JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate => Topic started by: Tom Graves on February 18, 2026, 02:20:48 AM
-
David Reitzes posted the following at the Alt.Conspiracy.JFK Google group in 1999.
Did Clay Shaw perjure himself when he said he never worked for the CIA?
No; the claim that Shaw perjured himself is based on the ill-informed belief
that anyone who performs a service for the CIA is an agent or employee. Shaw
served as a contact for the Domestic Contact Services division of the CIA
between 1948 and 1956; there is no evidence that he was ever employed by the
CIA as a contract agent or in any other capacity. Just as FBI Paid Criminal
Informant Jack Ruby can in no manner be designated an agent or employee of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, CIA domestic contacts -- paid or unpaid -- are
not agents or employees of the Central Intelligence Agency.
Hundreds if not thousands of businessmen who travel and trade abroad serve as
domestic contacts for the CIA, providing a legitimate source of intelligence.
"Contact" status in no way relates to the notorious exploits of the CIA's
Covert Action arm, and cannot be reasonably related to the Kennedy
assassination in any manner.
Many Garrison boosters don't even realize that Shaw was not charged with
perjury regarding the CIA; Shaw was charged with perjury for denying
associations with Lee Harvey Oswald and David William Ferrie. Garrison had no
evidence whatsoever that Shaw worked for the CIA (or was even a contract agent
-- many Garrison fans don't even understand the difference) and his followers
would likewise come up empty-handed when trying to substantiate the claim.
Meanwhile, documents released in the mid-'90s under the JFK Records Act have
fueled speculation that Shaw was indeed a contract agent. But what do these
documents actually say?
In Fair Play, Martin Shackelford writes, "The CIA paid for one of Shaw's trips
in 1955, and the following year he actively solicited information for them.
Although a CIA internal report described him as a valuable informant, his
formal connection with the Agency suddenly ended in 1956. His CIA activities,
though, continued. The House Select Committee on Assassinations learned, but
didn't report, that Shaw was heavily involved in anti-Castro activities; he
allowed one group rent-free space in his International Trade Mart. He had a
working relationship with former FBI agent Guy Banister, many of whose former
employees now confirm that Banister employed Oswald in the summer of 1963."
As Shackelford omits source citations in his article, the basis of the
allegation that the CIA paid for a trip in 1955 is unknown, although this
writer does not contest the fact. CIA contacts are often reimbursed for
services performed. Shackelford likewise omits any citation or description of
the manner in which Shaw "actively solicited information" for the CIA, or a
description of the type of information he allegedly sought. There is nothing to
indicate that Shaw was acting as anything more than the informant the CIA long
ago revealed him to have been.
The statement about Shaw's so-called "CIA activities" continuing after 1956 is
misleading. For one thing, Shaw had never been involved in any "CIA activities"
in an operational sense. There also is no firm evidence that Shaw's agency ties
extended past 1956, as will be examined shortly.
Shackelford refers to a relationship between Shaw and William George Gaudet,
something worthy of investigation. Gaudet published the Latin American
Newsletter out of the rent-free office at the Trade Mart. Gaudet himself had
been a CIA domestic contact until 1961, and told journalist Anthony Summers in
1978 that the Newsletter was a CIA front operation. This is not a charge that
can be dismissed outright: Although the Newsletter's official sponsor was
Standard Fruit, a company which did a tremendous amount of business in Latin
America, a great deal of its funding came from New Orleans doctor Alton
Ochsner, founder of the Ochsner Clinic, who had a long-standing relationship
with the CIA that has not been adequately explained with regard to his
anti-Communist activities in New Orleans over the years.
Gaudet himself plays a murky role in the story of Oswald's 1963 summer in New
Orleans. He happened to be next in line to Oswald when Oswald applied for his
Mexican tourist visa. Though the registry list was published by the Warren
Commission, Gaudet's name was withheld from the public until it accidentally
leaked out in 1975. Gaudet insisted he did not see Oswald that day and called
the event a coincidence. He did say, however, that he'd seen Oswald around the
Trade Mart and, most interestingly, he said he had witnessed Oswald conversing
at length with New Orleans ultra right-wing extremist Guy Banister on several
occasions.
Gaudet, who is now deceased, remains something of a mystery, though his
relationship to the International Trade Mart may not prove especially
noteworthy, since -- according to Garrison advocate Jim DiEugenio's *Destiny
Betrayed* -- it was ITM employee Ted Brent, not Clay Shaw, who allowed Gaudet
the use of ITM office space. As an institution prominently involved in
facilitating trade with Latin America, the ITM could have had legitimate
reasons for providing an office for the Latin American Newsletter. And if the
Newsletter was indeed a front for a CIA operation, as Gaudet has stated, there
are any number of explanations that don't require implicating anyone in high
crimes or assassinations.
It is now theorized that Shaw may well have had a working relationship with
rabid anti-Communist, ex-FBI Bureau Chief Guy Banister; many New Orleans civic
leaders did. However, even for those who theorize that Lee Harvey Oswald was
somehow involved in Banister's operation, this hardly implies a link between
Shaw and Oswald. In short, Shackelford generates a lot of smoke with no
evidence of fire.
Shackelford continues, "As late as 1967, Shaw had a 'covert security'
classification for a top secret program called QK/ENCHANT. The program remains
so highly classified that we are still unable to learn anything about its
nature, but Shaw's classification was approved by the CIA's then covert
operations chief, Richard Helms, and we know that clearances were being granted
in December 1962.
"Former CIA official Victor Marchetti said that QK/ENCHANT was most likely run
out of the Domestic Operations Division of the Clandestine Services, run by
Tracy Barnes. Support for this comes from recently released documents
identifying Barnes' then-deputy, E. Howard Hunt, as another individual involved
with QK/ENCHANT. We also know that a pilot was considered for clearance for the
program. One of the few others known to have been cleared for QK/ENCHANT was
Monroe Sullivan, director of the San Francisco Trade Mart, and Shaw's alibi
witness for November 22, 1963. At the time of the House Select Committee
investigation in 1976, inquiries to the CIA about Clay Shaw were coordinated by
J. Walton Moore, the former Dallas CIA contact for Oswald's friend George De
Mohrenschildt."
