Friday, July 15, 2016

50 U.S. Code § 3093 - Law Governing Covert Ops



50 U.S. Code § 3093 - Presidential approval and reporting of covert actions


 (a) Presidential findingsThe President may not authorize the conduct of a covert action by departments, agencies, or entities of the United States Government unless the President determines such an action is necessary to support identifiable foreign policy objectives of the United States and is important to the national security of the United States, which determination shall be set forth in a finding that shall meet each of the following conditions:
(1)
Each finding shall be in writing, unless immediate action by the United States is required and time does not permit the preparation of a written finding, in which case a written record of the President’s decision shall be contemporaneously made and shall be reduced to a written finding as soon as possible but in no event more than 48 hours after the decision is made.
(2)
Except as permitted by paragraph (1), a finding may not authorize or sanction a covert action, or any aspect of any such action, which already has occurred.
(3)
Each finding shall specify each department, agency, or entity of the United States Government authorized to fund or otherwise participate in any significant way in such action. Any employee, contractor, or contract agent of a department, agency, or entity of the United States Government other than the Central Intelligence Agency directed to participate in any way in a covert action shall be subject either to the policies and regulations of the Central Intelligence Agency, or to written policies or regulations adopted by such department, agency, or entity, to govern such participation.
(4)
Each finding shall specify whether it is contemplated that any third party which is not an element of, or a contractor or contract agent of, the United States Government, or is not otherwise subject to United States Government policies and regulations, will be used to fund or otherwise participate in any significant way in the covert action concerned, or be used to undertake the covert action concerned on behalf of the United States.
(5)
A finding may not authorize any action that would violate the Constitution or any statute of the United States.
(b)Reports to congressional intelligence committees; production of informationTo the extent consistent with due regard for the protection from unauthorized disclosure of classified information relating to sensitive intelligence sources and methods or other exceptionally sensitive matters, the Director of National Intelligence and the heads of all departments, agencies, and entities of the United States Government involved in a covert action—
(1)
shall keep the congressional intelligence committees fully and currently informed of all covert actions which are the responsibility of, are engaged in by, or are carried out for or on behalf of, any department, agency, or entity of the United States Government, including significant failures; and
(2)
shall furnish to the congressional intelligence committees any information or material concerning covert actions (including the legal basis under which the covert action is being or was conducted) which is in the possession, custody, or control of any department, agency, or entity of the United States Government and which is requested by either of the congressional intelligence committees in order to carry out its authorized responsibilities.
(c)Timing of reports; access to finding
(1)
The President shall ensure that any finding approved pursuant to subsection (a) of this section shall be reported in writing to the congressional intelligence committees as soon as possible after such approval and before the initiation of the covert action authorized by the finding, except as otherwise provided in paragraph (2) and paragraph (3).
(2)
If the President determines that it is essential to limit access to the finding to meet extraordinary circumstances affecting vital interests of the United States, the finding may be reported to the chairmen and ranking minority members of the congressional intelligence committees, the Speaker and minority leader of the House of Representatives, the majority and minority leaders of the Senate, and such other member or members of the congressional leadership as may be included by the President.
(3)
Whenever a finding is not reported pursuant to paragraph (1) or (2) of this section,[1] the President shall fully inform the congressional intelligence committees in a timely fashion and shall provide a statement of the reasons for not giving prior notice.
(4)
In a case under paragraph (1), (2), or (3), a copy of the finding, signed by the President, shall be provided to the chairman of each congressional intelligence committee.
(5)
(A)
When access to a finding, or a notification provided under subsection (d)(1), is limited to the Members of Congress specified in paragraph (2), a written statement of the reasons for limiting such access shall also be provided.
(B)Not later than 180 days after a statement of reasons is submitted in accordance with subparagraph (A) or this subparagraph, the President shall ensure that—
(i)
all members of the congressional intelligence committees are provided access to the finding or notification; or
(ii)
a statement of reasons that it is essential to continue to limit access to such finding or such notification to meet extraordinary circumstances affecting vital interests of the United States is submitted to the Members of Congress specified in paragraph (2).
(d)Changes in previously approved actions
(1)
The President shall ensure that the congressional intelligence committees, or, if applicable, the Members of Congress specified in subsection (c)(2) of this section, are notified in writing of any significant change in a previously approved covert action, or any significant undertaking pursuant to a previously approved finding, in the same manner as findings are reported pursuant to subsection (c) of this section.
(2)In determining whether an activity constitutes a significant undertaking for purposes of paragraph (1), the President shall consider whether the activity—
(A)
involves significant risk of loss of life;
(B)
requires an expansion of existing authorities, including authorities relating to research, development, or operations;
(C)
results in the expenditure of significant funds or other resources;
(D)
requires notification under section 3094 of this title;
(E)
gives rise to a significant risk of disclosing intelligence sources or methods; or
(F)
presents a reasonably foreseeable risk of serious damage to the diplomatic relations of the United States if such activity were disclosed without authorization.
(e)“Covert action” definedAs used in this subchapter, the term “covert action” means an activity or activities of the United States Government to influence political, economic, or military conditions abroad, where it is intended that the role of the United States Government will not be apparent or acknowledged publicly, but does not include—
(1)
activities the primary purpose of which is to acquire intelligence, traditional counterintelligence activities, traditional activities to improve or maintain the operational security of United States Government programs, or administrative activities;
(2)
traditional diplomatic or military activities or routine support to such activities;
(3)
traditional law enforcement activities conducted by United States Government law enforcement agencies or routine support to such activities; or
(4)
activities to provide routine support to the overt activities (other than activities described in paragraph (1), (2), or (3)) of other United States Government agencies abroad.
(f)Prohibition on covert actions intended to influence United States political processes, etc.
No covert action may be conducted which is intended to influence United States political processes, public opinion, policies, or media.
(g)Notice and general description where access to finding or notification limited; maintenance of records and written statements
(1)
In any case where access to a finding reported under subsection (c) or notification provided under subsection (d)(1) is not made available to all members of a congressional intelligence committee in accordance with subsection (c)(2), the President shall notify all members of such committee that such finding or such notification has been provided only to the members specified in subsection (c)(2).
(2)
In any case where access to a finding reported under subsection (c) or notification provided under subsection (d)(1) is not made available to all members of a congressional intelligence committee in accordance with subsection (c)(2), the President shall provide to all members of such committee a general description regarding the finding or notification, as applicable, consistent with the reasons for not yet fully informing all members of such committee.
(3)The President shall maintain—
(A)
a record of the members of Congress to whom a finding is reported under subsection (c) or notification is provided under subsection (d)(1) and the date on which each member of Congress receives such finding or notification; and
(B)
each written statement provided under subsection (c)(5).
(h)Plan to respond to unauthorized public disclosure of covert action
For each type of activity undertaken as part of a covert action, the President shall establish in writing a plan to respond to the unauthorized public disclosure of that type of activity.

