
>> David then told Jim that he had written a letter to the various media,
>> as a
>> "Preemptive Strike" , against any and all allegations about his
>> involvement in
>> the JFK assassination. Jim knew that David was the head of the
>> "Retired
>> Intelligence Officers of the CIA", or some such organization, and that
>> he was
>> extremely critical of JFK, and his policies.
>
>He was critical about JFK's leaving the Brigade stranded on the beach,
>yes.
>
>I wouldn't call him "extremely critical" of Kennedy overall. Not at
>all.
>
> Jim knew at that point,
>> that David
>> was in some way, seriously involved in this matter and he and David
>> argued
>> rather vehemently, resulting in a silent hiatus between them that
>> lasted almost
>> six years according to Jim. Finally, as David was dying of
>> irreversible lung
>> cancer, he called Jim and there was apparently no reconciliation
>> between them,
>> as Jim asked David pointedly, "Were you in Dallas on that day"? David
>> said,
>> "Yes", and Jim hung the phone up.
>
>It is proved that he was in Mexico City that day lunching with a
>journalist when news of the assassination came in.
>
I don't suppose you would supply a citation for that, would you?
I'm inclined to believe you, but it's a little frustrating that you
never provide any cites for your assertions.
Robert Olin
> Intelligence Officers, incidentally.
>
> Martin
>
One of the members was Clare Booth Loose - who's husband owned??? Time
magizine. Nice to have the Journalists under control. According to Fonzi
- she was the source of a lot of time and resource wasting disinformation
leads, fed to the House investigation.
RO
Barb Junkkarinen
wrote:
>I believe the organization was headquartered in Akron, Ohio several years
>ago, however I beleive they have moved.
Hi Jim,
It may depend on who is president as to where it is "headquartered" at
any particular time. A person who has posted here recently is not only
a longstanding member, and I believe former president (or some
officer) of it, but was also there when it was founded ..... and he
helped Phillips found CHALLENGE, INC a few years later (he and
Phillips were friends) .... and as of a few years ago, at least, was
president of that organization....at any rate, this poster is an east
coast dude and, Challenge, at least, a few years ago anyway, was
"headquartered" by official paperwork in the state where he, then
president of it, lived.
Bests,
Barb :-)
Barb Junkkarinen
More than a little. :-) I have this vague nagging recollection that
it may have been Phillips himself who stated that .... in his book THE
NIGHT WATCH.....which, of course, that hardly "proves" anything.
How about it, Jer? Where is it stated or "proved" that DAP was at
lunch with a journalist in MC at the time of the assassination?
Barb :-)
Clark Wilkins
"James K. Olmstead" <Thp...@onecom.com> wrote in message
news:3e2a...@mcadams.posc.mu.edu...
> I believe the organization was headquartered in Akron, Ohio several years
> ago, however I beleive they have moved.
>
> jko
The Beast?
James K. Olmstead
I will have to look it up to see who was president at that time. It was noted
in my files because of my interest in Ohio and the fact that my daughter at
the time worked for a Privite Investigator while she went to school at
Akron University.
will get back to you
jko
"Barb Junkkarinen" <bar...@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:3e2ac54d...@nntp.ix.netcom.com...
James K. Olmstead
script "Maggie's Farm". There are many more.
But in general terms this organization can be linked. Ray Bliss was also
from Akron as well as the center for KKK actions and other organizations
of interest. One has to look at all considerations.
jko
"Clark Wilkins" <clwi...@prodigy.net> wrote in message
news:rLsW9.1317$MO6...@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com...
Gary Buell
> Oh really? So has the CIA produced this tape? Have they even admitted
its existence? And as for there only being one tape I quote from a CIA
document #104-10400-10296 from the Russ Holmes Collection:
"The search did reveal more data from technical operations, however. This
information, which comes in great masses, had not been previously
associated with OSWALD because his name is not mentioned in it, but the
subject matter shows it is about him, and our expert monitor says the
voice is identical with the voice of 1 October known to be Oswalds."
I would say that the CIA was not only guilty of lying but of obstruction
of justice since they concealed and/or destroyed evidence after the
assassination.
GMcNally
>
> >jer...@my-deja.com (GMcNally) wrote in message news:<a163e09.03011...@posting.google.com>...
> >> gary...@yahoo.com (Gary Buell) wrote in message news:<56f0defe.03011...@posting.google.com>...
> >> Matt,
> >>
> >> > Cuban intelligence has reported that Phillips also used the alias
> >> > Harold Benson. From Document 027 on the history-matters website we
> >> > learn that Major Nicolas Sirgado, a Cuban agent, had met a man in
> >> > London in the last quarter of 1967 who identified himself as a CIA
> >> > case officer by the name of Harold Benson. From photographs he later
> >> > identified Benson as Phillips. What else did Benson/Phillips have to
> >> > say?