Webmaster John McAdams notes that a document from the HSCA, CIA Segregated
Collection, puts a different light on this. . . . a series of handwritten
notes, presumably by an HSCA staffer," dated June 28, 1978 and regarding a
"possible CIA connection" to "Clay Shaw." Referring to a CIA memo of September
18, 1968, it notes that Shaw was "granted covert security approval for use
under Project [REDACTED] on an unwitting basis 10 Dec. 62" (NARA
180-10143-10220, Agency File Number 29-04-01). McAdams also cites a CIA
memorandum dated 26 April 1967, which reports that "J. Monroe Sullivan,
#280207, was granted a covert security approval on 10 December 1962 so that he
could be used in Project [REDACTED]. SHAW has #402897-A."
These are the documents that the Assassination Records Review Board has now
confirmed are in reference to QK/ENCHANT. McAdams notes that Shaw's "approval,"
not "clearance," was for use on an UNWITTING basis.
Shackelford's conclusions would seem to be unfounded. The Agency was either
using Shaw as an unsuspecting source of intelligence of an unknown nature or
they were actually spying on HIM for some reason.
Victor Marchetti is quoted frequently by conspiracy theorists despite the
questionable nature of his information. It should be kept in mind that
Marchetti incorrectly informed researcher A. J. Weberman in the '70s that the
existence of a CIA 201 file in Oswald's name was proof that Oswald had been a
CIA contract agent. 201 files actually have nothing to do with contract
employment or operational use of a subject.
The references to Tracy Barnes, Howard Hunt, and George De Mohrenschildt are
window dressing: Shaw himself had no idea that any CIA operation was going on
around him, and there is no reason to believe he ever had any relationship with
Howard Hunt or any of the other figures named.
We also know that J. Monroe Sullivan, onetime director of the San Francisco
World Trade Center had been granted a "covert security approval" for
QK/ENCHANT. Sullivan told Patricia Lambert in 1997 that he'd never heard of any
such thing and that he'd never worked for the CIA. That's a reasonable enough
claim: Like Shaw, Sullivan was approved for unwitting use.
Now, you ask, what exactly was QK/ENCHANT? We don't know; the CIA isn't
talking. If two men involved in international trade were unwittingly involved,
one might guess that QK/ENCHANT had something to do with business-related
intelligence. Why don't we ask the authority on Shaw's purported CIA
connections, Mr. Bill Davy. From "Through the Looking Glass," p. 54 fn. 16:
(quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
CIA Information and Privacy coordinator, John Wright, has written to the author
that information on QK/ENCHANT is still classified. Yet, an admitted ex-CIA
employee has broadcast on a popular computer Bulletin Board System, that
QK/ENCHANT involved routine debriefing of people in the trade industry. Either
this person has violated his/her secrecy agreement by revealing classified
information or is deliberately spreading false information. Time will tell.
(end quote) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Shackelford continues, "Another recently released document connects Shaw to the
top secret project ZR/CLIFF, which was run out of William Harvey's super-secret
Staff D along with the ZR/RIFLE assassination program."
This writer has not seen the document in question, so a definitive conclusion
cannot be drawn. The CIA's Staff D was a division generally involved with
cryptography, although the existence of ZR/RIFLE, the CIA's top-secret
assassinations training operation was confirmed by the Church Committee in
1975. Shackelford notes that ZR/RIFLE, though operated out of Staff D, was kept
separate from the crypto operations, and suggests that the same may be true of
ZR/CLIFF. He explains, "The top-secret CIA division Staff D was used to conceal
the highly-sensitive ZR/RIFLE assassination program. ZR/CLIFF may well have
been handled in the same fashion, as it was also run out of Staff D. What we
don't know is why it would be that highly sensitive" (E-mail to this author,
December 3, 1998).
In five months, Shackelford has not been able to come up with a citation for
his claim. The closest I can find is a Bill Davy allegation from *Through the
Looking Glass* claiming to link Shaw to a pilot who was allegedly considered
but refused for the ZR/CLIFF project:
Leslie Norman Bradley (described as a "soldier- of-fortune and freelance
pilot") was alleged by Klansman/Minuteman Jules Ricco Kimble to have known Clay
Shaw, and that NORMAN "was once considered for employment as a pilot in Project
ZR/CLIFF, but for unknown reasons the offer of employment was withdrawn" (Davy,
9).
It would appear the entire "ZR/CLIFF" accusation is another false lead. I do
yet again invite Mr. Shackelford to produce that citation, however.
The latest allegation regarding Shaw, the CIA, and assassination plots involves
Freeport Sulphur, which, according to researcher Lisa Pease, is "a company that
connects the CIA, the Rockefellers, Clay Shaw and [CIA officer] David Phillips.
The company had serious clashes with Castro over an expensive project, and with
the Kennedy administration over matters of great monetary significance to
Freeport. Allegations of a Canadian connection with New Orleans, and Cuban
nickel mining and processing operations fit neatly into Shaw's reported
activities. And this is a company which had at least one director reportedly
talking about killing Castro." Pease's case can be examined at:
http://www.webcom.com/~lpease/collections/hidden/board.htm
*What about this Centro Mondiale Commerciale?*
Clay Shaw sat on the board of directors of Centro Mondiale Commerciale, an
alleged CIA front, and its subsidiary, Permindex, which has been linked by some
to assassination plots directed against foreign leaders. These allegations were
the subject of a 1967 article in an Italian newspaper, Paese Sera. CMC had been
ejected from both Italy and Switzerland and relocated to Johannesburg, South
Africa, due to perceived subversive activities, including alleged assassination
plots against Charles de Gaulle and others. The Italian authorities accused CMC
of money laundering and of being a CIA front company, and its officers' refusal
to divulge information about the source of some of its funds contributed
towards its hasty ejection from the country.