Monday, June 27, 2016

Dear AOTUS

William E. Kelly, Jr.
20 Columbine Ave.
Browns Mills, New Jersey 08015
(609) 425-6297

June 27, 2016

Mr. David S. Ferriero
Archivist of the United States
National Archives and Records Administration
8601 Adelphi Road
College Park, Maryland 20740-6001

Dear Mr. Ferriero,

As a researcher, fellow blogger and Walt Whitman enthusiast, I was fascinated by your blog post "Calling All Whitman Fans." I found it amazing that over 3,000 previously unknown Whitman records could have secretly existed among the stacks of documents at the Archives. Their discovery gives hope that more such historic gems are waiting to be found among our nation’s family jewels in the Archives’ attic. I have a particular interest in the missing and still-withheld records of the assassination of President Kennedy, the subject of much of my research.

As a co-founder of the Committee for an Open Archives, I lobbied Congress to release the remaining House Select Committee on Assassinations records and took an active interest in the passage of the JFK Act as an original member of the Coalition on Political Assassinations. Now, in my capacity as Secretary of Citizens Against Political Assassinations (CAPA), I continue that work to ensure that the JFK Act is appropriately enforced.

I appreciate your commitment to the job and appeal to you to try to resolve some of the outstanding issues concerning the JFK Collection at the Archives II and the enforcement of the JFK Records Act (44 U.S.C.A. 2107).  As you know the law requires all government records pertaining to the assassination of President Kennedy to be collected and deposited in the JFK Collection at Archives II.  Further, the law requires such records are to be immediately made available to the public unless delayed until October 26, 2017.  At that time it is anticipated that you will be able to certify to the president, Congress and the public that: “all assassination records have been made available to the public in accordance with this Act,” as the law stipulates.

Section 4 of the JFK Act states: “the Archivist shall ensure the physical integrity and original provenance of all records. The Collection shall consist of records of all government records relating to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, which shall be transmitted to the National Archives in accordance with section 2107 of title 44, United States Code.  The Archivist shall prepare and publish a subject guidebook to the collection,…a central directory comprised of identification aids created for each record transmitted to the Archivist and the Archivist shall ensure that the identification aid program is established in such a manner as to result in the creation of a uniform system of electronic records by Government offices that are compatible with each other.” (Emphasis added.) 

