|
|
NEW ARTICLE
|
|
TALK AT THE 92ND STREET Y,
JANUARY 28, 2007
|
|
|
A Farewell to Justice
|
|
|
|
|
A Farewell to Justice
|
|
|
|
|
A Farewell to Justice
|
|
|
|
|
|
A Farewell to Justice
|
|
|
|
Talk at
the 92nd Street Y,
JANUARY 28, 2007
THE KENNEDY ASSASSINATION AND THE CURRENT POLITICAL MOMENT
by Joan Mellen
It happened going on forty-four years
ago, and yet the murder of President Kennedy remains simultaneously
a subject of fascination and yet is still taboo within mainstream
discourse. You will not find a free exchange of views on the Kennedy
assassination in the “New York Times” nor, to date, an acknowledgement
of the unanswered questions arising from 9/11. This past November,
I spoke at a Jewish Senior Center on the Upper West Side [in New
York] where the director, Sara Tornay, remarked that the “Times” had
listed the lecture the week before mine, and the lecture the week
after. My talk on the Kennedy assassination had slipped down the
memory hole. How come? she wondered.
So I'm grateful to the 92nd Street Y for the liberalism
of outlook and independence of mind that made this evening possible.
The Kennedy assassination will not go away, and I'll try to explain
why, heartened as I am by the fact that the former governor of
Minnesota, Arne Carlson, gave a speech in November entitled “The
JFK Assassination: Its Impact on America's History.” That's my
subject as well: How the Kennedy assassination illuminates the
present political moment.
The Kennedy assassination is present even in its absence
in the recent film, “The Good Shepherd,” a movie about the CIA.
Its central character, played by Matt Damon, is based largely
on the late head of CIA Counter Intelligence, James Jesus Angleton.
The distortions of “The Good Shepherd” return us to the meaning
of the Kennedy assassination. James Angleton in real life was
the mastermind not, as the film suggests, of the Bay of Pigs (that
was Richard Bissell), but of a false defector program that sent
spies into the Soviet Union. Among them was one Lee Harvey Oswald.
I am basing this talk either on interviews I conducted for “A
Farewell to Justice,” or on new interviews I've done since its
publication a year or so ago. I am referring as well to some of
the more than four million documents released under the JFK Records
Collection Act and now residing in Maryland at the National Archives.
It was actually an FBI document that demonstrates that Oswald, indeed
one of Angleton's assets in the Soviet Union, communicated back
to the CIA through a CIA asset at American Express named Michael
Jelisavcic. One of my discoveries for “A Farewell to Justice” was
the original of a note that Oswald,
arrested in New Orleans for a street fight, handed to the police
lieutenant who was questioning him, Francis Martello.
One CIA document refers
to an FBI "65" file,
an espionage file, for Jelisavic,
a reference inadvertently unredacted
when CIA declassified the document.
This number clearly directs CIA to an espionage file.
Oswald also had Jelisavcic's name and room number in his possession.
Angleton's false defector program, not mentioned in “The Good
Shepherd,” remains among CIA's most closely guarded secrets, a
secret necessary to preserve the fiction of the Warren Report.
The figure of Lee Harvey Oswald, and his peculiar biography
as a low-level intelligence agent, continues to haunt those whose
paths he crossed. After “A Farewell to Justice” was published,
this was last April, I drove down Alligator Highway in Central
Florida to interview a very interesting nonagenarian named Otto
Otepka. Mr. Otepka was high up in State Department security under
the Eisenhower administration and into the 1960s. Routinely, he
came upon the names of people who had defected, and whom it was
his job to investigate for security purposes.
Highly commended for his diligence, Mr. Otepka displayed
to me, proudly, a wall filled with a display of framed commendations,
including one signed by Secretary of State John Foster Dulles
on behalf of President Eisenhower. (Certainly in these times President
Eisenhower seems to be a bonafide liberal, not only for his prescient
remark about the military industrial complex, but for another
of his observations, that most of America has accepted the idea
of the New Deal, but for a few oil millionaires in Texas).
Otepka saw at once that there was something unusual about
Lee Oswald, “tourist.” As he placed this list of defectors into
his security safe, Mr. Otepka planned to request that the CIA
look into this individual, “Oswald.” A nighttime burglary, obviously
an inside job, resulted in this file vanishing. Soon Otto Otepka
was demoted to an inconsequential post, writing summaries of documents.
Oswald's “defection” was not to be scrutinized. Later I'll explain
whom Mr. Otepka believes was responsible for the burglary and
the destruction of his career.