A State Department memo released by the Assassination Records Review Board
confirms the long-alleged identities of Shaw's fellow board members, an
astonishing bunch consisting largely of former officials of Nazi Germany and
Fascist Italy.
Shaw told *Penthouse* magazine, "Back in 1959 or 1960, a young Italian came to
see me in New Orleans and told me about a world trade center that was being
planned in Rome. The idea was to have one place where buyers coming into the
Common Market area would find all the Common Market countries represented in
one center. He wanted my advice and asked me to serve on the board of
directors. I had no objection if it was a legitimate project. I investigated it
and found that the head of it was a man named Imre Nagy, who had been the last
non-Communist premier of Hungary. Some of the other people involved were
Italian senators, journalists, lawyers, and other responsible people. It was
agreed that we would have an exhibit at their center, and they would have one
at the mart here in New Orleans, and we would exchange information and so on. I
didn't mind being on their board, although there was no money involved, but I
would have to go to Rome annually to the board meetings and my way would be
paid, so why not? Then they ran into difficulties, but they finally got the
center opened. It turned out to be either badly planned or badly organized and
it closed very shortly, and that was the last I ever heard of it. I never heard
that it was a CIA operation and I don't know that it was. I'll say this -- it
was a highly unsuccessful operation which is not customary with the CIA. Other
than what I've told you, I know nothing more about the Centro Mondiale
Commerciale. I have never had any connection with the CIA."
The *Paese Sera* charges were never especially well documented. Inevitably,
what little we know about CMC/Permindex comes from sources of questionable
reliability.
Alleged former CIA agent Robert Morrow describes flying to Greece with David
Ferrie to transport a cache of arms from a Permindex warehouse to Houma,
Louisiana. This is implied to be the cache later acquired in Houma by a
CIA-backed group of anti-Castro plotters including Ferrie, Gordon Novel, and
Sergio Arcacha Smith -- some of the same cast of characters that Morrow and
others have fingered in the assassination, and whom Jim Garrison himself had
been investigating. Morrow's source regarding the shipment's destination is CIA
officer Tracy Barnes, who, of course, is not alive to substantiate the author's
story.
Ulric Shannon researched Morrow's claims for a review of Morrow's *First Hand
Knowledge.* Shannon's article demonstrates that Morrow's story lacks even a
semblance of credibility:
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/morrow.htm
The pseudonymous "William Torbitt," believed to be Texas attorney David
Copeland, in a 1970 manuscript entitled *Nomenclature of an Assassination
Cabal,* and published recently as *Nazis, NASA & JFK,* accused Permindex of
complicity in the JFK assassination. "Torbitt's" sole cited source is the
*Paese Sera* article.
*Didn't the CIA try to destroy Garrison's investigation?*
Former CIA agent-turned-author Victor Marchetti testified to the HSCA that he
heard Richard Helms and various CIA officers discuss the Shaw trial on numerous
occasions, and quotes Helms as asking of one agent, "Are we doing everything we
can [for Shaw]?"
While Marchetti's credibility remains questionable, Robert Tanenbaum, onetime
Deputy Counsel for the House Select Committee on Assassinations, stated in an
interview with Jim DiEugenio that he'd seen documents proving the CIA
interfered with the Garrison investigation, and both he and HSCA investigator
Gaeton Fonzi have alleged that the DA's office was infiltrated and disrupted by
CIA agents. Such allegations remain unsubstantiated.
When researcher Vince Salandria worked with Garrison, they and other members of
Garrison's team believed that the CIA was actively plotting against them.
Salandria admits now that a lot of this was simple paranoia: "I would see
anybody trying to destroy Garrison as a CIA agent" (JFK: The Book of the Film,
195).
*Wasn't there a massive government conspiracy against Jim Garrison?*
That's what Garrison said. But is there any truth to that assertion?
If there was a government conspiracy against Jim Garrison's office . . .
1. Why did the Supreme Court (under Earl Warren) refuse to intervene and
dismiss the Shaw case when they had the chance? (New York Times, December 20,
1968)
2. Why did Ohio Governor James Rhodes agree to extradite Garrison witness
Gordon Novel? ("Novel Will Be Returned -- Ohio," New Orleans Time-Picayune, May
10, 1967; cited in Epstein, *Counterplot*)
3. Why did Judge William T. Gillie dismiss the extradition case against
Gordon Novel only after REPEATEDLY asking Garrison's office to complete the
necessary paperwork within the required sixty-day period? ("Ohio Frees
'Witness' Sought by Garrison," New York Times, July 4, 1967; cited in Epstein)
4. Why did California Governor Ronald Reagan refuse to extradite Garrison
suspect Edgar Eugene Bradley only after Garrison's office refused to present
even the slightest evidence of Bradley's complicity in the assassination? (New
York Times, November 9, 1968; cited in Epstein)
5. Why did Nebraska and then Iowa authorities refuse to extradite witness
Sandra Moffett, when the Shaw trial transcript proves it was the defense -- not
the prosecution -- that wanted Moffett's testimony? (Shaw trial transcript,
opening day arguments)
6. Why did Texas authorities agree to allow Garrison's office to depose
Sergio Arcacha Smith -- an offer that Garrison turned down? (cf. Paris
Flammonde, *The Kennedy Conspiracy,* 117-21)
7. Why was Judge Charles W. Halleck, Jr., about to hear Harold Weisberg
and Bud Fensterwald's arguments for releasing the JFK autopsy materials to the
New Orleans DA when Charles Ward at Garrison's office phoned Weisberg and
Fensterwald AT THE COURTHOUSE and ordered them to drop the entire suit?
(Weisberg, *Post Mortem,* 135-6; Livingstone, *Killing the Truth,* 376).
8. Why did the courts enforce Garrison's subpoena to LIFE magazine for the
Zapruder film?