The Act’s mandate that the “Archivist shall prepare and publish a subject guidebook to the collection,” has not been undertaken and I am advised by your polite and efficient staff that the digital data base legally suffices to meet the requirements of the Act even though such a digital data base cannot be reasonably construed as a published subject guidebook, as the law prescribes. The existing digital data base may be compatible with and sufficiently accessible to various government offices but it certainly is not sufficiently accessible or compatible with public research within the meaning of the Act. The digital data base has not been updated in years to keep abreast of evolving information and many of the records listed as still classified on the database have in fact been open to the public for years. In addition, I am informed that the Archives’ staff uses a different data base that is continuously updated. The fact that this updated data base is not accessible to the public suggests a two-tiered system that is incompatible with the spirit and the letter of the Act.

In addition to the lack of a published subject index and the elusiveness of an accessible, updated digital data base, the most serious issue I wish to call to your attention involves the many missing records. Compounding this problem is the evident failure of the NARA to actively investigate the location of all missing records in order to recover them.

My most particular concern is with: 1) the original Air Force One radio transmission tapes; 2) the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) defector files; 3) the records relating to all interviews and depositions conducted by the Church Committee; and 4) the ONI 119 Reports.

As I understand that you are a former Navy corpsman, and I thank you for your service in Vietnam. Because of your personal interest in Navy records you may already be aware of the sorry state of the ONI records relating to the assassination, many of which have been reported as lost or missing. Certainly the suggestion that any such records may be wrongfully withheld today would be a justifiable cause of concern to the National Archives.

Some documents that have been located, such as the records of former HSCA chief counsel Richard Sprague, are not being properly obtained and made available, even though they are within the ambit of the Act and unquestionably belong in the JFK Collection.

In view of the mandate that “No assassination record shall be destroyed, altered, or mutilated in any way,” as provided by the Act, the reported destruction of records and evidence by employees of the Secret Service is a particular source of dismay. To my knowledge, in spite of such admissions, no investigation of these reports is being pursued and no one has been charged with a crime. The lack of enforcement activity may be understandable in view of the lack of congressional oversight; no hearings on compliance have been held in 18 years.  This nonfeasance makes the situation no less unacceptable. 

Since the law mandates the Archivist of the United States be accountable for ensuring this law is carried out I am requesting that the JFK Act of 1992 be enforced forthwith. Will the National Archives publish a subject index as the law requires? Will the National Archives open the updated digital data base to researchers? Will the National Archives pursue the missing records? Will the National Archives request Congress to hold oversight hearings on the JFK Act?  
Please also consider this a request for a personal meeting with you and JFK Collection-Archives II staff and two or three serious, responsible researchers to discuss some of these issues and to consider the best way that we may work together to resolve them within the mandates of the Act.

Thank you for your time and prompt attention to this matter.

Very truly yours,

William E. Kelly, Jr.
CAPA Secretary
Citizens Against Political Assassinations



Proposed Letter to Senator Booker

Dear Senator Corey Booker (D. N.J.),

As I am one of your fellow New Jersey constitutes, I request that as a member of the relevant oversight committee of the Senate you request the committee chairman to  schedule oversight hearings on the JFK Act both before and after the October 24, 2017 sunset provisions are enacted. 
It has been reported that you played a key role in the recent passage of the FOIA Reform law. That focus and persistence will be necessary in calling for JFK Act oversight hearings because the same forces that opposed FOIA reform have kept JFK Act oversight hearings from from happening for the last 18 years.

The same forces that fought for a transparent and open government in FOIA reform must also fight for the strict enforcement of the JFK Act of 1992, a law that was unanimously passed by Congress and signed into law by President George H. W. Bush on October 24, 1992.
Will you please be the champion of an open and transparent government where the laws of the land are strictly enforced to the spirit and letter of the law and call for these hearings?
Thank you for your time and interest in this matter.

William E. Kelly, Jr.
Browns Mills, N. J. 



Proposed Petition

AOTUS Petition –
Mr. David S. Ferriero
Archivist of the United States
National Archives and Records Administration
8601 Adelphi Road, College Park, Maryland, 20740-6001

The Archivist of the United States is responsible for the maintenance and protection of America's historic records, including, for example, the Declaration of Independence, and the Constitution, as well as official government records, such as those relating to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
We the undersigned citizens against political assassinations (CAPA) do hereby officially request that the Archivist of the United States (AOTUS) assume the responsibility of upholding the JFK Act of 1992. as the law prescribes and see to the public release of all government records related to he assassination of President Kennedy by October 2017.  