This all took place in the early sixties. In the year
2006, “The Good Shepherd” still could not mention Angleton's false
defector program which would have driven the film to the door
of the Kennedy assassination. Instead the film conveniently closes
in 1961 at the time of the Bay of Pigs.
That Oswald was an employee of the CIA I demonstrate in
my book, a fact recently re-confirmed by a historian named Michael
Kurtz. Professor Kurtz reports on an interview he did in 1981
with Hunter Leake, second in command at the New Orleans field
office. Leake admitted that CIA used Oswald as a courier and that
Oswald came to New Orleans in April 1963 because the CIA office
there intended to use him for certain operations. Leake either
was disaffected from the Agency, or, perhaps, was just an honest
man. He admitted that he personally paid Oswald various sums of
cash for his services. Oswald was on the CIA payroll, Leake knew.
He himself paid Oswald's CIA salary.
Leake also explained in this telephone interview with
Professor Kurtz why there was no documentation on Oswald's employment
with CIA in New Orleans. After President Kennedy's assassination,
he drove the files personally to Langley, Virginia. They were
so voluminous that he had to rent a trailer to transport them.
Shouldn't revelations from so credible a source have made the
newspapers or CNN? I don't know why Hunter Leake, who figures
prominently in “A Farewell to Justice,” talked to Professor Kurtz,
but I discovered that the original Hunter Leake family estate,
in 1927, was sold to purchase Hammond Junior College, which became
Southeastern Louisiana University – where Professor Kurtz teaches.
In “A Farewell to Justice,” I write for the first time
that Oswald had also been enlisted by U.S. Customs in New Orleans,
information I gleaned from the documents deposited at the National
Archives by the Church Committee. Not a single newspaper or magazine
or television program chose to notice this astonishing revelation.
I show how the framing of Oswald in Louisiana by the CIA began
even before the shooting in Dallas. I shall return to that subject.
As you study the aftermath of the Kennedy assassination,
you discover repeatedly that the press relinquished its freedom
more than forty years ago. The latest document I was sent came
from the LBJ library in Austin. Dated 1967, it was a telegram
from the “Newsweek” columnist, Hugh Aynesworth, to George Christian,
Lyndon Johnson's press secretary. Aynesworth was announcing that
he was sending the President, in advance of publication, his latest
attack on New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison, the better
for the President to take steps against Garrison's investigation.
CIA releases, once marked “Secret,” are filled with revelations
of how reporters, another was Al Burt, the Latin America editor
of the “Miami Herald,” visited the CIA to be instructed on what
was and was not in the Agency's interest that he print. There
are precedents for our present co-opted press, from FOX to CNN,
its twin. Even Keith Olbermann on MSNBC seems unduly cautious.
In his forthcoming memoir, “American Spy: My Secret History
in the CIA, Watergate & Beyond,” long time CIA operative,
E. Howard Hunt, who died last Tuesday – as with Richard Helms,
with his secrets intact – suggests that Lyndon Johnson should
be viewed as the prime suspect in “having Kennedy liquidated.” It
seems clear that Hunt, age 88, was still engaged in the business
of drawing attention away from the massive evidence connecting
CIA to the assassination. Lyndon Johnson, the direct beneficiary
of the assassination, seemed to Hunt a likely target.
Hunt was far too clever to regurgitate J. Edgar Hoover's
disinformation that the Mafia planned and then covered up this
crime. His obvious intention was to provide a false sponsor, someone
other than the Agency. Even Hunt didn't bother to revive the fantasy
that Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone, or acted at all, in the assassination.
The young Warren Commission lawyers could find no motive
for Oswald's shooting of President Kennedy, even as they blamed
him. You might well ask, what, then, was the CIA's motive? Return
to 1963 and the pressure by both the CIA's clandestine service
and the Pentagon for a full-scale invasion of Cuba. President
Kennedy opposed an American invasion of Cuba as not in the national
interest, just as he had no intention of embedding us in the quagmire
of a ground war in Vietnam. That was the first Texas President
who profited from John F. Kennedy's murder, and who did the bidding
of those forces John Kennedy opposed.
Look at Richard Reeves' biography quoting President Kennedy's
fury at the sabotage of his presidency by the CIA. In the one
true political moment in “The Good Shepherd,” Kennedy threatens
to splinter the CIA into a thousand pieces and cast them to the
winds. “I'll get those CIA bastards if it's the last thing I do,” Kennedy
said, famously, underestimating his adversaries. The CIA's “Executive
Action” (read murder) capability was in place by 1963. CIA had
already been involved in the murder and/or attempted murders of
various heads of state, efforts outlined in detail in the papers
of the Church Committee.
