JFK Assassination Forum

[RIF: 104-10322-10101]

Date: 29 November 1978

Memorandum for: Deputy Director of Central Intelligence [Frank Carlucci]

Via: Deputy Director for Operations Acting Chief, Soviet / East European Division

From: Donald F. Vogel, DCSE/ORP

Subject: Talking Paper for Briefing Chairman Stokes, HSCA, on KITTY HAWK

SECRET SENSITIVE

1. The Chief Counsel of the House Select Committee on Assassination, Mr. G. Robert Blakey, has requested access to “all reports and documents referring to an operation code named KITTY HAWK” [Igor Kochnov], which Mr. Blakey describes as “a project concerning the debriefing of a Soviet defector and a KGB analysis of the Kennedy assassination.” You propose to provide Chairman Stokes an oral response to this request.

2. Chairman Stokes may be informed that “KITTY HAWK” is not a defector but is a very sensitive [quarter sentence redacted] with whom we have [one-and-a-half lines redacted] mention of KITTY HAWK in the press in connection with the current investigation of the fate of Nicholas Shadrin, an FBI-CIA double agent who disappeared in 1975 while in Vienna for a meeting with the KGB. In spite of the unfortunate publicity, however, KITTY HAWK has apparently been able to survive KGB scrutiny thus far, and we continue to abide by the Director’s statutory obligation to protect his identity.

3. We have reviewed our holdings on KITTY HAWK and have found no reference to any “KGB analysis of the Kennedy assassination” or any other information pertinent to the Committee’s interest. Discussion of the assassination of President Kennedy took up only a small portion of the time spent in debriefing KITTY HAWK. You may wish to inform Chairman Stokes that in 1966 KITTY HAWK volunteered his impression that Kennedy’s assassination “was planned and carried out by the VIPs, possibly due to Kennedy’s opposition to Texas oil interests.” He added that he believed that the KGB was embarking on a “disinformation” campaign to have the assassination blamed on President Johnson, but he had no specific details of this campaign. KITTY HAWK also said that he was “personally well acquainted” with Lee Harvey Oswald’s background because he had helped prepare the file on Oswald which was turned over to the United States Government by Soviet Government. KITTY HAWK was not questioned further on this point, and there is no further reference in the KITTY HAWK file to any KGB or Soviet Government activity with respect to the assassination.

4. Although strictly speaking it is not relevant to this inquiry, you should be aware of the fact that KITTY HAWK supported Nosenko’s bona fides by reporting that Nosenko had done the KGB considerable damage (more than Golitsyn) and that the KGB was looking for Nosenko and intended to kill him if they found him. This is pertinent because those who hold to the theory that any KGB source or defector who supported Nosenko’s bona fides was also KGB-controlled. Introduction of KITTY HAWK into the assassination controversy can only serve the purpose of obfuscation. (emphasis added)

. . . . . . .

My comments:

KITTY HAWK was KGB Major Igor Kochnov, whose ostensible mother-in-law was Politburo member / Khrushchev’s mistress Yekaterina Furtseva. (It was she who had allegedly overridden Yuri Nosenko and others and permitted Lee Harvey Oswald to continue living in the USSR after he’d allegedly tried to kill himself in October 1959.)

Kochnov called soon-to-be-Director-of-CIA Richard Helms at home in June 1966 and offered to work for the CIA as an agent-in-place if it would boost his status with the Kremlin by arranging for him to pretend-recruit a former Soviet destroyer captain, Nicholas Shadrin (original name Nikolay Artamonov), who had defected to the U.S. years earlier.

James Angleton and others, believing that Kochnov was a “plant” and having been led to believe that there was a KGB mole in the Soviet Russia Division by Angleton’s confidant and mole-hunting superior, probable mole Bruce Solie in the Office of Security, decided to “play” Kochnov back against the KGB by allowing him to “recruit” Shadrin. None other than Solie was chosen to be Kitty Hawk’s CIA case officer in the ruse, and Elbert Turner became Kochnov’s FBI case officer but wasn’t told that CIA had concluded Kochnov was fake.