9. Why did Judge Herbert J. Christenberry dismiss Garrison's perjury
charges against Clay Shaw only after a lengthy 1971 hearing in which, among
other curious incidents, Garrison refused to state how many witnesses he had
against Clay Shaw at the time of Shaw's arrest, refused to answer questions
about the veracity of witness Vernon Bundy's testimony, refused to elaborate on
his claim that more had come out of his investigation than merely the Shaw
prosecution, and -- perhaps most curious of all -- Garrison's star witness,
Perry Raymond Russo, pleaded the Fifth Amendment when he was called to testify
on Garrison's behalf? (Christenberry transcript; Patricia Lambert, *False
Witness,* 165-79)
10. Why -- in thirty years -- has not a shred of evidence emerged
indicating that elements of the US government obstructed Jim Garrison's case or
interfered with his investigation?
As Jim Garrison himself pointed out in his often quoted *Playboy* interview, "The
very repetition of a charge lends it a certain credibility, since people have a
tendency to believe that where there's smoke, there's fire . . ."
One thing is certain: If there exists even a single shred of evidence
implicating Clay L. Shaw in a conspiracy to assassinate President John F.
Kennedy, Jim Garrison failed to unearth it for Shaw's 1969 trial, and his
advocates have failed to turn it up in the three decades since.
-
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10337-10006.pdf
(https://i.postimg.cc/xCqwc0wV/Screen-Shot-2569-02-17-at-15-34-47.png)
The chief of the CIA history staff in 1992 said Shaw was a "highly paid CIA contract source" until 1956.
Some have said that quote was typo, the historian meant to "highly rated contact source," although the historian never issued a correction. This seems like a weak argument, to the point of risibility. On such a matter on intense interest, the CIA historian just happened to make multiple typos?
Others have said, somewhat mysteriously, that the underlying documents do not support the historian's conclusion.
I wonder what that means, and who reviewed all the HSCA documents and files, and microfilms, that the CIA historian's office did back in the early 1990s.
(https://i.postimg.cc/2Sh8Sx4M/Screen-Shot-2569-02-18-at-21-32-54.png)
Inside those 64 boxes were any number of microfilmed documents.
Am I to believe a JFKA researcher also went through all 64 boxes, and then confirmed that Clay Shaw had never been a CIA contract source? And that the dreadnought researcher's work was confirmed by others?
As it stands, the CIA historian's statement seems solid.
Are the LN'ers doing the CT thing? Any evidence that does not fit the narrative must be false?
-
"BC" wrote:
The chief of the CIA history staff in 1992 said Shaw was a "highly paid CIA contract source" until 1956.
Some have said that quote was typo, the historian meant to say "highly rated (sic; valued) contact source," although the historian never issued a correction. This seems like a weak argument, to the point of risibility. On such a matter on intense interest, the CIA historian just happened to make multiple typos?
Others have said, somewhat mysteriously, that the underlying documents do not support the historian's conclusion.
I wonder what that means, and who reviewed all the HSCA documents and files, and microfilms, that the CIA historian's office did back in the early 1990s.
Inside those 64 boxes were any number of microfilmed documents.
Am I to believe a JFKA researcher also went through all 64 boxes, and then confirmed that Clay Shaw had never been a CIA contract source? And that the dreadnought researcher's work was confirmed by others?
As it stands, the CIA historian's statement seems solid.
Dear "BC,"
Could you please explain to me what in the world a "CIA contract source" is?
Tangentially, do you agree that Shaw was a voluntary source for the Domestic Contact Service for eight years, and that he produced something like seventeen reports?
If so, don't you find it strange that J. Kenneth would fail to mention that, but would say that he was a "highly paid contract source," instead?
Do you think several people may have been involved managing and summarizing, etc., Shaw's reports from 1948 (when he either patriotically volunteered to be an unpaid contact source or was given a very lucrative contract, indeed, to spy for the evil, evil CIA) to 1956?
Do you think J. Kenneth did all of his own research on everything he wrote about in that long report, or do you think he probably had several helpers?
Do you think that several people on J. Kenneth's hysterical I mean historical staff may have been involved in cobbling the long report together?
'Nuf said.
-- "TG"
-
TG--
1. The paragraph regarding Clay Shaw is high and prominent in the CIA historian's report, on a matter of intense interest. It is hard to imagine the description on Shaw contains inadvertent, multiple, and crucial typos in the key sentence that describes Shaw relationship to the CIA. I assume the historian meant what he said. That leaves possibility No. 2:
2. If the description of Shaw is intentional, as it obviously is, then you are assuming the historian and his staff made an error when they read through the HSCA documents---but have you reviewed the contents of the 64 boxes they reviewed?
Has Fred Lifton, who also claims the CIA historian was in error, due to mistakes the historian made in understanding "the underlying" documents? Which underlying documents misled the historian?
This is risible. Yes, Clay Shaw was a highly paid CIA contract source up until 1956, and likely worked informally after that. Big deal.
Does that mean Shaw helped perp the JFKA? Very unlikely.
It would be interesting to find out if Bruce Solie, or someone else in the CIA, put Shaw onto LHO, the way J. Walton Moore (in Dallas) put DeMohrenschildt onto LHO.
Solie was intensely involved in the CIA monitoring and reaction to Garrison (says Blunt). Why did Solie, ostensibly in counter-intel, get involved with LHO and Garrison?
-
Benjamin: That CIA document is a summary of the segregated collection, and there is NO underlying document which says that Clay Shaw was a "highly paid contract source." Of course, there is no such thing as a "contract source." And,
there are many underlying documents that say he was not paid.
It was a mistake, pure and simple. But, go ahead and find the underlying document that supports the statement. They are all online.
fred
-
"BC" wrote (my comments are in brackets):
TG --
1. The paragraph regarding Clay Shaw is high and prominent in the CIA historian's report [LOL], on a matter of intense interest. It is hard to imagine the description on Shaw contains inadvertent, multiple, and crucial typos in the key sentence that describes Shaw relationship to the CIA. I assume the historian meant what he said. That leaves possibility No. 2:
2. If the description of Shaw is intentional, as it obviously is [LOL], then you are assuming the historian and his staff made an error when they read through the HSCA documents -- but have you reviewed the contents of the 64 boxes they reviewed [wowie zowie!!!]?
