Jefferson Morley's Unbearable Lightness of Being

[W. Tracy Parnell]

We have to add the actions of Stuckey - who was almost as critical to any supposed operation as Bringuier - to the mix. It was Stuckey who met Oswald, was impressed enough to interview him on TV and then invite him to a debate. If Stuckey meets Oswald and thinks, "This is a nut, no thanks" then the whole matter fades away.

Multiple people involved here, directly or indirectly, with no evidence, from them or elsewhere, of being controlled or directed by Joannides. And it sure as heck isn't in the Joannides file.

Stuckey's testimony is here: https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/stuckey.htm

Very good points Steve.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Given that Oswald's confrontation with Bringuier made the local news (plus Oswald requested to speak to the FBI while in police custody) and they also had a radio show appearance together, the odds that Joannides had no knowledge of Oswald prior to 11/22/63 are very low.

Bringuer also noted that he reported everything that happened with Oswald to the DRE leaders in Miami who reported to "Howard".

Unless Joannides was bad at his job, we can assume he read Bringuer's reports and had heard of LHO before 11/22/63 via other information sources.


We can agree that none of this information directly connects Joannides to JFK's assassination if that's what you mean. Even if LHO was wittingly or unwittingly part of the CIA's campaign against the "Fair Play for Cuba" organization, it doesn't prove the CIA was complicit in JFK's murder.

I'm fully aware of that and am not arguing that this is some sort of "Smoking Gun". I don't think Jeff Morley is suggesting that either.

But it does however raise questions about what else the CIA has lied about in the official records.

What you have to have is GJ's knowledge of LHO before the assassination AND GJ running Bringuier's interactions with LHO for a nefarious purpose. All you have is the possible knowledge of LHO by GJ who by all accounts did nothing with said knowledge BEFORE the assassination. Without all of these things you have a nothingburger.

BTW, Morley is right back to claiming there was an Oswald Operation. He is just not saying he has a smoking gun anymore because he doesn't and never did. But he is still claiming the same thing-there was a nefarious operation run by GJ that somehow involved LHO.

[Jon Banks]

Multiple people involved here, directly or indirectly, with no evidence, from them or elsewhere, of being controlled or directed by Joannides. And it sure as heck isn't in the Joannides file.

Stuckey's testimony is here: https://www.jfk-assassination.net/russ/testimony/stuckey.htm

The 17 months worth of information missing from Joannides' files overlaps with the summer of 1963. Therefore we can't say for certain what Joannides knew or wrote about Oswald:

"Harrelson’s memo also noted that progress reports on Joannides’s Miami operation were missing for the 17 months he was there"


All I can say is that some of you have too much pride to admit that you were lied to...

[Jon Banks]

What you have to have is GJ's knowledge of LHO before the assassination AND GJ running Bringuier's interactions with LHO for a nefarious purpose.

I disagree. Read what Jose Lanuza told the Miami Herald in 2019:

Jose Antonio Lanuza, 83, a former member of the Directorio Revolucionario Estudiantil, or Revolutionary Student Directorate, a Cuban exile anti-Castro organization active in the 1960s, told the Herald he was hoping the remaining documents would confirm a long-held suspicion that he, and other Directorate members, were used by Joannides, the organization’s case handler in Miami, to create and later spread the fake narrative that Oswald was a pro-Castro sympathizer, providing a handy motive for the assassination.

“I think [the CIA] built this legend,” Lanuza said. “Why? Because when it became known that he had killed Kennedy, an idiot named José Antonio Lanuza, that’s me, suddenly his memory would tell him, hey, I know this guy, this is Castro sympathizer.”

Morley has also advanced a version of this theory, but he told reporters last week that he believes Joannides may have used Oswald to undermine the work of Fair Play for Cuba.

Read more at: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article270075417.html#storylink=cpy

BTW, Morley is right back to claiming there was an Oswald Operation. He is just not saying he has a smoking gun anymore because he doesn't and never did. But he is still claiming the same thing-there was a nefarious operation run by GJ that somehow involved LHO.

GJ was into some pretty nefarious stuff including attempts to recruit assassins for anti-Castro operations.

Plus he ran a CIA operation in the US, which is illegal.

Joannides would NOT have been approved to be the CIA’s liaison for the HSCA had Congress known his background at that time.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

I disagree. Read what Jose Lanuza told the Miami Herald in 2019:

Joannides would NOT have been approved to be the CIA’s liaison for the HSCA had Congress known his background at that time.

So, Lanuza believes some conspiracy stuff-fine. But notice he did not say "The DRE was running an Oswald Operation at the behest of GJ."

And GJ would not have been approved-so what? No evidence that he covered up anything, only that he didn't tell about his own operations likely because he didn't want to be interviewed by the committee. Also, the evidence that the HSCA was that interested in what the DRE and their 1963 case officer were doing is very slim. My article has already addressed Blakey and most everything said by Hardway is based off of him.

[Jon Banks]

the evidence that the HSCA was that interested in what the DRE and their 1963 case officer were doing is very slim.

Only if you ignore what Robert Blakey and Dan Hardway have said about Joannides:

"According to Blakey, if he had known about Joannides's connection to the DRE, Joannides would have been called as a witness to be interrogated under oath, rather than serving as the liaison."

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/5-decades-later-some-jfk-probe-files-still-sealed/1922978/


Staff members for the committee have said they were making progress on unearthing documents from the CIA in 1978 until a new agency liaison was installed: Joannides, whom they had no idea was at the center of what they were trying to uncover.

“Joannides began to change the way file access was handled,” committee staff member Dan Hardway testified before Luna’s task force in May. “The obstruction of our efforts by Joannides escalated over the summer [of 1978]. … It was clear that CIA had begun to carefully review files before delivering them to us for review.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/07/14/cia-oswald-jfk-assassination-joannides/


Morley is over the target and you folks are either useful idiots or paid shills.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Only if you ignore what Robert Blakey and Dan Hardway have said about Joannides:

"According to Blakey, if he had known about Joannides's connection to the DRE, Joannides would have been called as a witness to be interrogated under oath, rather than serving as the liaison."

https://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/5-decades-later-some-jfk-probe-files-still-sealed/1922978/


Staff members for the committee have said they were making progress on unearthing documents from the CIA in 1978 until a new agency liaison was installed: Joannides, whom they had no idea was at the center of what they were trying to uncover.

“Joannides began to change the way file access was handled,” committee staff member Dan Hardway testified before Luna’s task force in May. “The obstruction of our efforts by Joannides escalated over the summer [of 1978]. … It was clear that CIA had begun to carefully review files before delivering them to us for review.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2025/07/14/cia-oswald-jfk-assassination-joannides/


Morley is over the target and you folks are either useful idiots or paid shills.

I wrote a rather lengthy piece of Blakey. As I said, Hardway's comments are based on Blakey. Some of Blakey's comments are based on Fonzi of all people.

https://wtracyparnell.blogspot.com/2025/06/jfk-file-expert-skeptical-of-blakeys.html

When Morley can prove GJ was running an Oswald Operation of some type, he will have something. The problem is, Bringuier doesn't support it and the actual DRE guys in Miami don't support it even if they support CTs. In fact, nothing supports it. End of story.