Solie chose probable mole Leonard V. McCoy and his loyal assistant, Cynthia Hausman, to “run” Shadrin, with help from the aforementioned Turner. They were warned by Angleton to never allow Shadrin to leave the country to meet with the KGB, but they did – twice – once in Canada and another time in Vienna.

The third time they let Shadrin leave the U.S. to meet with his ostensible (or actual?) KGB case officer, Kochnov, was in Vienna in December 1975, at which time he was kidnapped by the KGB and “accidentally” killed while being transported into Czechoslovakia.

Another interesting thing or two about Kochnov is that he claimed that false defector-in-place-in-Geneva-in-1962 / false (or perhaps rogue) physical defector to the U.S. in 1964, Nosenko, was a true defector, and he confirmed for mole-hunter Solie that Igor Orlov (who had retired from the CIA in 1961 and who had earlier gone by the name “Alexander ‘Sasha’ Kopatzsky”) was Golitsyn’s mole SASHA, and he uncovered Orlov’s former CIA boss in Germany, Alexander “Sasha” Sogolow, as Nosenko’s 1964 (but-not-mentioned-in-1962) mole, “Sasha.”

Michael Griffith has always been one of the disingenuous wordsmiths on the Education Forum who falsely accuses people of Anti-Semitism.

Griffith works in the U.S. military industrial complex, and has also spent time in a military or intelligence affiliated agency in Israel.

Among other canards, Griffith has relentlessly focused on defaming Col. L. Fletcher Prouty as an "Anti-Semitic crackpot," while ignoring the extensive debunking of his false Prouty talking points by informed JFK researchers, including James DiEugenio, Jeff Carter, Len Osanic, and Greg Burnham.

Notice that Griffith fails to refute a single point in my above rebuttal of Ben Cole's libelous commentary.

That is typical of Michael Griffith's "debate" style on the Education Forum.

He ignores rebuttals and repeats his false talking points.

LOL! Permit me to begin by saying that you are a paranoid anti-Semitic wingnut who peddles 9/11 Truther craziness as "scientific fact." Ben Cole's commentary about you was anything but "libelous." If anything, he was a bit too gentle--but that's Ben for you (always a gentleman).

Yes, folks, do go read my exchanges in the Education Forum regarding the crackpot Fletcher Prouty and see how I shredded the pitiful, embarrassing defenses of Prouty offered by his handful of defenders. Far from "ignoring" their alleged "debunking" of my attacks on Prouty, I showed that my attacks are entirely valid, totally justified, and unanswerable.

And, folks, if you read my posts in the Education Forum, you'll see that I only accused a very small number of people of peddling anti-Semitic arguments, and that I had very good reasons for doing so.

I have to just giggle at this paranoia:

Griffith works in the U.S. military industrial complex, and has also spent time in a military or intelligence affiliated agency in Israel.

Thanks for putting your wingnut paranoia on full display.

BTW, I went to Israel for two months to attend an advanced Hebrew program at Haifa University. My wife came over for a week while I was there so we could visit the holy sites in Jerusalem and Haifa. This is what you describe as "spent time in a military or intelligence affiliated agency in Israel." The last time I checked, Haifa University was not affiliated with any U.S. intelligence agency. I had no contact with any U.S. agency while in Israel, not even the American Embassy. I was there purely as a student at Haifa University.

Incidentally, I'm still upset at you for blowing my cover as a CIA disinformation agent within the JFK research community. I had such a good gig going! Plus, I got extra Operation Mockingbird pay for pointing out what a nut Prouty was. 

But the blow of exposure was erased when my CIA handler informed me that Prouty was also a Mockingbird plant whose job was to pose as an intel community whistleblower and then to make bizarre claims that would discredit the case for conspiracy in the JFK shooting. My handler said he did a great job, especially in getting so many bogus claims into Oliver Stone's 1991 movie JFK, and that my critiques of Prouty's nutty statements were all part of the plan.