> >>
> >> We should grant Cuban intelligence credibility? Why?
> >>
> >> Why would you trust them to tell you the truth?
> >>
> >> Jerry
> >
> >Sadly, Cuban intelligence seems to be more credible on this subject
> >that American intelligence. Which is not to say that anything the
> >Cubans say should be taken on faith. The CIA, on the other hand, has
> >been shown to have lied about Oswald in Mexico City, particularly
> >regarding the tapes of Oswald, or whoever.
> >>
>
John,
> No, the CIA has not "been caught lying" about any tapes.
>
> They said "the tapes" were destroyed. But one tape was known to exist
> after the assassination.
Please explain to me how "one tape was *known* to exist"
post-assassination?
How do we KNOW that one did?
And where is this tape, John?
Even the HSCA "whiz kids" didn't buy into this. Read the appendix to
the Lopez Report.
CIA said this: The tapes on-hand - some 7 weeks after Oswald had been
in MC, with a normal turn-around time of 3 weeks before degauze and
reuse, were checked and none of Oswalds few and very brief calls were
found on tape.
If you really want to believe that Win Scott had such tapes and never
reported them to HQ, then, you are as attracted to nutty beliefs as
some of the CTs are.
Jerry
GMcNally
It's in one of Phillip's HSCA two depositions.
I believe it's also mentioned in Fonzi's book that Phillips was having
lunch in Mexico City with a journalistic friend, the UPI's man in
Mexico City.
Further, we have D/COS White's HSCA testimony as well as other Mexico
City officers that show that Phillips was there and very busy
examining archived photos and photo logs and involved in the search of
the tapes.
So, John, it's really very simple. Since a man cannot be in two places
at one time, Phillips cannot have been in both Dallas on 11/22/63 and
in Mexico City.
Now if you want to ignore all the documents - cables he authored -and
testimonies - just throw them out as a pack of lies - and throw out
all the testimonies - just a bunch of lies - and believe this claim
then -- Hey, John, he was in Dallas.
Maybe the Loch Ness Monster was there with the Easter Bunny, too.
Jerry
Robert Olin
Like the other CIA officers wouldn't cover up for Phillips? Who believes in
the Easter Bunny? "Spies lie" - ever hear that?
RO
"GMcNally" <jer...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:a163e09.03011...@posting.google.com...
GMcNally
It's in Nightwatch, yes. It's in his sworn testimony,yes.
It's in the sworn testimony of the other Mexico City officers who
worked with Phillips in Mexico City and specifically on the day of the
assassination and afterwards.
But, hey, Barb, if you want to believe he was in Dallas on 11/22/63
and everybody has been lying about it ever since, then, maybe he was
there having lunch with Hunt and his Cuban marksmen. Maybe he lusted
after Marita Lorenz.
Maybe ... maybe ... maybe.
That's what Castro's intelligence chief wants you to believe. Fabian
Escalante wants you to believe that Dave Phillips, aka Maurice Bishop,
hated Kennedy to such an extreme degree that he not only recruited
Cuban exiles to kill JFK, but, also went to Arlington National
Cemetary and pissed on his grave.
And he wouldn't lie about it, would he?
Jerry
>
> Barb :-)
Barb Junkkarinen
Ah yes .... seems my memory does retain some things....
> It's in his sworn testimony,yes.
Sworn testimony to whom/what/where/when?
>
>It's in the sworn testimony of the other Mexico City officers who
>worked with Phillips in Mexico City and specifically on the day of the
>assassination and afterwards.
Ditto above?
>
>But, hey, Barb, if you want to believe he was in Dallas on 11/22/63
>and everybody has been lying about it ever since, then, maybe he was
>there having lunch with Hunt and his Cuban marksmen. Maybe he lusted
>after Marita Lorenz.
>Maybe ... maybe ... maybe.
I never said I believed he was in Dallas that day ... I would rather
specifically doubt he was. All I said in response to john was that I
thought the mention of the MC lunch was in DAP's own book. Which
you've confirmed but still not given a cite for .... sworn testimony?
>
>That's what Castro's intelligence chief wants you to believe. Fabian
>Escalante wants you to believe that Dave Phillips, aka Maurice Bishop,
>hated Kennedy to such an extreme degree that he not only recruited
>Cuban exiles to kill JFK, but, also went to Arlington National
>Cemetary and pissed on his grave.
>
>And he wouldn't lie about it, would he?
Neither goes to the question about how/when/where it was proved (as
you stated) that DAP was in MC having lunch with a journalist that
day.
Any reason Escalante would lie any more than any other intel type if
it suited their needs? I doubt it.
