JFK Assassination Forum

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.

From what I can see, all the conspiracy people here need to go back and re-read Fred's article carefully. They are not getting the facts right. Here's one major fact. It is not just Bringuier saying that he had nothing to do with Joannides. None of the DRE people are claiming or have ever claimed that Joannides told Bringuier what to do. Bringuier did what came naturally when he saw a pro-Castro supporter like LHO.

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

We don't have proof that Joannides knew about Oswald before the assassination-only after.

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.

One or two of the members said they told Joannides about Oswald. That is all the evidence we have on that. But even if they told him before, there is no evidence that he thought much about it or did anything about it. And nobody says that he did. That is why it is a nothingburger.

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.

That's not the point.

The point is, the DRE reported to a CIA officer named "Howard" who we now can confirm was Joannides.

Which means, Joannides knew about Oswald before the assassination and advised the DRE on what to do with the information they had on Oswald after the assassination.

You guys act as if LN'ers didn't spend years accepting the CIA's denials that "Howard" existed. The CIA's rep for the ARRB has more integrity than you all because at least he admits that he was wrong.

We don't have proof that Joannides knew about Oswald before the assassination-only after. One or two of the members said they told Joannides about Oswald. That is all the evidence we have on that. But even if they told him before, there is no evidence that he thought much about it or did anything about it. And nobody says that he did. That is why it is a nothingburger.

From what I can see, all the conspiracy people here need to go back and re-read Fred's article carefully. They are not getting the facts right. Here's one major fact. It is not just Bringuier saying that he had nothing to do with Joannides. None of the DRE people are claiming or have ever claimed that Joannides told Bringuier what to do. Bringuier did what came naturally when he saw a pro-Castro supporter like LHO.