Our mainstream press manages to avoid confronting those
documents, writing about CIA as if it had no history, but was
born in the aftermath of 9/11. They are particularly unwilling
to connect our present political morass to past events. Foreign
reporters have not been similarly restrained. On a recent fifteen
minute magazine segment on BBC-2 this past November, came an extraordinary
photograph connecting the assassination of John and Robert Kennedy.
(You won't find this information in that other Kennedy movie of
this season, “Bobby”).
That press photograph was taken at the Ambassador Hotel
on the evening of the assassination
of Robert Kennedy where a crowd
had gathered to celebrate his victory
in the California primary. Pictured
standing together were three high
level CIA operatives. One was Gordon
Campbell, the second in command at JMWAVE, the big CIA station in
Miami, from which emanated plans for the sabotage of Cuba and the
assassination of Fidel Castro.
With Campbell was a long-time CIA operative named David
Sanchez Morales, who worked with CIA propaganda expert David Atlee
Phillips, a figure I discuss at length in “A Farewell To Justice.” Morales
had assisted Phillips in the 1954 coup against President Arbenz
in Guatemala. Morales' lawyer, Robert J. Walton, had quoted his
client to the government investigator in Miami, Gaeton Fonzi: “I
was in Dallas when we got the son of a bitch, and I was in Los
Angeles when we got the little bastard.”
Morales was also close to a CIA operative named Felix
Rodriguez, famously present at the murder of Che Guevara in Bolivia,
so that he came away with Guevara's wristwatch. Rodriguez was
so close to George H. W. Bush that he included photographs with
the Bushes in his autobiography. (Present in Dallas that November
morning of the 22 nd were not only George H. W. Bush, shortly
to depart for Tyler, then return that afternoon to Dallas, but
also Richard Nixon. Neither Bush nor Nixon, of course, staged
the shooting itself. But it does seem odd that they were in Dallas
along with David Atlee Phillips.
The third unlikely well-wisher of Robert Kennedy in this
trio was CIA psychological warfare specialist, George Joannides.
Joannides was CIA handler in Miami for an anti-Castro group called
DRE (Directorio Revolucionario Estudantil). Lee Oswald's adversary
in his street scuffle in New Orleans was a man named Carlos Bringuier,
who claimed to be the DRE representative in New Orleans. Both
were arrested. All trails lead to Lee Harvey Oswald.
That street fight was clearly staged, as I show in my
book. I also discovered what Oswald actually said to Lieutenant
Francis Martello, and which Martello chose not to share with the
Warren Commission: “Call the FBI. Tell them you have Lee Oswald
in custody.” Yet another recently declassified FBI document, again,
once marked “Secret,” reveals information given to the Bureau
by a CIA officer. Dated 11/23/63, it confirms that Oswald was
indeed a shared agent of both agencies.
It may be (here I'll speculate, I hope for the last time),
that the street fight on Canal Street that established Oswald
as pro-Castro, purveyor of leaflets for “Fair Play For Cuba,” was
a propaganda victory by Joannides, whose specialty was psychological
warfare. Five years later, there Joannides apparently stands,
awaiting the impending murder of Robert F. Kennedy. The BBC documentarian,
Shane O'Sullivan, tells me that he plans to release a full-length
film on the anniversary of Robert Kennedy's assassination in June.
I hope he has added further identifications to that photograph.
I'll just add that there was a complete blackout in the U.S. media
of O'Sullivan's BBC segment. On the website of the London GUARDIAN
newspaper, you can find a report entitled, “Did The CIA Kill Bobby
Kennedy?”
I'm sure many in this audience are aware of the third
recent moment at which the Kennedy assassination has surfaced.
There are a few scant degrees of separation between
1. the two Bush presidents
2. the role of the
CIA in the Kennedy assassination
3. Lee Harvey Oswald,
the CIA asset.
This surprising invocation of the Kennedy assassination
occurred on January 2 nd at the funeral of President Gerald Ford,
the last surviving member of the Warren Commission. I'll read
this extraordinary revealing paragraph from George H. W. Bush's
eulogy for those who missed it:
“After a deluded gunman assassinated President Kennedy,
our nation turned to Gerald Ford and a select handful of others
to make sense of that madness – and a conspiracy theorist can
say what they will – but the Warren Commission report will always
have the final definitive say on this matter. Why? Because Gerry
Ford put his name on it and Gerry Ford's word was always good.”