Barb :-)
GMcNally
Gary,
What the 'expert monitor'/translator wrote on the transcripts was that the
voice making a telephone to the Soviet Embassy and identifying himself as
Oswald was identical (the voice) to a previous caller who had spoken to
the Soviets from within the Cuban embassy.
Since you have an imperfect grasp of the FACTS, your conclusions, which
are based on misinformation, have no validity.
Jerry
GMcNally
> as well as other Mexico
> City officers that show that Phillips was there and very busy.....
> Like the other CIA officers wouldn't cover up for Phillips? Who believes in
> the Easter Bunny? "Spies lie" - ever hear that?
If you want to make a case that all the officers in Mexico City lied to
cover up Dave's being up in Dallas killing Kennedy, then, please lay some
evidence on the table.
How curious that you disbelieve Dave Phillips when he writes where he was
when news of the assassination came in, yet, believe some cock-and-bull
story that Dave Phillips telling somebody who told somebody who told
somebody else that he was in Dallas on 11/22/63.
Hey John McAdams -- THIS is why I don't bother with cites.
If somebody wants to believe Dave Phillips killed JFK then they will do so
in spite of any cites, any documentary evidence, any eyewitness testimony.
It's like Wexler - when documents disprove his theories, he merely
counters with an assertion that they "deep-sixed" them.
As for what the CIA officers say, according to Stu, we should give it no
more weight than O.J. Simpson assuring us that he didn't kill his wife.
So, John, it is a no-win situation when you try to reason with the true
believers.
Jerry
Altasrecrd
If Jerry believes Phillips pissing on JFK's grave is a fabrication of Cuban
intelligence, then he's entitled to his opinion.
Maybe it's true, maybe it isn't.
If untrue, what's unfortunate is the fact that due to what is known about
Phillips, the story was floated because it appeared plausible.
That's what is really sad.
Stugrad98
>cover up Dave's being up in Dallas killing Kennedy, then, please lay some
>evidence on the table.
>
>How curious that you disbelieve Dave Phillips when he writes where he was
>when news of the assassination came in, yet, believe some cock-and-bull
>story that Dave Phillips telling somebody who told somebody who told
>somebody else that he was in Dallas on 11/22/63.
>
>Hey John McAdams -- THIS is why I don't bother with cites.
You sure don't.
>
>If somebody wants to believe Dave Phillips killed JFK then they will do so
>in spite of any cites, any documentary evidence, any eyewitness testimony.
>
>It's like Wexler - when documents disprove his theories, he merely
>counters with an assertion that they "deep-sixed" them.
You mean like Jerry McNally did when he was confronted with the missing DRE
reports. One can't say that when a series of documents which should exist,
don't exist UNLESS it helps the CIA cause. Then Jerry is more than happy to
say that there is some NEW warehouse in Virginia, that these things happen all
the time, and that no one now can possibly find them...
>From Jerry's 5/4/2001 post attempting to explain away reports that Ted Shackley
even admited should exist:
[QUOTE]
I'm sure they do exist - probably in a huge government warehouse for
document archives in northern Virginia. Finding them is a different story.
[UNQUOTE]
>
>As for what the CIA officers say, according to Stu, we should give it no
>more weight than O.J. Simpson assuring us that he didn't kill his wife.
Never actually said this, but since when does that affect Jerry? He accused me
of defending the Lafontaine-inspired Isidro Borja claim, when I was the one who
was actually countering it on the newsgroup forums.
I do know that Allen Dulles himself said that a CIA agent would lie rather than
break their secrecy oath. And that Gus Russo, a member of AFIO (a CIA
support group) had no problem arguing that the CIA officers lied, directly or
indirectly, to the U.S. Government. If an AFIO member can say so, who am I
to argue.
>
>So, John, it is a no-win situation when you try to reason with the true
>believers.
The only true believer here is the guy running around making completely
unsupported accusations (you), making attacks on people totally uninvolved in a
thread (you), and taking the "whatever is convenient" approach to defending the
CIA at all costs. The CIA does good things, but they have done plenty of
not-so-good things. Some people just can't distinguish between the two.
-Stu
>
>Jerry
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Gary Buell
Let me see if I understand this. Are you saying that the "expert
monitor" listened to tapes of two conversations, before Nov. 22, and
made a note on the trascripts that the voices were the same, and that
these tapes were erased before Nov.22?
>
> Jerry
John McAdams
I'll be Barb thinks that he was the Dal-Tex shooter. :-)
.John
--
John McAdams
To whom?
To the reflexive "hate the CIA" types?
> That's what is really sad.
>
Yes it is.