William E. Kelly 


Wednesday, June 22, 2016

Black Propaganda at Dealey Plaza - Case Studies

Black Propaganda Operations affiliated with the Assassination of JFK:

1)              The use of Lee Harvey Oswald’s name in the purchase in Louisiana of military goods for Cubans when he was in USSR.

2)              The “mission” backyard photographs of Oswald brandishing a rifle and pistol and copies of two contradictory magazines -  one photo  copy signed “Hunter of Fascists” and given to George deMohrenschildt.

3)              Lee Harvey Oswald’s Fair Play for Cuba Committee activities in New Orleans in the summer of 1963, including the handing out of leaflets at the dockside of the USS Wasp, the International Trade Mart and other locations.

4)              Oswald’s visit to the Cuban and Russian embassies in Mexico City in late September 1963, Oswald’s visa application, and photos and tapes of “Oswald” in Mexico.

5)              A leaflet was distributed to the Florida Cuban community in November, 1963 warned of an “Act of God” that would put a “Texan in the White House.”

6)              The Hands Off Cuba leaflet distributed by Oswald.

7)              The booklet Crime Against Cuba – By Corlis Lamont as translated by Ella Garro, with the 544 Camp Street address stamped on it.

8)              The Dallas Wanted for Treason poster.

9)              The Dallas Dear Mr. President full page advertisement in the Dallas Morning News.

10)         The Impeach Earl Warren billboard that Jack Ruby in the company of Lary Crafard took a photo of at 3am in the morning after the assassination.

11)         The last two issues President Kennedy dealt with before leaving the White House for Texas concerned the William Attwood-Carlos Lechuga  backchannel negotiations with Fidel Castro at the UN and

12)         The discovery of a cache of weapons in Venezuela that appeared to have come from Cuba. The weapons story was later discovered to be over a year old and was part of a CIA black propaganda to falsely implicate Cuba in exporting terrorism abroad.

13)         The role of Sylvia Duran, Lachuga’s Mexico City mistress, in the bogus story of the Twist Party.

14)         The role of Ella Garro in the bogus story of the Twist Party in Mexico City.

15)         Julio Fernandez, one of three anti-Castro Cubans whose boat was financially supported by Clair Booth Luce, called Luce, wife of the publisher of Time-Life on the evening of the assassination to report information on Oswald’s activities in New Orleans.  Fernandez, a former Cuban publisher, was married to an attorney who worked for Catholic Welfare Services in Miami.

16)         Julio Fernandez, Sr. publisher of newspapers in Cuba, was assisted in his defection and relocation by the Cuban Aid Relief (CAR), sponsored by the CIA front Catherwood Foundation, that also sponsored Cuban refugee relief services in Miami, New Orleans and Dallas, and

17)         The Cuban Aid Relief and the Catherwood Foundation, together with the Pan Am Foundation, co-sponsored a conference for Cuban journalists in exile at the University of Miami (JMWAVE) in July 1963, attended by Julio Fernandez, Jr.

18)         The Catherwood CIA fund also sponsored the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia had a parish in Dallas area where Oswald’s daughters were baptized. In Dallas the Catholic Charities and their CIA benefactors also assisted Father Walter McChann, the Catholic priest who knew Syvia Odio and John Martino and administered to the Cuban refugees in Dallas and New Orleans.

19)          In New Orleans the Catholic relief services provided a laundry truck that was used in the Houma Bunker raid that picked up munitions from the Sculemberger Wells company run by Jean DeMenil, a parishioner of the Dallas Russian Orthodox church and Oswald associate.

20)          In Miami, shortly after the assassination, Dr. Jose Ignorzio, the chief of clinical psychology for the Catholic Welfare Services, contacted the White House to inform the new administration that Oswald had met directly with Cuban ambassador Armas in Mexico.

21)         In Mexico City, David Atlee Philips of the CIA debriefed a Nicaraguan intelligence officer  who claimed to have seen Oswald take money from a Cuban at the Cuban embassy.

22)         In New Zealand, U.S. Air Force Col. Fletcher Prouty read complete biographies of Oswald in the local papers hours after the assassination, indicating to him that a bio of Oswald was pre-prepared. Prouty’s Pentagon office is just down the hall from that of his friend Gen. Krulak, whose assistant Col. Higgins, was briefed by the CIA’s Desmond Fitzgerald on the adaption of the “Valkyrie” plot to kill Hitler to Cuba.

