Ruth Paine, the woman who Marina Oswald was staying with at the time of the JFK murder, has passed away. We have a link to an obituary, but we recommend the reader watch Max Good’s “The Assassiantion and Mrs. Paine” for a more balanced view (free link here).
Tag: JFK
-
Paul Bleau: “On the Trail of the Plotters”
Paul’s very detailed address from the most recent Dealey Plaza UK conference, this includes his analysis of case linkage and the Pepe Letters.
Paul’s DPUK video may be found here.
-
Jeff Crudele’s Podcast re JFK Act (w/Iler, Adamyczk & DiEugenio)
We link our readers to an important discussion of how Congress can solve the problem of declassifying the last of the JFK documents. Host Jeff Crudele featured two experts on the JFK Act and Jim DiEugenio to elucidate how something called the Final Determinations Notices could be a solution.
-
Monika Wiesak – RFK Jr. More Like JFK or LBJ?
Monica Wiesak profiles RFK Jr. and his Israeli policy, and how they markedly differs from President Kennedy’s problems with that country. Which were not resolved at the time of his murder.
-
Mark Adamczyk’s Letter to Congresswoman Luna Regarding Declassification
Did the CIA plan a path to avoid declassification of hundreds of records in advance of the creation of the ARRB? DId NARA go along with that plan, and are they still cooperating in it?
Via Federal Express Overnight Courier & Email
U.S. House Representative Anna Paulina Luna
Florida’s Thirteenth Congressional District
9200 113th St. N., Office Suite 305
Seminole, Florida 33772Re: Task Force on the Declassification of Federal Secrets (“Task Force”) –
Official Record on the JFK AssassinationDear Congresswoman Luna:
I am writing to congratulate you on the public hearings of April 1 and May 20, 2025. In those hearings, the Task Force created an important record on the secrecy surrounding the assassination of President John F. Kennedy.
I am a Florida attorney and member of the Florida Bar since 2005. I am a co-author of The JFK Assassination Chokeholds, along with James DiEugenio who testified before the Task Force on April 1, 2025. I have studied the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992 (the “JFK Act”) extensively since 2017, the year when each assassination record was to be disclosed in full and available in the JFK Collection at the National Archives. While President Trump’s recent Executive Order and the focused efforts of the Task Force have certainly resulted in progress, the JFK Collection at the National Archives is still not complete as required by law. This letter will explain the serious continuing problems surrounding the JFK assassination records held by the National Archives and specifically what the Task Force can do to ensure that Congress’s mandate from 1992 is fully carried out and respected.
At the May 20 hearing, you stated that the Task Force is not organized “to provide the definitive account of what happened to President Kennedy on November 22, 1963. Instead, the Task Force is meant to root out the hidden pockets of federal government that has for too long remained in the shadows and out of our reach…for even good faith investigators to reach.” I agree with that statement, and I believe the following information is critical to the stated mission of the Task Force.
The hidden pocket that can and should be investigated going forward is the conduct of and obstruction by the National Archives with respect to JFK assassination records. On May 20, we heard Judge John Tunheim testify that the Assassination Records and Review Board (ARRB) never saw or had the opportunity to review many assassination records that were supposed to be at the National Archives for ARRB review and declassification decisions. Judge Tunheim also confirmed what he perceived to be the plan of agencies to “wait out” the ARRB, and then selectively turn over assassination records to the National Archives “at a later time.” As you are probably aware, these acts of obstruction of the ARRB mandate are and were a direct and flagrant violation of the JFK Act, and it is the chief reason why there is still not a complete and reliable collection of assassination records, despite President Trump’s recent Executive Order dated January 23, 2025.
The following discussion will respectfully attempt to provide a guide-map on what the Task Force can do to ensure that there is a legitimate, comprehensive, organized and transparent collection of assassination records available to the public. This may not provide a definitive account of what happened to President Kennedy, but without strong action by the Task Force on the following issues, we can be sure that we will never have all assassination records generated by agencies that were always most concerned about maintaining their secrecy.
Pre-ARRB Obstruction of the JFK Act
As you know, the JFK Act was signed into law by Congress on October 26, 1992. The CIA knew that the ARRB would have unprecedented declassification authority and that the ARRB was mandated to review and make release decisions on each assassination record. Before the JFK Records Act even became law, the CIA was prepared with a plan to maintain maximum secrecy over its most sensitive assassination records. By February 1992 (eight months before the Act was passed), the CIA had already designed a written strategy to circumvent the JFK Act before the ARRB even took office.