 

Here are just a few of the eyewitness accounts regarding the substantial amount of brain matter that was missing from JFK's brain:

Floyd Riebe, who assisted John Stringer with taking photos at the autopsy, said that less than half the brain was present:

Q: Did you see the brain removed from President Kennedy?
A: What little bit there was left, yes.
Q: Were any photographs taken of the brain?
A: I think I did some when they were putting it in that stainless steel pail.
Q: When you say that there was not much left, what do you mean by that?
A: Well, it was less than half of a brain there. (Deposition of Floyd Albert Riebe, ARRB, 5/7/1997, pp. 43-44)

From Clint Hill's 11/22/1963 report, in which he describes what he saw at very close range as he rode on top of the limo's back seat on the way to Parkland--part of the brain was gone and there was a wound in the right-rear part of the head:
         
As I lay over the top of the back seat I noticed a portion of the President's head on the right rear side was missing and he was bleeding profusely. Part of his brain was gone. (11/22/1963 report, p. 3)

When interviewed by CBS News in 2013, Clint Hill repeated his account of seeing a large amount of missing brain:
         
Scott Pelley: What did you see?
         
Clint Hill: Brain matter, blood, bone fragments all come out of the wound.… Then Mrs. Kennedy came up on the trunk. She was trying to grab some of that material and pull it back with her.… I got a hold of her and I put her in the backseat. … And when I did that, his body fell to its left into her lap. His face--is head was in her lap. The right side of his face was up. I could see his eyes were fixed. I could see an area through the skull that there was no brain matter in that area at all. So I assumed it was a fatal wound. (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/agent-who-jumped-on-jfks-limo-recounts-fateful-moments/)

Dr. Robert McClelland, one of the Parkland doctors, told the WC that at least a third of the brain had been blasted out:
         
You could actually look down into the skull cavity itself and see that probably a third or so, at least, of the brain tissue, posterior cerebral tissue and some of the cerebellar tissue, had been blasted out. There was a large amount of bleeding, which was occurring mainly from the large venous channel in the skull which had been blasted open. (6 H 33)

Secret Service agent Sam Kinney, who rode in the follow-up car, stated in a recorded interview with Vincent Palamara that brain matter splattered "all over" his windshield and arm:
         
The back of that Lincoln would be directly in front of me. Well, I had brain matter all over my windshield and arm. That's how close we were. (19:33-19:47 in video)

In 2003, Dr. Robert Grossman, one of the Parkland doctors, wrote that Jackie's dress was splattered with brain tissue and blood:
         
Her face was very white and she appeared to have been crying. She was wearing a light-colored dress. The lap of her dress was covered with blood and brain tissue. (https://www.deseret.com/2003/11/22/19797270/neurosurgeon-recalls-examining-the-dying-jfk)

From FBI agent Francis O'Neill's ARRB interview:
         
Mr. Gunn: Earlier in the deposition we referred to your observation of the brain being removed during the course of the autopsy Do you recall that?
         
Mr. O'Neill: Yes.
         
Mr. O'Neill: [After some discussion about removal procedures] "... Now once again too this is just a portion of it [the brain] because the rest of it was--you know, really gone. And it was a very, very large portion of it. . . .
         
Mr. Gunn: "Do you have any sense of what percentage of the brain was missing at the time it was removed from the cranium?
         
Mr. O'Neill: . . . It was--Oh well, more than half of the brain was missing. (ARRB Deposition of Former FBI SA Francis O'Neill, 9/12/1997, pp. 74-75)

Mortician Tom Robinson, who witnessed the autopsy and who helped to reassemble JFK's skull after the autopsy, said that the amount of brain missing in the back of the head was about the size of a closed fist:

Robinson said that he saw the brain removed from President Kennedy's body and that a large percentage of it was gone "in the back," from the "medulla," and that the portion of the brain that was missing was about the size of a closed fist. He described the condition of the brain in this area as the consistency of "soup." (Meeting Report, ARRB, 6/21/1996, p. 2)

Jack McNairy, who saw the limousine up-close at Parkland Hospital, said in a video-taped interview that there was "gray matter" splattered over a large part of the back seat:

As I looked around, I saw that there was gray matter splattered here [pointing to the inside of the rear passenger door to the right JFK's seat] and along the back of the front seat.