Barb Junkkarinen
McAdams) wrote:
>On 20 Jan 2003 14:49:28 -0500, jer...@my-deja.com (GMcNally) wrote:
>
>>bar...@ix.netcom.com (Barb Junkkarinen) wrote in message news:<3e2ac6c3...@nntp.ix.netcom.com>...
>>> On Sun, 19 Jan 2003 04:56:38 GMT, john.m...@marquette.edu (John
>>> McAdams) wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> More than a little. :-) I have this vague nagging recollection that
>>> it may have been Phillips himself who stated that .... in his book THE
>>> NIGHT WATCH.....which, of course, that hardly "proves" anything.
>>>
>>> How about it, Jer? Where is it stated or "proved" that DAP was at
>>> lunch with a journalist in MC at the time of the assassination?
>>
>>It's in Nightwatch, yes. It's in his sworn testimony,yes.
>>
>>It's in the sworn testimony of the other Mexico City officers who
>>worked with Phillips in Mexico City and specifically on the day of the
>>assassination and afterwards.
>>
>>But, hey, Barb, if you want to believe he was in Dallas on 11/22/63
>>and everybody has been lying about it ever since, then, maybe he was
>>there having lunch with Hunt and his Cuban marksmen. Maybe he lusted
>>after Marita Lorenz.
>>Maybe ... maybe ... maybe.
>>
>
>
>I'll be Barb
Careful, John, at least one guy here thinks you just might be both of
us. HA!
>thinks that he was the Dal-Tex shooter. :-)
Phillips get his propaganda expert hands dirty on a gun .... naw ...
never. I expect he was in MC having lunch. So, since Jerry hasn't
replied about what "sworn testimony" he's referring to, and you didn't
ask, maybe it's because you already know?? Educate me.
Barb :-)
GMcNally
Barb,
> >> How about it, Jer? Where is it stated or "proved" that DAP was at
> >> lunch with a journalist in MC at the time of the assassination?
> >
> >It's in Nightwatch, yes.
>
> Ah yes .... seems my memory does retain some things....
Yeah, I was really impressed. Last I recall, you had only portions of
Night Watch that somebody had xeroxed for you. Wow, watta gal!
> > It's in his sworn testimony,yes.
>
> Sworn testimony to whom/what/where/when?
He testified to the Clark and twice to the HSCA about his
actions/investigations in Mexico City when news of the assassination
came in and in its aftermath.
I think it's well known that on the afternoon of the assassination he
began a search of the tapes - some 30 that were kept for some 3 weeks
before they were degauzed and reused - to try to find any of Oswald's
very brief phone calls in Mexico City - all to the Soviet Embassy.
> >It's in the sworn testimony of the other Mexico City officers who
> >worked with Phillips in Mexico City and specifically on the day of the
> >assassination and afterwards.
>
> Ditto above?
> >
> >But, hey, Barb, if you want to believe he was in Dallas on 11/22/63
> >and everybody has been lying about it ever since, then, maybe he was
> >there having lunch with Hunt and his Cuban marksmen. Maybe he lusted
> >after Marita Lorenz.
> >Maybe ... maybe ... maybe.
>
> I never said I believed he was in Dallas that day ...
I know, Barb, just having a little fun. <vbg>
I would rather
> specifically doubt he was. All I said in response to john was that I
> thought the mention of the MC lunch was in DAP's own book. Which
> you've confirmed but still not given a cite for .... sworn testimony?
Hey, Barb, this is Jerry ... the guy who doesn't give cites! <GDR>
Jerry
GMcNally
> Neither goes to the question about how/when/where it was proved (as
> you stated) that DAP was in MC having lunch with a journalist that
> day.
The burdon is on those who claim otherwise to prove he was other that
where he said he was.
Not on me.
> Any reason Escalante would lie any more than any other intel type if
> it suited their needs? I doubt it.
Because Castro and his intelligence agencies were brutal bastards and
'we' were neither.
Try to remember: they're the bad guys, trying to turn the
assassination to their advantage through propaganda claiming the the
bad guys did it:
1. Phillips, a bad guy who worked against Cuba
2. CIA which worked against Cuba
3. The Exiles (called 'traitors') who fled Castro's tyranny
4. And the capitalist monsters who Castro was trying to save the world
from.
If you think that we should grant Castro/Escalante's disinformation
campaign any credibility at all, then, I am disapointed in you.
If you think we should consider Phillips and the CIA guilty until
proven innocent, then, I am disappointed in you.
The writer contradicts himself. He says that Phillips made a claim
that he was in DP - he supposed told A who told B who told C - all
dead.
But, he has already "proven" Phillips and CIA to be evil liars.
So, why would he believe Phillips, if it could be proved that Phillips
actually did say what the friend of the friend of the friend said he
said?