23)         In Miami brothers Jerry and James Buchanan, CIA propaganda assets, began promoting the Castro-did-it theme immediately after the assassination. According to Donald Freed and Jeff Cohen (in Liberation Magazine), the source of the Buchanan’s tales was the leader of the CIA supported International Anti-Communist Brigade (IAB). They wrote “Back in Miami a high powered propaganda machine was cranking out stories that Oswald was a Cuban agent…”

24)         Frank  Sturgis is quoted in the Pampara Beach Sun-Sentinel as saying that Oswald had talked with Cuban G-2 agents and fricasseed with IAB members in Miami in 1962.

25)         Jack Anderson used Sturgis and mobster John Rosselli to keep the Castro plot propaganda story going when Rosselli told Anderson that a JMWAVE covert action anti-Castro Cuban commando team was captured, tortured and  turned around to kill JFK – What professor Peter Dale Scott calls the “Phase Three” story.

26)         Jack Martin (Scruggs) and David Lewis wrote (circa 1967) in a Houston Weekly (possibly the Texas Observer) that the Humme Report – a Congressional Committee document implicates RFK in the plots to kill Castro.

27)         The book Red Friday by Carlos Bringuier, which publishes the names of the anti-Castro commando team trained at JMWAVE that was captured and paraded before the media.

28)          The same “propaganda machine” was still pumping out the same lines in 1976 when Gaeton Fonzi interviewed Sturgis, who said that he had recently ran into a friend who worked for the “company” who reminded him of an incident he had completely forgotten about. Sturgis suddenly recalled, “that he had heard about a meeting in Havana about two months before the Kennedy assassination. At the meeting there were a number of high-ranking men, including Castro, his brother Raul, Ramiro Valdez, the chief of Cuban intelligence, Che Guevara and his secretary Tanya, another Cuban officer, an American known as ‘El Mexicano,’ and,…oh, yea; Jack Ruby. And the meeting dealt with plotting the assassination of President Kennedy.”

29)         Seith Kantor, a Scripps-Howard News Service Reporter in Dallas during the assassination, couldn’t understand why his telephone call records from Parkland Hospital were being withheld because “disclosure would reveal confidential source of information.” When Kantor checked his own records he discovered his editor had told him to call another reporter in Florida or some deep background on Oswald. The reporter in Florida had everything on Oswald, FPFCC, Russian defection, New Orleans radio debate, etc., but instead of using it himself, fed it to Kantor. The reporter was Hal “the Spook” Hendrix, who won the Pulitzer Prize for his coverage of the Cuban Missile Crisis and earned his nickname when he “reported” on the Dominican Republic Coup on September 24, 1963, the day before it happened. His CIA affiliations became better known when he went to work for ITT in Chile and was found guilty of withholding information from a Congressional committee concerning his role in the Chilean coup.

30)         While other major news organizations have been exposed as CIA media assets, such as CBS News, Life Magazine, the North American Newspaper Alliance and the Copley Newspaper chain, the Scripps-Howard News Service (SHNS) stand out not only because of the Kantor-Hendrix connection, but because of the March 12 news report out of Washington. An obvious black propaganda operation that stems from NSA intercepts (note that the NSA does not issue press releases), and continues to implicate Castro in not only the assassination of President Kennedy, but in the planning of an assassination on President Reagan. This story is remarkably similar to the one that Sturgis tells [in #12] and includes many of the same conspirators. [See: SHNS Story]. Also please note that two weeks after this obvious piece of black propaganda disinformation was published, President Reagan was shot in front of the Washington Hilton by John Hinkley.

31)         Steve K – the Man on the Motorcycle in Mexico City, reportedly gave LHO a ride to the Cuban embassy on the back of his motorcycle, had previously  been to Cuba and photographed with Castro, a picture published in the Temple University school newspaper.

32)         Brian Letell, former CIA officer involved in Cuban operations and a professor at the University of Miami, writes a book that attempts to implicate Castro in the assassination based on the accusations of a former Cuban G2 intelligence officer who says that Castro had him search for radio broadcasts out of Texas on the day of the assassination. That would indicate Castro knew JFK would be in Texas - not that he had foreknowledge of the assassination, as Letell falsely asserts.