Allow me to add that when amendments were offered to the
Freedom of Information Act, enlarging public access to affairs
of state, Gerald Ford vetoed the bill, only for Congress to override
his veto. Ford was no more a supporter of the truth than Mr. Bush's
son. George H. W. Bush's own word was not always so good either.
There are powerful reasons why George H. W. Bush was motivated
to invoke the Warren Report, even, amazingly, to refer to a “conspiracy
theorist,” as if that designation would at once banish some truths
he does not want available. Only two degrees of separation separate
George H. W. Bush from Oswald himself.
At his 1976 confirmation hearings for the post of Director
of Central Intelligence, a post into which he was elevated by
Gerald Ford, Bush denied that he had any prior connection to the
CIA. This was a falsehood. At the National Archives, and on the
Internet, is a CIA document directed to its clandestine service
(Record Number 104-10310-10271) that reveals that when, in the
1950s, Bush founded Zapata Oil, his partner was one Thomas J.
Devine, who was not only an oil wildcatter, but a long-time CIA
staff employee. Thomas Devine's name does not appear in the original
papers of Zapata, but it does in the company Bush created shortly
thereafter as “Zapata Offshore.”
This CIA document reveals that Thomas Devine had informed
George Bush of a CIA project
with the cryptonym WUBRINY/LPDICTUM. It involved CIA proprietary
commercial operations in foreign countries. By 1963, Devine had
become not a former CIA employee, but ‘a cleared
and witting contact” in the investment banking firm which managed
the proprietary corporation WUSALINE.
WUBRINY involved Haitian operations, in which, the documents reveal,
a participant was George de Mohrenschildt, the Dallas CIA hander
of – Lee Oswald.
In late April 1963, in Haiti, de Mohrenschildt appeared
to discuss investment possibilities. The CIA officer, the author
of the document, named only as WUBRINY/1, had no idea of de Mohrenschildt's
already long-standing CIA connections, and in particular his role
in shepherding Oswald in Dallas. De Mohrenschildt could safely
pursue CIA interests in Haiti because it was that month, April
1963, that Lee Oswald, his charge, moved from Texas to New Orleans,
on the orders of the CIA, with Oswald reporting to – Hunter Leake.
A May 22, 1963 CIA document has de Mohrenschildt admitting
he had “obtained some Texas financial backing” and had visited
interested people In Washington regarding the candidacy of one
M. Clemard Joseph Charles for President of Haiti, “as soon as
Duvalier can be gotten out.” So we are reminded of CIA's efforts
to influence the political configurations of other countries – an
obvious example is CIA's obliging British Petroleum – for a price – and
overthrowing Mohammed Mossadegh in Iran, replacing him with the
Shah.
To summarize: George Bush is linked in April 1963, seven
months before the Kennedy assassination, to a CIA project involving
Lee Oswald's handler, Count Sergei Georges de Mohrenschildt through
his own CIA partner, Thomas Devine. Bush and Devine later traveled
to Vietnam together, a trip for which the Department of Defense
issued Devine an interim “Top Secret” clearance. No surprise there:
Devine obviously had never left the Agency.
On the day Gaeton Fonzi was to interview de Mohrenschildt
for the House Select Committee on Assassinations, de Mohrenschildt
was shot, his death ruled a suicide. Fonzi's card was in his pocket.
Let me refer you as well to Joseph McBride's “Nation” magazine
article where he exposed how George H. W. Bush was debriefed by
the FBI about the Kennedy assassination on November 23 rd . The
inadvertently released document refers to “Mr. George Bush of
the Central Intelligence Agency.” It was a different George Bush,
George William Bush, who worked for the Agency, Bush claimed.
But it wasn't so. George William came forward to say he was never
debriefed by anyone.
Every road leads to the assassination of President Kennedy.
What should also give us pause is that these documents about Zapata
Offshore, which had offices on several continents, but never did
much business, as the CENTRO MONDIALE COMERCIALE in Rome, on whose
board of director's Garrison suspect Clay Shaw served, did little
trade, and George Bush's CIA partner, were released under the
JFK Act as Kennedy assassination documents. So it is the Agency
itself, not the dreaded “conspiracy theorists,” that links George
H. W. Bush with the Kennedy assassination. Or: it's the government
that is the ultimate “conspiracy theorist.”
Part
I, Part II, Part III

Publication date: November 16, 2005; $29.95 hardcover; 576 pages
|