Jerry
.
>
> Barb :-)
GMcNally
What diff does it make where/when he gave sworn testimony?
Havn't the buffs "proved" that he and the CIA always lied? Ask Gary to
give you the poop on Helms and what a big bad liar he was.
So, I guess, according to the wildest and wooliest of the buffs that
everything any CIA officer ever said was a lie, with the exception of
things they think "slipped out" and inadvertantly reveal truth.
Helms according to Gary was *convicted* of perjury. So, I guess
Phillips just got lucky and never got convicted, right?
Hey, Fonzi wanted him tried for perjurious testimony, right?
Hadn't he denied he was Maurice Bishop, the man behind Alpha-66?
It's a crying shame that the bastard escaped justice, right?
Justice would have demanded that all of them be imprisioned and die in
prison -
or maybe set out in the courtyard, as in Saudi Arabia, to die by
stoning - with Aggie casting the largest stone, right?
Jerry
Jerry
>
> Barb :-)
GMcNally
> If Jerry believes Phillips pissing on JFK's grave is a fabrication of Cuban
> intelligence, then he's entitled to his opinion.
I think the Cubans were clever at pushing the buttons of guys like you
with their disinformation campaign to scrore against their
adversaries: Phillips, CIA, Cuban exiles.
> Maybe it's true, maybe it isn't.
>
> If untrue, what's unfortunate is the fact that due to what is known about
> Phillips, the story was floated because it appeared plausible.
>
> That's what is really sad.
Really? "Appeared plausible" to whom?
Not to me. I think the notion is ridiculous. And people whose
prejudices push them towards the belief that he did, ridiculous. Or
pathetic.
Jerry
GMcNally
> >If you want to make a case that all the officers in Mexico City lied to
> >cover up Dave's being up in Dallas killing Kennedy, then, please lay some
> >evidence on the table.
> >
> >How curious that you disbelieve Dave Phillips when he writes where he was
> >when news of the assassination came in, yet, believe some cock-and-bull
> >story that Dave Phillips telling somebody who told somebody who told
> >somebody else that he was in Dallas on 11/22/63.
Stu,
> >Hey John McAdams -- THIS is why I don't bother with cites.
> You sure don't.
Why caste pearls before swine? To what end?
> >If somebody wants to believe Dave Phillips killed JFK then they will do so
> >in spite of any cites, any documentary evidence, any eyewitness testimony.
> >
> >It's like Wexler - when documents disprove his theories, he merely
> >counters with an assertion that they "deep-sixed" them.
>
> You mean like Jerry McNally did when he was confronted with the missing DRE
> reports.
You havn't established that there were any "missing DRE reports".
Or established that anybody at JM/WAVE or Headquarters would give a
fig that somebody tried to present himself as a friend of the exiles
and subsequently proved he was the reverse and was arrested.
Who the hell would care about that?
As opposed to those who'd care what DRE was doing in the Dominican
Republic from which they vowed raids on Cuba of a D-Day scale.
Again, believe what you wish.
But, have the guts to be upfront in acknowledging that you have any
proof that
anything "fishy" was going on.
Let alone that CIA "deep sixed" these alleged documents.
You don't have any proof that this happened - be a Mensch and admit
it!
One can't say that when a series of documents which should exist,
> don't exist UNLESS it helps the CIA cause.
And how would it do that?
Gus Russo, the most informed expert on the Cuban issues believed that
Morley came up with nothing. Just wasted over a year digging.
Then Jerry is more than happy to
> say that there is some NEW warehouse in Virginia, that these things happen all
> the time, and that no one now can possibly find them...
Look Stu. You and I know the same about these so-called "reports":
--nothing.
We don't know if they ever existed. We don't know what happened to
them if they did exist.
That's the reality of the situation.
Face reality.
Morley had to: his article attracted no interest whatsoever and had to
be published in a 3rd rate weekly in Miami.
That's a fact.
Face facts.
Face the fact that Morley in his article strongly implied that the DRE
members were involved in the assassination of JFK.
And that he had to retract this assertion when they wrote letters to
the editor strongly protesting his allegations.
Jerry
GMcNally
Boris Tarisoff was the "expert monitor". He testified to the HSCA
which looked into this matter and found no basis for believing that a
tape existed on 11/22/63. I also have spoken with Tarisoff - called
"Mr T" by Newman.
Mexi knew on the Friday that an American was in the Cuban embassy
wanting to defect. They didn't know the name.
Mexi gave this attention to find out the name.
Subsequently, the day before he left for "home", Oswald phoned the
Soviet Embassy twice. The first was to the wrong dept - the military
attache. The second was a request for any new info, ie, if the cable
the SovEmb had sent had been replied to.