Patrolman H. B. McClain, who helped Jackie get out of the limousine at Parkland Hospital, said in a video-taped interview that there was "matter" splattered all over the inside of the right-hand side of the car:

I could see what looked like a piece of skull, some hair, and matter splattered all over inside the car. It was all on the right-hand side of the car, except the part of the skull--it was laying right in the middle.

Crucially, even Bugliosi mentioned that Jackie Kennedy was holding “a large chunk” of JFK’s brain when she entered the Parkland Hospital emergency room and gave it to Dr. Marion T. (“Pepper”) Jenkins:

Looking shell-shocked, Mrs. Kennedy aimlessly circles the hospital gurney where technicians work feverishly on her husband’s body. Her hands are cupped in front of her, as if cradling something. As she passes Dr. Jenkins, she nudges him with her elbow and hands him what she has been nursing—a large chunk of brain tissue. Jenkins quickly gives it to a nearby nurse. (Reclaiming History, p. 182)

Dr. Jenkins himself confirmed that Jackie Kennedy handed him “a large chunk of her husband’s brain tissues”:

Jacqueline Kennedy was circling the room, walking behind my back. The Secret Service could not keep her out of the room. She looked shell-shocked. As she circled and circled, I noticed that her hands were cupped in front of her, as if she were cradling something. As she passed by, she nudged me with an elbow and handed me what she had been nursing in her hands: a large chunk of her husband’s brain tissues. I quickly handed it to a nurse. (Dennis Breo, “JFK’s Death, Part II,” Journal of the American Medical Association, May 27, 1992, p. 2806, https://www.aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/arrb/master_med_set/pdf/md221.pdf)

JFK's brain matter was splattered onto 16 surfaces:

• The back seat of JFK’s limousine.

• The right-rear passenger door of the limo.

• The trunk/rear hood of the limo.

• The front seat of the limo (per Roy Kellerman).

• Roy Kellerman's coat ("it was all over my coat").

• The back of William Greer's coat (per Greer himself, and per Kellerman).

• Governor Connally's clothes.

• Nellie Connally's clothes.

• Officer Martin's clothes.

• Officer Hargis's clothes.

• Officer Martin's motorcycle.

• Officer Hargis's motorcycle.

• Sam Kinney's clothes (riding in the follow-up car).

• The windshield of the follow-up car.

• The drapes of JFK’s emergency room cart.

• Jackie's dress (she said JFK's brains were "all over me").

And this is *not* counting the "large chunk" of brain that Jackie handed to Dr. Jenkins in the ER.

How can anyone really believe that the brain pictured in the autopsy brain photos is the same brain (1) that had bits of its matter blown onto 16 surfaces and (2) that was missing the "large chunk" of tissue that Jackie brought into the ER and handed to Dr. Jenkins?

Duncan, another (blog) site that I frequent, and typically stay logged in to, now has a CAPTCHA form to complete in order to see the pages. Their form is just one check box to click to prove one is human. That is at least quick, easy and simple. And we typically stay logged in and do not have to go through the routine of logging in very often.

CAPTCHA forms can be accessed, and in many cases bypassed by advanced bots.

Addendum:  After further review of Benjamin Cole's lead post on this thread, I noticed that it contains a number of false, defamatory statements about me.  They sound like AI generated hallucinations.
I have never believed, nor posted anti-Semitic "canards" about Jewish bankers, world finance, the Rothchilds, etc.
Nor have I promoted anti-vaccine disinformation. 
On the contrary, I have endeavored to correct anti-vaccine disinformation on social media.
This is libelous nonsense.