Has Fred Lifton [sic], who claims the CIA historian, J. Kenneth McDonald, was in error due to mistakes he made in understanding "the underlying" documents [read the 64 boxes of documents that the historian and/or his helpers allegedly read]? Which underlying documents misled the historian [and/or his helpers]?
This is risible. Yes, Clay Shaw was [allegedly] a highly paid CIA contract source up until 1956 and likely [wowie zowie!!!] worked informally after that. Big deal.
Does that mean Shaw helped perp the JFKA? Very unlikely. [Bummer, dude.]
It would be interesting to find out if Bruce Solie, or someone else in the CIA, put Shaw onto LHO, the way J. Walton Moore (in Dallas) put DeMohrenschildt onto LHO.
Solie was intensely involved in the CIA monitoring and reaction to Garrison (says Blunt). [Wowie zowie!!!]
Why did Solie, ostensibly in counter-intel, get involved with LHO and Garrison?
. . . . . . . .
My reply:
Dear "BC,"
To err is human.
For example, you mistakenly called Fred Litwin "Fred Lifton" in your post.
Along that same line of thought, I figure that one of J. Kenneth's helpers probably made the mistake of writing either "Clay Shaw was a highly valued contract source," or "Clay Shaw was a highly paid contact source," and J. Kenneth or one of his other helpers compounded the error by trying to "clarify" it.
It is interesting to note, however, that J. Kenneth compiled his report in 1992, one year after Oliver Stone came out with his self-described mythological ("to counter the myth of the Warren Report") piece of KGB disinformation known as "JFK."
Who's to say that J. Kenneth didn't get zombified by it as did so many other otherwise intelligent Americans?
-- "TG"
PS Malcolm Blunt didn't say, "Bruce Solie was intensely involved in the CIA's monitoring and reaction to Garrison."
He said, "There's a great mass of documentation. Solie is all over the JFK investigation, [and for] Jim Garrison, the person that's all over Clay Shaw is Bruce Solie. You know (to his assistant Bart Kamp), there are handwritten notes by Solie. He's the guy who was really sitting on the Clay Shaw stuff."
-
FL-
What evidence do you have there are no "underlying documents" in the 64 boxes of documents reviewed by the CIA historian (that includes oodles of microfilm, btw) that asserts Shaw was a CIA contract source.
Have you reviewed the contents of the 64 boxes? Was your work vetted by an independent reviewer?
Has the CIA historian, or successors, ever corrected the purported error? Why not?
Has anyone in the CIA ever denied the accuracy of the CIA historian's statement? Why not?
Max Holland accepts the CIA historian's findings. Even Max Holland.
Are you, and Tom Graves, the only people who assert the CIA historian made an error in his description of Shaw?
I can't think of anyone else.
-
Max Holland does NOT accept what the historian wrote.
The segregated collection is online. You can search it yourself. There is no CIA document, except this one, that refers to a "contract source."
It is obviously a mistake.
The document was made by staff, not by McDonald himself.
Paul Hoch found another error in the document.
From my post:
It is important to note the McDonald summary document in question (which is factually unreliable for reasons apart from its description of Shaw) was not prepared contemporaneously during Shaw’s years of service to the Agency, but decades later. It was compiled for the purpose of describing a collection of assassination-related documents the Agency was preparing to release at the order of then CIA Director Robert Gates, months before the Assassination Records Collection Act became law. All of this material was given to the HSCA.
As for the document's reliability, researcher Paul Hoch has found another example of where this document was wrong. It refers to "records relating to Gilberto Alvarado, who maintained that he witnessed Cubans passing Oswald cash at a party on the night before the assassination." In fact, this description is obviously a confused mashup of two allegations that were separately made: one by Gilberto Alvarado in 1963 (which he ultimately retracted), and another, made later, by Elena Garro de Paz.
A different page in the 1992 document correctly describes Alvarado as "the Nicaraguan who claimed he saw Lee Harvey Oswald receive cash in meetings inside Mexico City Cuban embassy."
Elena Garro de Paz claimed to have seen Oswald and two companions at a "twist party" in Mexico City.
The date given for this twist party (November 21) matches neither allegation and is obviously an error, thus suggesting that the 1992 document is not exactly a completely reliable accounting of what is in the CIA's own archive.
https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/was-clay-shaw-a-contract-agent-for-the-cia
(https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/was-clay-shaw-a-contract-agent-for-the-cia)
-
Maybe it was "Bertrand" :D
George Lardner | Washington Post
The Attorney General’s remarks consequently amounted to an acceptance of Garrison’s
charge that Clay Shaw and "Clay Bertrand” are one and the same. “It’s the same guy,”
said one source in the Justice Department.
-
Maybe it was "Bertrand" :D
George Lardner | Washington Post
The Attorney General’s remarks consequently amounted to an acceptance of Garrison’s
charge that Clay Shaw and "Clay Bertrand” are one and the same. “It’s the same guy,”
said one source in the Justice Department.
Point being?
-
Maybe it was "Bertrand" :D
George Lardner | Washington Post
The Attorney General’s remarks consequently amounted to an acceptance of Garrison’s
charge that Clay Shaw and "Clay Bertrand” are one and the same. “It’s the same guy,”
said one source in the Justice Department.
"Justice Admits Error in Shaw-Bertrand Tie"/George Lardner
"The Department of Justice acknowledged yesterday that it goofed in ever suggesting that Clay Shaw was the mysterious "Clay Bertrand" sought after the assassination of President Kennedy.
Attorney General Ramsey Clark took responsibility for the snafu in a statement issued by a Department spokesman. Clark, the spokesman said, felt that justice would best be served by the embarrassing admission.
(https://www.drivehq.com/file/DFPublishFile.aspx/FileID13261946417/Keyw0jfa39xq0xw/error.png)
https://ia801206.us.archive.org/35/items/nsia-ClarkRamseyStatementsOnShaw/nsia-ClarkRamseyStatementsOnShaw/Clark%20Ramsey%20On%20Shaw%2008.pdf
-
"Justice Admits Error in Shaw-Bertrand Tie"/George Lardner
"The Department of Justice acknowledged yesterday that it goofed in ever suggesting that Clay Shaw was the mysterious "Clay Bertrand" sought after the assassination of President Kennedy.