It was on this phone call that he identified himself by name.
This tape was brought over to "T" immediately. On the transcript he
noted that the voice of this person, Oswald, was identical to the
voice on the first intercept: Oswald at the CubCon phoning, with
Duran, the SovEmb.
All this is well-documented.
You need to read the Lopez Report appendix that finds no tape existed
by 11/22/63 and the testimony of Boris T.
If you want to know the truth, that is.
If you are content with CT fables, divorced from reality, don't bother
to do either.
Jerry
>
>
> >
> > Jerry
Stugrad98
statements ... I'd challenge Jerry to actually support his assertion, but the
newsgroup is about 0 for 200. Jerry likes to greatly overextend what an
author says, misrepresent it to those who haven't read the article, and then
make all sorts of corrally misrepresenations from it. It was Morley who was
on the newsgroups saying that he did NOT agree that Joannides is pictured with
Oswald, that he believed his DRE sources, etc. But Jerry thinks Morley is
arguing for DRE involvement.
-Stu
Barb Junkkarinen
Well, Jer, you made a claim about it .... so cough it up. Or were you
incorrect about it having been "proved" that DAP was in MC having
lunch with a journalist on 11/22 ... and that it had been testified to
in "sworn testimony" by DAP and others. If you don't want to be called
on to provide cites for your claims ... then don't make the claims.
;-)
>
>Havn't the buffs "proved" that he and the CIA always lied? Ask Gary to
>give you the poop on Helms and what a big bad liar he was.
Now, Jer, this has nothing to do with Gary .... you wouldn't be trying
to distract from your claim and requested cite now, would you?
>
>So, I guess, according to the wildest and wooliest of the buffs that
>everything any CIA officer ever said was a lie, with the exception of
>things they think "slipped out" and inadvertantly reveal truth.
Right now it's not the wild and wooly CIA officers of 1963 that anyone
is asking for a cite re the claimed "sworn testimony" of DAP and
others regarding his being in MC on assassination day ... it's you
being asked, because you made the claim.
>
>Helms according to Gary was *convicted* of perjury. So, I guess
>Phillips just got lucky and never got convicted, right?
Phillips, according to *you* was "proved" to have been lunching with a
journalist in MC on 11.22 by sworn testimony. Where's your cite?
>
>Hey, Fonzi wanted him tried for perjurious testimony, right?
C'mon BAY-bee, let's do the twist.....
>
>Hadn't he denied he was Maurice Bishop, the man behind Alpha-66?
Seems to me you have historically criticized others for failing to
answer questions and instead asking questions in return.
The "sworn testimony" cite?
>
>It's a crying shame that the bastard escaped justice, right?
In 1814 we took a little trip, along with Sgt Jackson down the mighty
Mississip....
How far we got to travel to find your cite to support your claim, Jer?
>
>Justice would have demanded that all of them be imprisioned and die in
>prison -
>or maybe set out in the courtyard, as in Saudi Arabia, to die by
>stoning - with Aggie casting the largest stone, right?
It is the dawning of the age of Aquarius, the age of Aquarius...
Gonna be awhile, eh?
How come?
I know you wouldn't make a claim you couldn't back up with a cite.
Wouldn't it be easier just to post it?
Strawberry Fields Forever,
Barb ;-)
Barb :-)
---"Our intention, is not to establish the point with
complete accuracy, but merely to substantiate the
hypothesis which underlies the conclusion that
Oswald was the sole assasin."
(Redlich memo to Rankin, 4/64)
Barb Junkkarinen
Still don't have a copy of the book ... darn it. It's on my wish list.
All I seem to find copies of in used book stores is...sigh ... Case
Closed. <g>
>
>> > It's in his sworn testimony,yes.
>>
>> Sworn testimony to whom/what/where/when?
>
>He testified to the Clark
The Clark panel asked him about his whereabouts on assassination day??
Caould you put a cite up for me, pretty please, I'd like to check that
out.
> and twice to the HSCA about his
>actions/investigations in Mexico City when news of the assassination
>came in and in its aftermath.
Which volume can I find that in? Got any quotes relevant to the claim
you made?
>
>I think it's well known that on the afternoon of the assassination he
>began a search of the tapes - some 30 that were kept for some 3 weeks
>before they were degauzed and reused - to try to find any of Oswald's
>very brief phone calls in Mexico City - all to the Soviet Embassy.
Oops ... there goes my "watta gal" designation ... I didn't recall
that. Where can I read about that? ;-)
>
>> >It's in the sworn testimony of the other Mexico City officers who
>> >worked with Phillips in Mexico City and specifically on the day of the
>> >assassination and afterwards.
>>
>> Ditto above?