33)         The bogus Mexico City Twist Party story is resurrected by Phil Shenon in his book that is not so much about Oswald being encouraged to kill JFK by Cuban diplomats, as it is more clearly yet another example  and case stury of the CIA supported disinformation - black propaganda campaign to link Castro to Oswald.


A Clear Example of a Black Prop Op and JFK Assassination. (Item #30)
 
Besides Shenon, a clear example of this black propaganda disinformation campaign being used in other similar operations, years later, is the SHNS report in 1981, shortly before the attempted assassination of President Ronald Reagan.

Scripps-Howard News Service – By R. H. Boyce. Thursday, March 12, 1981

Washington – The National Security Agency has alerted the CIA, the White House and State Department to a Latin American newspaper report saying Cuban President Fidel Castro is plotting the assassination of President Reagan, Scripps-Howard News Service has learned.

            The NSA, which monitors published and broadcast information around the globe, does not makes such “alert” messages available to the press. But SHNS obtained a copy, which was marked “for official use only.” It included the text of the newspaper report as well as a garbled message about the news story directed to the head of Castro’s controlled news agency, Presna Latina.

            Without revealing its sources, the news report, published yesterday in the Caracas, Venezuela, newspaper El Mundo, asserted the assassination plot called for the slaying to be carried out by Illich Ramirez Sancho, an international terrorist known as Carlos the Jackal. Carlos is said to have organized the massacre of Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympic Games in Munich, West Germany, and has been involved in dozens of terrorists acts.

            U.S. officials said the NSA’s action in alerting the U.S. intelligence community “suggests that while they are not necessarily ready to believe the report of an assassination plot, nevertheless they (NSA) find it at least worthy of looking into.”

            The Caracas newspaper story said the assassination plan “was discussed in a meeting of the International Trust of Crime in Cojimar, an exclusive beach club east of Havana, with the participants of Montonero and Tupamaro thugs, Illich Ramirez, Ramiro Valdez, Cuban Police Minister Carlos Rafael Rodriguez and Fidel Castro.”

            No identification was found of Ramiro Valdez. Montonero “thugs” are terrorists operating primarily in Argentina while Tupumaros thugs operate in Uruguay. The article said Palestine Liberation Organization chief Yasir Arafat also participated in the plan.

            Presna Latina (Latin Press) often has been used by Castro for political ends. The Pressa Latina correspondent in Caracas, at 9:47 a.m. EST yesterday, began transmitting the El Mundo article by cable to Prensa Latina headquarters in Havana. NSA monitored it. At the close of the text, Prensa Latina Caracas began adding what appears to be commentary on the El Mundo report. It reads:

            “Everything seems to indicate that Fidel Castro is planning the assassination of U.S. President Ronald Reagan in the same way that he previously ordered the assassination of John F. Kennedy and whose participation the high-ranking U.S. government circles hid…”

            There the Prensa Latina cable transmission stopped. Had it been ordered broken off by the Venezuela government, say U.S. officials, NSA would have added the words: “transmission interrupted,” to show Venezuela’s action. There was no such NSA notation. Officials provided no explanation of why the transmission ended in mid-sentence.



Assassination Psychology and the COP Profile

Assassination Psychology and the COP - Covert Operational Personality Profile


Assassination Psychology 

– By William Kelly

There was a lot of psycho-analysis going on over the course of the 50th anniversary of the assassination of President Kennedy, most coming from those who believe JFK was killed by a deranged lone nut, but instead of trying to figure out how and why Oswald did what they suggest he did – kill JFK without any assistance, they reflect on the mindset of conspiracy theorists and why they think Oswald didn’t kill Kennedy alone.

Rather than review the evidence that convinces nearly 80% of the people that Oswald didn’t act alone in killing JFK, they prefer to psychoanalyze the logic and reasoning of most people everywhere, in every time and generation, to believe conspiratorial forces killed JFK.

But those who believe Oswald killed Kennedy for his own psychological reasons fail to connect to the real motives behind the assassination.

Richard Sprague, a former prosecutor and first chief counsel to the House Select Committee on Assassinations, tasked with investigating the assassination of President Kennedy, and said to be the son of two psychologists, when asked about Oswald’s mental state said, “I am not about to find out if Oswald was nurtured at his mother’s breasts, my approach to evidence is more direct.”

Instead of considering the facts that support the belief of most people hold that Oswald wasn’t on the Sixth Floor at the time of the assassination, wasn’t the sniper in the window who didn’t shoot the fatal shot that came from the front of the president, those radical extremists who stick to the implausible belief that Oswald killed JFK alone want to psychoanalyze the rest of us who don’t see things quite as qurkey as they do.