Attorney General Ramsey Clark too responsibility for the snafu in a statement issued by a Department spokesman. Clark, the spokesman said, felt that justice would best be served by the embarrassing admission.
(https://www.drivehq.com/file/DFPublishFile.aspx/FileID13261946417/Keyw0jfa39xq0xw/error.png)
https://ia801206.us.archive.org/35/items/nsia-ClarkRamseyStatementsOnShaw/nsia-ClarkRamseyStatementsOnShaw/Clark%20Ramsey%20On%20Shaw%2008.pdf
see all the ducks go in a row. :D
-
See all the ducks go in a row. :D
What's that supposed to mean?
-
see all the ducks go in a row. :D
So Clark "reveals" that Shaw was Bertrand; "they" (them again) then had to scramble to cover that up: and you conclude from this that they had "all the ducks in a row"?
I would think if they had their ducks lined up that Clark wouldn't have revealed this in the first place. Some ducks, some row. There I go with that crazy lone nutter logic again. The world where 1+1 = 2 and not conspiracy world where it's whatever one wants it to be.
I know I shouldn't but how did they get Clark to retract the statement? And then keep it quiet the remainder of his life? This is Ramsey Clark, someone known for taking on the government. Did they threaten him with the secret death squads going around silencing witnesses?
-
...and you conclude from this that they had "all the ducks in a row"?
who is saying that? - ::) nutters !
I'm talking about the hundreds of mistakes that are magically corrected over 62 years ....
It was a mistake, pure and simple.
-
who is saying that? - ::) nutters !
I'm talking about the hundreds of mistakes that are magically corrected over 62 years ....
Can you give us some examples, Mr. CT?
-
Can you give us some examples, Mr. CT?
Sure, Mr Nutter. I got this list from John Iacoletti
it's incredible, really.
- Howard Brennan lied at the lineup because he was scared for his family.
- Howard Brennan had the ability to estimate a man's height and weight from seeing him in a crouched position from the chest up.
- Klein's mistakenly put February on a March deposit slip
- J. M. Poe forgot to mark the shells
- Studebaker accidentally didn't photograph the bag
- The police forgot to check Oswald's pockets for hours after he was arrested
- Buell Frazier was mistaken about the length of the package
- Linnie Mae Randle was mistaken about the length of the package
- Linnie Mae Randle could see through a wall
- Essie Mae Williams just didn't notice the bag Oswald was carrying
- Arnold Rowland was lying about seeing an elderly black man
- Arnold Rowland was lying about seeing two men on the sixth floor
- So was Carolyn Walther
- So was Ruby Henderson
- Amos Euins was mistaken about seeing a colored man in the sixth floor window
- Amos Euins was mistaken about seeing a man with a bald spot in the sixth floor window
- Jack Dougherty just didn't notice the bag Oswald was carrying
- Marina Oswald was mistaken about the camera viewfinder and how many pictures she took
- The bullet holes don't match because JFK's jacket was bunched
- The lower hole in the autopsy back photo is just a spot of blood
- In every interview and affidavit Charles Givens gave for over 4 months after the assassination he forgot the detail about going back to the sixth floor to get cigarettes and seeing Oswald there.
- Bonnie Ray Williams was mistaken when he said in his affidavit that he only heard two shots
- Carolyn Walther was mistaken about seeing a man with a brown sport coat
- Richard Randolph Carr was mistaken about seeing a man in a brown sport coat in an upper floor of the TSBD
- James Worrell was mistaken about seeing a man in a dark sports jacket run out the back of the building
- The first 11 officers on the 6th floor just didn't notice the long bag
- Helen Markham didn't understand the question 6 times
- The clock at Markham's washateria was slow
- T. F. Bowley's watch was slow
- Margie Higgins' clock was slow
- The clock at Memorial Hospital was slow
- Roger Craig was lying about seeing a Mauser
- Roger Craig was lying about seeing Oswald run down the hill and get into a Nash Rambler
- So was Marvin Robinson
- So was Mrs. James Forrester
- Ed Hoffman was lying about seeing two men behind the fence break down a rifle
- Gordon Arnold was lying about being on he grassy knoll during the assassination and shots being fired from behind him
- Rose Cheramie was lying about riding in a car with two men who told her that they were going to kill the president in Dallas in just a few days
- Acquilla Clemons was mistaken about seeing two men at the scene of Tippit shooting from her front porch, one who had a pistol and was waving the other man away, neither of whom resembled Oswald.
- Frank Wright was mistaken about seeing a man standing over Tippit after he was shot and then driving away in a gray, 1951 Plymouth coupe.
- Gerald Hill was mistaken about there being 3 shells in Benavides' cigarette packet
- Julia Ann Mercer was mistaken about seeing two men exit a green Ford truck with what looked like a gun case and carry it up the grassy knoll at about 10:50.
- Sam Holland was mistaken about seeing a puff of smoke come out from under trees on the grassy knoll
- Bernard Haire was lying about seeing police escort a man with a white pullover shirt from the rear of the Texas Theater
- Aletha Frair was lying about seeing Lee Oswald's driver's license
- So was Lee Bozarth
- Sylvia Odio was mistaken about Oswald visiting her apartment in Houston with two hispanic men in late September, 1963
- Annie Odio was also mistaken about the same thing
- Darrell Tomlinson was mistaken about which stretcher he found a bullet on
- O.P. Wright was mistaken about what the bullet looked like
- Bardwell Odum was mistaken when he said he never saw CE399 or showed it to anybody
- Earlene Roberts was mistaken about a police car stopping and honking while Oswald was in the rooming house
- Eugene Boone was mistaken about the Mauser
- Seymour Weitzman was mistaken about the Mauser
- Marrion Baker was mistaken about the 3rd or 4th floor suspect
- Victoria Adams was mistaken about when she went down the stairs
- Carolyn Arnold was mistaken about seeing Oswald in the second floor lunchroom at 12:25
- The Parkland doctors were all mistaken about the back of the head wound
- George Burkley was mistaken about the location of the back wound
- Sibert and O’Neill were mistaken about a back wound below the shoulders, a shallow back wound, and surgery to the head area
- Rosemary Willis was mistaken about a shot coming from the grassy knoll
- Jean Hill was lying about seeing a shooter on the grassy knoll
- Bill Newman was mistaken about a shot coming from directly behind him
- Nellie Connally was mistaken about seeing JFK reacting after the first shot
- John Connally was mistaken about which shot hit him
- Jack Ruby was demented when he said "Everything pertaining to what's happening has never come to the surface. The world will never know the true facts of what occurred, my motives. The people who had so much to gain, and had such an ulterior motive for putting me in the position I'm in, will never let the true facts come above board to the world".