>> >
>> >But, hey, Barb, if you want to believe he was in Dallas on 11/22/63
>> >and everybody has been lying about it ever since, then, maybe he was
>> >there having lunch with Hunt and his Cuban marksmen. Maybe he lusted
>> >after Marita Lorenz.
>> >Maybe ... maybe ... maybe.
>>
>> I never said I believed he was in Dallas that day ...
>
>I know, Barb, just having a little fun. <vbg>
Such a rascal. :-) Now, since you've started humming a bit here, and
since I'm out of songs to sing ..... could ya provide some actual
cites for us poor souls who don't remember everything so well without
being able to reference it?
>
> I would rather
>> specifically doubt he was. All I said in response to john was that I
>> thought the mention of the MC lunch was in DAP's own book. Which
>> you've confirmed but still not given a cite for .... sworn testimony?
>
>Hey, Barb, this is Jerry ... the guy who doesn't give cites! <GDR>
Well, I'm an eternal optimist, Jer .... I figure lightning just might
strike someday .... silly me ..... I deserve to have my Goddess apron
taken away ... sigh ....
Barb :-)
Barb Junkkarinen
>bar...@ix.netcom.com (Barb Junkkarinen),
>
>> Neither goes to the question about how/when/where it was proved (as
>> you stated) that DAP was in MC having lunch with a journalist that
>> day.
>
>The burdon is on those who claim otherwise to prove he was other that
>where he said he was.
>
>Not on me.
Oops, Jer ... read it again. I am not claiming he was anywhere else.
It was YOU who made a claim .... so, even by your own accounting it's
you who need to provide a cite for your claim.
But then you know that perfectly well. Is this a case of spoke too
soon and can't back up the claim? Hey, if so ... just say so. :-)
>
>> Any reason Escalante would lie any more than any other intel type if
>> it suited their needs? I doubt it.
>
>Because Castro and his intelligence agencies were brutal bastards and
>'we' were neither.
White hats all, right Jer?
>
>Try to remember: they're the bad guys, trying to turn the
>assassination to their advantage through propaganda claiming the the
>bad guys did it:
Right now you are the naughty one for not providing a cite for your
claim.
Wouldn't be trying to divert from that again would ya, Jer? :-)
>
>1. Phillips, a bad guy who worked against Cuba
>
>2. CIA which worked against Cuba
>
>3. The Exiles (called 'traitors') who fled Castro's tyranny
>
>4. And the capitalist monsters who Castro was trying to save the world
>from.
>
>If you think that we should grant Castro/Escalante's disinformation
>campaign any credibility at all, then, I am disapointed in you.
If you continue this charade/dodge/divert dance rather than post a
cite for a claim you made ... or admit that perhaps you were mistaken,
then it is I who will be disappointed in you, Jerry.
>
>If you think we should consider Phillips and the CIA guilty until
>proven innocent, then, I am disappointed in you.
This isn't about that, Jer.
>The writer contradicts himself. He says that Phillips made a claim
>that he was in DP - he supposed told A who told B who told C - all
>dead.
>
>But, he has already "proven" Phillips and CIA to be evil liars.
>
>So, why would he believe Phillips, if it could be proved that Phillips
>actually did say what the friend of the friend of the friend said he
>said?
So why won't you post the cite that you claim proves your friend DAP
was in MC on assassination day?
Like Robert Blake always used to say on Barretta .... "if you can't do
the time, don't do the crime."
But then he's in jailk just now isn't he.
Stugrad98
these reports existed-- the reports in question being George Joannides
reports to HQ about his relations with the DRE. How could Jerry deny it?
Several top level intelligence personnel said they would have existed.
Ted Shackley said they would exist. Every report from the CIA/DRE
liason-- *BEFORE* and *AFTER*-- exist. What Jerry said was the following:
[QUOTE]
I'm sure they do exist - probably in a huge government warehouse for
document archives in northern Virginia. Finding them is a different story.
[UNQUOTE]
I challenge Jerry to keep the above quotation in any response he has to
this thread.
Once again, I reitirate: when it is convenient for Jerry, he is happy to
acknowledge that the CIA has lost, cannot find, files. Then we get the
split-personality, who insists, even when there are 100 independent
reasons to believe a document exists-- that they can't *possibly* be in
that same warehouse in Northern Virginia, as lost as anything else.
>Stug...@aol.com (Stugrad98) wrote in message
Stugrad98
Ritchie Linton
About David Phillips=wasn't he the former CIA guy who admitted that
someday the truth about the volumes of files about Oswald would get
out? In the meantime:
> Why caste pearls before swine? To what end?
>
> > >If somebody wants to believe Dave Phillips killed JFK then they will do so
> > >in spite of any cites, any documentary evidence, any eyewitness testimony.