One of the first books to attack the critics of the official version of events – “The Scavanagers and Critics of the Warren Report” – was co-authored by Lawrence Schiller, who also co-authored Norman Mailer’s book about Oswald, and who has refused to share the KGB files that were provided to them. Why are official records in the hands of private individuals who refuse to disclose their contents or turn them over to the NARA JFK Collection so they can be open to the public?

Schiller was not the first to withhold important and historical official records from the public but he was one of the first to brand critics of the Warren Report irrational “scavangers.”

Marquette University professor John McAdams wrote a book about how conspiracy theorists think and imply their thought processes are illogical. Those who promote the idea that a deranged Oswald killed Kennedy also like to psychoanalyze the logic of so-called conspiracy theorists, like Professor Michael J. Wood, lecturer at the University of Winchester in Hampshire, England, who claims that conspiracy theorists operate under a different set of assumptions than other, more rational people. When it comes to the assassination of President Kennedy Wood parrots Priscilla Johnson McMillen, who has often said, “It was a pretty shocking event on a national scale, and to think it could be the product of just one person is very unsettling.” They say how difficult it is for conspiracy theorists to accept the fact that one lowly little man had the ability to commit such a tremendous act and change the course of history, and how reassuring it is to think that there was something more sinister behind it.

But Professor Wood has it backwards – if Oswald was a deranged psycho-madman, that would be readily apparent and could be understood. What is unsettling is the idea that a crazy Oswald didn’t kill JFK alone and it was a successful conspiracy and coup d’├ętat and our democracy has been robbed of us. And that is the reason why the government today keeps secret records hidden under the guise of “national security.”

Now that’s unsettling. It’s not unsettling that JFK was killed by a deranged lone nut - it’s unsettling that it was a conspiracy that’s still affecting us today.

It’s not the mind-set of the conspiracy theorists that should be studied, it is the mind of the assassin – the man who pulled the trigger – or to flip the coin – the mind set of lone nutters who want us to believe that snipe was a crazy psycho-assassin rather than a political animal who despised and eliminated Kennedy as a threat to national security.

Was Oswald set up as a patsy and fall guy or was he the assassin, and if he was the assassin was he crazy or a professional sniper and assassin politically and professionally motivated?

Before looking more closely at Oswald’s mind set, I think we should look further into the thinking of those who claim Oswald was crazy.

If we must examine what motivates people to believe silly theories, let’s look more closely at the mind-set of the minority - 20% who hold the radical extremist view that one deranged loner killed the Kennedy, a smaller, more easily isolated and studied minority group.

At the 2013 Wecht conference in Pittsburgh Lisa Pease mentioned a formal study of those who espouse such extremist beliefs as Holocaust Deniers, 9/11 Truthers, Obama Birthers and she added Lone Nutters in the JFK case, pointing out that while they all represent a small, similar less than 20% of the population minority viewpoint, only the Lone Nutters occupy important and significant positions in government, academia and the media.

This despite the facts and evidence of the case and that Lone Nutters are totally illogical, as they claim that the alleged assassin sought fame and a place in history, yet this belies the fact that he denied the deed and claimed he was set up as a patsy.

Also illogical is the attempt to portray Oswald as a lonesome loser who couldn’t hold a job and failed at everything he tried to do, yet claim he had the wherewithal to successfully kill Kennedy all by himself. If he did kill Kennedy wouldn’t that make him the world’s best and greatest assassin in history?

And wouldn’t his mind and motives be studied forever by psychologists and psychiatrists as a standard case study of such deranged assassins and included in the same category as other nut case killers?
If Oswald killed Kennedy all by himself, wouldn’t it be of interest to determine exactly how he did it? Where’d he get the bullets? How’d he get the gun in the building? How’d he get down the stairs without anyone on the steps seeing him?

In July 1964, as the Warren Commission was wrapping up its report, Lee Harvey Oswald’s older brother Robert received a telephone call from Warren Commission attorney Wesley J. Liebeler, who was holed up in a remote cabin writing the part of the Warren Report about Oswald’s motive for shooting the President.

According to Robert Oswald, Liebeler, “...had now reached the point in the chapter where he wanted to reveal Lee’s motive for shooting the President, he said, and that was why he was calling me.”
“When you want to know something,” Liebeler said, “you go directly to the man who should know the answer.”

