JFK Assassination Forum

I must say, your pretty obvious desperation to cling to Pena is losing you a lot of points in my estimation of your reasoning abilities. Do you believe Pena was an FBI informant, even though the FBI said he wasn't and DeBrueys was adamant? That Oswald was an FBI informant? That he was consorting openly with DeBrueys, a Customs agent, and an INS agent, meeting them in restaurants.

It isn't a matter of "hook-ups." Shaw was a high-profile, highly respected public figure in New Orleans. If he were to stoop to "hooks ups" with a character like Ferrie, he sure as hell wouldn't be bar-hopping with him. Your egalitarianism is duly noted, but Shaw was not crazy.

There comes a time when rational people say "OK, let it go. I wish it were true to help my theory, but this goes nowhere."

Speaking of not letting it go, Richard Burnes not only brought in Josephine Hug's husband (a radio announcer) on August 3, 1967, he brought back HER for a second bite at the apple. It didn't go any better this time. One can only wonder what Burnes thought he was accomplishing. The killer, as it were, was that both spouses said they had recently seen the man she thought was Ferrie - long after Ferrie was dead. Oops.

https://aarclibrary.org/publib/jfk/garr/grandjury/pdf/Hug2.pdf

He was in the Office of Security, heading the Research staff. Read his HSCA testimony as to the scope of his duties. Moreover, Shaw's attorneys were posing questions as to Shaw's possible CIA connections (and even whether the CIA had files on THEM!). We have no idea what the "inquiry" may have related to in the context of Solie's position.

In fact, the All-Seeing Eye of AI tells me this is exactly what Solie was doing - assisting in the inquiry as to whether Shaw in fact had any CIA connections as alleged. Moreover, there are many materials with Solie's name in reference to WC critics like Weisberg and Epstein and characters like Nagell. Why? Because these were potential SECURITY issues and he headed the RESEARCH staff. Indeed, pesky Mr. AI interrupted my breakfast to add, "Bruce Solie, a high-ranking official in the CIA’s Office of Security (OS) and its Security Research Staff (SRS), was interested in Jim Garrison’s investigation because it threatened to expose sensitive CIA operations and personnel."

On pages 11-17 of this PDF are organizational charts for the Office of Security. It wasn't exactly "Howard Osborn and Bruce Solie sharing a desk in the corner."

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32404556.pdf

This is my problem with characters like Blunt, whom I put in the same category as Newman. They absolutely BURY themselves (and you, their eager readers) in documents and acronyms and fill in the vast gaps with dark speculation driven by what they want to see. "Read Newman's Jesus book," advises the sage Mr. Payette. You will realize that Newman and Blunt, your heroes, are, in their own little way ... absolutely nutty.

Memo to Solie referencing Garrison's investigation = Solie is outside his assigned area = Solie is monitoring the Garrison investigation = Solie is a KGB mole.

FL--

That is a valid point, that Pena would not repeat his understanding of the Shaw-Ferrie relationship under oath.

Do you have any clue why Pena would not repeat, under oath, the rather specific statements he made regarding Shaw and Ferrie? 

What did Pena have to gain by fabricating the Ferrie-Shaw friendship?