> > >
> > >It's like Wexler - when documents disprove his theories, he merely
> > >counters with an assertion that they "deep-sixed" them.
> >
> > You mean like Jerry McNally did when he was confronted with the missing DRE
> > reports.
+++++
Like Jerry did when I started posting the actual quotes of what former CIA
Director Helms actually said about the Oswald files being a responsibility
of the "Defense Establishment" ..Jerry could not 'deepsix' actual
testimony so he has taken-a-powder when confronted with actual.Regular
posters might recall that I encountered a little trouble recently when I
critiqued Jerry's literary technique.Anyway Jerry notes:
>
> You havn't established that there were any "missing DRE reports". Or established that anybody at JM/WAVE or Headquarters would give a
> fig that somebody tried to present himself as a friend of the exiles
> and subsequently proved he was the reverse and was arrested.
>
> Who the hell would care about that?
+++
Not the CIA=as Helms explained in his testimony it was not their
jurisdiction=Oswald being a member of the Defense Establishment;having
been a Marine.Helms was very clear that the Oswald files were considered
by the CIA as part of the "counter intelligence..counter espionage"(hence
the "CI" designation we know of in most routing and filing systems that
appeared later in record)=so from the CIA perspective already knowing the
jurisdiction in responsibility="who the hell would care about that" within
the CIA? Jerry's eager verbosity gets the best of him with this question
already answered=the Oswald files were a responsibity of the "Defense
Establishment".As we all know,thats where the CIA went looking for a real
picture of the actual Oswald after CIA had photographed somebody who was
NOT Oswald in MEXI.=look where CIA went looking.People suspecting the CIA
in complicity in the Kennedy murder are barking up the wrong tree=although
I have posted the right 'file tree' now. Apparently, David Atlee Phillips
told his family something similiar towhat Helms said.
RJ
mmn...@earthlink.net
Altasrecrd
>Try to remember: they're the bad guys,
And just why are they the bad guys, again, Jerry?
Cuba has the highest literacy rate in the Northern Hemisphere.
Most people seem to enjoy living there. Those that don't, I get to see
frantically swim ashore at Key West every year.
If Castro is so bad, then why hasn't there been a revolt like there was
against Batista?
Are people so scared that they won't do it? Or are they for the most part
happy?
And are they aware most of their poverty occurs as a result of US sanctions,
and not mismanagement on Castro's part? I think so.
GMcNally
Barb,
> >What diff does it make where/when he gave sworn testimony?
>
> Well, Jer, you made a claim about it .... so cough it up. Or were you
> incorrect about it having been "proved" that DAP was in MC having
> lunch with a journalist on 11/22 ...
I've already said several times that Phillips gave testimony - twice -
to the HSCA, which also took the testimony of most of the officers
stationed at Mexico City at the time.
All of that testimony and all of the documents put Phillips as working
and being in Mexico City on 11/22/63.
Is anything PROVED beyond ALL DOUBT?
Of course not. Nothing is ever proved beyond all doubt. If one wants
to - as a poster recently wrote - content oneself with saying that
Phillips was a "spy", so were they all spies, and spies lie, and
imagining like Wexler that the documentary record is fake and the
incriminating documents "deep-sixed", then,
we, like the poster, can conclude that all of the lied, lied, lied.
And all of the documents are fake, fake, fake.
So, yes, I do consider it proved beyond a reasonable doubt that
Phillips was in Mexico City on 11/22/63 and doing exactly what he -
and the others - say he was doing.
But, if you choose to believe otherwise, then, "you are entitled to
your opinion".
And if you want to know more - research the subject.
I have and find the documentary record to be sufficient to dispove all
the nonsense about Phillips and the CIA and the missing tapes and
missing photos and all the other nonsense.
But, if you think I'm going to be your personal research assistant and
produce documents for you, then, think again.
Jerry
Barb Junkkarinen
Ooo...I get all a tingle when you're predictable. <BG>
You must have missed me saying, a few posts back, that I have no doubt
Phillips was most likely in MC having lunch with several people at the
time of the assassination.
You made waxing claims about how something that had been "proved",
claimed DAP and others had given sworn testimony about it, and like
others here who make such claims without a specific cite ... were
simply asked to provide said cite. Even McAdams asked and expressed
frustration if I recall correctly.
Simple as that.
You expect others to do your research for you, jump through your
hoops, answer your questions .... you demand such, and cites, on
occasion, yet when you're just asked for a simple cite for something
you yourself brought to the drawing board, you break out the Schlitz!
Lighten up, Jer. And back up your claims with cites. Think of it as a
community service to further the knowledge of others less
knowledgeable than yourself and to promote reading of the documentary
records by all.
[.............]