“I was astonished by his question,” Robert wrote. “The Commission had spent months in ‘exhaustive examination of every particle of evidence it could discover,’ as Harrison E. Salisbury wrote. Yet, here suddenly, after taking the testimony of hundreds of witnesses, a member of the Commission staff was asking me to answer during a brief telephone conversation, one of the most important questions about the entire case.”

“I had withheld judgment partly because I expected the vast authority and resources of the Commission to help me and others understand just what led to that moment of violence in Dealey Plaza. The casual call from Liebeler made me wonder whether I had placed too much faith in the Commission. When the report appeared in September, I realized that the Commission had failed completely in its search for the answer to that question.”

“Why? The few paragraphs in the summary report devoted to the subject of motive seemed to reflect the surprising uncertainty I had detected in Liebeler’s voice during our telephone conversation. After offering a few generalizations that could apply to many people who have never committed any serious crime, the Commission confessed: ‘…the Commission does not believe that it can ascribe to him any one motive or group of motives.’”

Why would Oswald kill the President if he sincerely liked him? Why did Oswald deny the deed if he did it to achieve fame and place in history?  Why’d he do it? What was his motive?

Robert Oswald was flabbergasted. Here the US government undertook this giant investigation and concluded Oswald did it alone for his own psychological motives, and they would have us believe they are reasons that we will never know because they were his own personal demons – like Ted Bundy, or John Hinckley, - just plain crazy.

But what if Oswald wasn’t the Sixth Floor Sniper assassin, and was set up to be the Patsy as he claimed – is the mind and psychology of the Patsy worth studying or knowing?

It’s like what Vincent Bugliosi said to John Judge – “I heard you don’t believe Oswald acted alone,” to which Judge replied, “Oh, I think Oswald acted alone all right, I just don’t believe he killed anyone.”

Whether Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone assassin, one of the multiple shooters or a just a mere Patsy, his motivations are worth reviewing, especially if what happened at Dealey Plaza was not the random act of a madman but a well planned and successfully executed covert intelligence operation.

Those who claim a deranged Oswald acted alone can say “case closed” and go home, leaving the psychoanalysis to the psychiatrists and psychologists, but if Oswald didn’t act alone, then there is a big hole in our “national security” shield, a hole that has allowed the intelligence network responsible for killing Kennedy to go on and continue unheeded, and permitted to function within the government from then until now.

There are two types of investigations – criminal and intelligence – with a the purpose of a criminal investigation being the accumulation of evidence that can be presented in a court of law to convict those responsible, while an intelligence investigation tries to determine exactly what happened, how and why it occurred, more so it won’t happen again and not to prosecute those responsible.

When the Secret Service commissioned psychologists to study the history of political assassinations in the United States and profile those who have attacked the president, both recent and historically, they failed to include one profile that I think is particularly important when it comes to political assassinations – that of what I call the covert operational profile.

Since the Secret Service report didn’t mention it – and being from New Jersey where we have a reputation for developing criminal profiles – I have outlined what I call the COP – the Covert Operative Personality.

And regardless as to whether you believe Lee Harvey Oswald was the Sixth Floor Sniper or was set up as the Patsy, Oswald pretty much sets the proto-type of the COP profile as a former USMC who used aliases, post office boxes and kept safe-house apartment separate from family.

COP – COVERT OPERATIONAL PERSONALITY – Profile

Modus Operandi – Covert operative, trained in intelligence tradecrafts, maintains Post Office box, valid passport, uses aliases, maintains confidential and clandestine communications, uses codes and ciphers, operates on a need-to-know basis under the command of a case officer or military superior.

Knowledge – Of military and government procedures, lines of authority, command and communications.

Specialty – Expert marksman, rifleman and sniper, working closely with spotter in special detachment, primarily overseas duty.

Status – Active duty or active reservists, US military, primarily US Marine Corps, US Navy SEAL or Special Ops detachment.

Type – Fits serial killer profile as a repeat offender, “passive-aggressive” - organized personality, involved in three or more separate events, premeditated, select type of victim, in control. Examples: John W. Booth, Byron Dela Beckwith, Lee Harvey Oswald, Frank Sturgis, Felix Rodriguez, Gerry Patrick Hemming, Charles Whitman, Michael Townbly, Timothy McVeigh, James Earl Ray, Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed Al Megrahi.

Type II: (disorganized personality, psycho motivated, mentally deranged, possibly intentionally hypno-drug programmed), Leon Czoigosz, Luis Angel Castillo, Charles J. Guiteau, John Hinkley, Sirhan B. Sirhan, Robert W. Piclett, Jessica Wilcox