- Whaley didn't record his passenger times accurately
- Oswald forgot that he was carrying around an ID card with the name he used to purchase the guns he used that day
- Oswald just happened to have 5 wallets
- The other 7 firearms experts weren't as skilled as Nicol
- The other photography experts weren't as skilled as Kirk
- The other fingerprint experts weren't as skilled as Scalice's examination of photographs 30 years later
- The post office forgot to follow their own rules about PO box delivery
- Railway Express forgot to follow their own rules about delivery of weapons
- Louis Feldsott said that Klein's purchased C2766 in June, 1962, but he really meant February, 1963.
- The police didn't record interrogations in those days
- Carl Day forgot to tell the FBI about the palmprint
- Paraffin tests aren't reliable, except when they are
- Vince Drain wrote up two versions of the report on the paper bag characteristics before the results were determined so that he could just throw away the one that was incorrect.
- Dr. Shaw at Parkland just accidentally referred to a fragment in Connally's leg as a bullet
- Oswald snuck off from work in the morning when he was supposed to be working to walk to a post office over a mile away and back in order to go buy a money order and mail an order to Klein's and then falsified his timesheet and nobody noticed.
- The police just accidentally mistook a copper-jacketed 6.5mm bullet for a .30 caliber steel-jacketed bullet
- John Hurt got drunk and just tried to call Oswald in jail to express his outrage over what Oswald had done. Actually, no, wait, the switchboard operator just made up the whole story.
- Joseph Milteer just made a lucky guess
- W.R. (Dub) Stark was mistaken about Tippit's phone call from the record shop
- So was Louis Cortinas
- Albert Bogard was lying about Oswald test driving a car
- So was Eugene Wilson
- So was Frank Rizzo
- Malcolm Price was mistaken about Oswald practicing at the Sports Drome Rifle Range
- So was Garland Slack
- Edith Whitworth was mistaken about the Oswalds coming in to the Furniture Mart and looking for a gun part
- Dial Ryder was lying about mounting a scope on an Argentinian rifle for a customer named Oswald
- Dr. Humes burned his autopsy notes because he didn't want the president's blood to fall into hands of people with peculiar ideas about the value of that
type of material. But he also burned a copy of the notes and a first draft report that had no blood on them, and he neglected to burn Boswell's autopsy
notes, even though they did have blood on them.
- Seth Kantor was mistaken about seeing Jack Ruby at Parkland
- Butch Burroughs was lying when he said he sold popcorn to Oswald at 1:15
- Benavides thought the killer had a squared-off hairline because the guy's jacket collar was hiding the actual hairline
-
Sure, Mr Nutter. I got this list from John Iacoletti
it's incredible, really.
- Howard Brennan lied at the lineup because he was scared for his family.
- Howard Brennan had the ability to estimate a man's height and weight from seeing him in a crouched position from the chest up.
- Klein's mistakenly put February on a March deposit slip
- J. M. Poe forgot to mark the shells
- Studebaker accidentally didn't photograph the bag
- The police forgot to check Oswald's pockets for hours after he was arrested
- Buell Frazier was mistaken about the length of the package
- Linnie Mae Randle was mistaken about the length of the package
- Linnie Mae Randle could see through a wall
- Essie Mae Williams just didn't notice the bag Oswald was carrying
- Arnold Rowland was lying about seeing an elderly black man
- Arnold Rowland was lying about seeing two men on the sixth floor
- So was Carolyn Walther
- So was Ruby Henderson
- Amos Euins was mistaken about seeing a colored man in the sixth floor window
- Amos Euins was mistaken about seeing a man with a bald spot in the sixth floor window
- Jack Dougherty just didn't notice the bag Oswald was carrying
- Marina Oswald was mistaken about the camera viewfinder and how many pictures she took
- The bullet holes don't match because JFK's jacket was bunched
- The lower hole in the autopsy back photo is just a spot of blood
- In every interview and affidavit Charles Givens gave for over 4 months after the assassination he forgot the detail about going back to the sixth floor to get cigarettes and seeing Oswald there.
- Bonnie Ray Williams was mistaken when he said in his affidavit that he only heard two shots
- Carolyn Walther was mistaken about seeing a man with a brown sport coat
- Richard Randolph Carr was mistaken about seeing a man in a brown sport coat in an upper floor of the TSBD
- James Worrell was mistaken about seeing a man in a dark sports jacket run out the back of the building
- The first 11 officers on the 6th floor just didn't notice the long bag
- Helen Markham didn't understand the question 6 times
- The clock at Markham's washateria was slow
- T. F. Bowley's watch was slow
- Margie Higgins' clock was slow
- The clock at Memorial Hospital was slow
- Roger Craig was lying about seeing a Mauser
- Roger Craig was lying about seeing Oswald run down the hill and get into a Nash Rambler
- So was Marvin Robinson
- So was Mrs. James Forrester
- Ed Hoffman was lying about seeing two men behind the fence break down a rifle
- Gordon Arnold was lying about being on he grassy knoll during the assassination and shots being fired from behind him
- Rose Cheramie was lying about riding in a car with two men who told her that they were going to kill the president in Dallas in just a few days
- Acquilla Clemons was mistaken about seeing two men at the scene of Tippit shooting from her front porch, one who had a pistol and was waving the other man away, neither of whom resembled Oswald.
- Frank Wright was mistaken about seeing a man standing over Tippit after he was shot and then driving away in a gray, 1951 Plymouth coupe.
- Gerald Hill was mistaken about there being 3 shells in Benavides' cigarette packet
- Julia Ann Mercer was mistaken about seeing two men exit a green Ford truck with what looked like a gun case and carry it up the grassy knoll at about 10:50.
- Sam Holland was mistaken about seeing a puff of smoke come out from under trees on the grassy knoll
- Bernard Haire was lying about seeing police escort a man with a white pullover shirt from the rear of the Texas Theater
- Aletha Frair was lying about seeing Lee Oswald's driver's license
- So was Lee Bozarth
- Sylvia Odio was mistaken about Oswald visiting her apartment in Houston with two hispanic men in late September, 1963
- Annie Odio was also mistaken about the same thing
- Darrell Tomlinson was mistaken about which stretcher he found a bullet on
- O.P. Wright was mistaken about what the bullet looked like
- Bardwell Odum was mistaken when he said he never saw CE399 or showed it to anybody
- Earlene Roberts was mistaken about a police car stopping and honking while Oswald was in the rooming house
- Eugene Boone was mistaken about the Mauser
- Seymour Weitzman was mistaken about the Mauser
- Marrion Baker was mistaken about the 3rd or 4th floor suspect
- Victoria Adams was mistaken about when she went down the stairs
- Carolyn Arnold was mistaken about seeing Oswald in the second floor lunchroom at 12:25
- The Parkland doctors were all mistaken about the back of the head wound
- George Burkley was mistaken about the location of the back wound
- Sibert and O’Neill were mistaken about a back wound below the shoulders, a shallow back wound, and surgery to the head area
- Rosemary Willis was mistaken about a shot coming from the grassy knoll
- Jean Hill was lying about seeing a shooter on the grassy knoll
- Bill Newman was mistaken about a shot coming from directly behind him
- Nellie Connally was mistaken about seeing JFK reacting after the first shot
- John Connally was mistaken about which shot hit him
- Jack Ruby was demented when he said "Everything pertaining to what's happening has never come to the surface. The world will never know the true facts of what occurred, my motives. The people who had so much to gain, and had such an ulterior motive for putting me in the position I'm in, will never let the true facts come above board to the world".
- Whaley didn't record his passenger times accurately
- Oswald forgot that he was carrying around an ID card with the name he used to purchase the guns he used that day
- Oswald just happened to have 5 wallets
- The other 7 firearms experts weren't as skilled as Nicol
- The other photography experts weren't as skilled as Kirk
- The other fingerprint experts weren't as skilled as Scalice's examination of photographs 30 years later
- The post office forgot to follow their own rules about PO box delivery
- Railway Express forgot to follow their own rules about delivery of weapons
- Louis Feldsott said that Klein's purchased C2766 in June, 1962, but he really meant February, 1963.
- The police didn't record interrogations in those days
- Carl Day forgot to tell the FBI about the palmprint
- Paraffin tests aren't reliable, except when they are
- Vince Drain wrote up two versions of the report on the paper bag characteristics before the results were determined so that he could just throw away the one that was incorrect.
- Dr. Shaw at Parkland just accidentally referred to a fragment in Connally's leg as a bullet
- Oswald snuck off from work in the morning when he was supposed to be working to walk to a post office over a mile away and back in order to go buy a money order and mail an order to Klein's and then falsified his timesheet and nobody noticed.
- The police just accidentally mistook a copper-jacketed 6.5mm bullet for a .30 caliber steel-jacketed bullet
- John Hurt got drunk and just tried to call Oswald in jail to express his outrage over what Oswald had done. Actually, no, wait, the switchboard operator just made up the whole story.
- Joseph Milteer just made a lucky guess
- W.R. (Dub) Stark was mistaken about Tippit's phone call from the record shop
- So was Louis Cortinas
- Albert Bogard was lying about Oswald test driving a car
- So was Eugene Wilson
- So was Frank Rizzo
- Malcolm Price was mistaken about Oswald practicing at the Sports Drome Rifle Range
- So was Garland Slack
- Edith Whitworth was mistaken about the Oswalds coming in to the Furniture Mart and looking for a gun part
- Dial Ryder was lying about mounting a scope on an Argentinian rifle for a customer named Oswald
- Dr. Humes burned his autopsy notes because he didn't want the president's blood to fall into hands of people with peculiar ideas about the value of that
type of material. But he also burned a copy of the notes and a first draft report that had no blood on them, and he neglected to burn Boswell's autopsy
notes, even though they did have blood on them.
- Seth Kantor was mistaken about seeing Jack Ruby at Parkland
- Butch Burroughs was lying when he said he sold popcorn to Oswald at 1:15
- Benavides thought the killer had a squared-off hairline because the guy's jacket collar was hiding the actual hairline
If just half of them were evil, evil "coverup changes" instead of honest mistakes or misinterpretations of other tinfoil-hat conspiracy theorists, how many bad guys were involved altogether in the planning, the "patsy-ing," the planting of false evidence, the shooting, the getting away, the alteration of photos, films, and X-rays, and the (evidently ongoing!!!) cover up?
Oodles and gobs, or just a few?
-
If just half of them were evil, evil "coverup changes" instead of honest mistakes or misinterpretations of other tinfoil-hat conspiracy theorists, how many bad guys were involved altogether in the planning, the "patsy-ing," the planting of false evidence, the shooting, the getting away, the alteration of photos, films, and X-rays, and the (evidently ongoing!!!) cover up?
Oodles and gobs, or just a few?
You asked for a few examples - I gave you more than 400
You troll - I'm out
-
You asked for a few examples - I gave you more than 400
You troll - I'm out
How many of them were statements made by people who were either mistaken or just wanted to get their name in the paper, Mr. CT?
And how many of them did Iacoletti "spin," Mr. CT?