On February 10, 1992, the CIA’s Chief of History Staff authored a memorandum with the subject “Survey of CIA’s Records from House Select Committee on Assassinations Investigation”. This collection of files involved 64 boxes of CIA records sequestered by Congress for the HSCA investigation of 1977-1979. Specifically, this “Sequestered Collection” of CIA assassination records is described to contain:
16 boxes of Lee Harvey Oswald’s 201 file and numerous loose folders (mainly from Mexico City Station records) collected for the Warren Commission
34 boxes of material collected by the Directorate of Operations
29 boxes of records from the CIA Office of Legislative Counsel, Inspector General, Office of General Counsel, Directorate of Science and Technology, Office of Security, and several boxes of HSCA staff notes and records
72 microfilm reels (box no. 64), which include the Oswald 201 file and Mexico City Station records, as well as other 201 files and information about Cuban exile groups.
Under the sub-heading titled “Sensitivity” (paragraph 5), the memorandum discusses a scattering of “Top Secret” and codeword documentation in this Sequestered Collection. Materials considered “especially sensitive” include “201 files, phone taps, mail intercepts, security files, photo surveillance, names of sources, watch lists and MHCHAOS documentation. Such material occurs throughout the collection, usually in response to HSCA requests for name traces. There are 22 microfilm reels of 201 files in addition to the Oswald file, while eight boxes contain security records, including for example, files on David Atlee Phillips, Martin Luther King, and Claw Shaw (sic).”
In the section titled “CIA Complicity” in the JFK assassination, the memorandum states: “Our survey found nothing in these records indicating any CIA role in the Kennedy assassination or assassination conspiracy (if there was one), or any CIA involvement with Oswald.”
[Note: We now know from recent testimony before the Task Force that the CIA without question had extensive operational involvement with Oswald.]
After internal considerations of whether to fully close or open this Sequestered Collection, the memorandum states a final “Recommendation” (section 10):
“I recommend that CIA transfer its entire HSCA collection (as defined and identified in this report) at its existing classification (emphasis added) to the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), for continuing declassification review by Archives staff, in accordance with the relevant laws, regulations and CIA guidelines (emphasis added). This transfer should be earned out under the auspices of CIA’s Historical Review Program (emphasis added). To retire this HSCA collection to the National Archives offers some significant advantages…”
The perceived advantage identified by the CIA was that a transfer of these HSCA records (Sequestered Collection) to the National Archives, before the establishment of the ARRB, would “protect their existing classification.”
The memorandum concludes that “NARA must ensure the confidentiality of investigatory sources and the proper protection of personal privacy and national security information, including intelligence sources and methods. NARA would continue the court-ordered declassification review according to CIA guidelines (emphasis added). CIA can accelerate the declassification of this collection by funding review positions at NARA (emphasis added).
The final Recommendation concludes: “If Congress should eventually undertake to open this entire Collection without regard to classification, the National Archives will be in a stronger position to protect its national security and privacy information than the CIA, whose motives would appear self-serving, if not sinister.”
Why is this a serious problem? First, the CIA transferred sensitive HSCA records to the National Archives before enactment of the JFK Act, which subverted review by the ARRB. This may have only been proper if the Sequestered Collection was transferred to NARA and “made publicly available in their entirety without redaction” as provided in section 5(d)(3) of the JFK Act. Otherwise, only the ARRB had the authority to make final declassification decisions under specific standards in the JFK Act, with only the President having the authority to overrule the ARRB on its final decisions and orders. As Judge Tunheim confirmed in his May 20 testimony, the ARRB made those final decisions on over 27,000 records (where agencies sought postponement) that were provided to the ARRB for review under the JFK Act.
A critical question for the Task Force is: Was this sensitive Sequestered Collection of CIA assassination records provided to the ARRB with identification aids and RIF numbers for review by the ARRB under the JFK Act? Or was this Collection transferred separately to the National Archives under separate procedures, not authorized by the JFK Act, for review only by the Archivist and the CIA at a later point in time and under different standards that were favorable to the CIA? This CIA memorandum from February 1992 strongly suggests the latter.
As the likely result of this CIA Memorandum of February 1992, a massive trove of CIA assassination records from its HSCA collection was shipped to the National Archives before the ARRB could start its work. Assuming that is true, these records were not assigned Record Identification Form (RIF) numbers and properly catalogued for mandatory ARRB review. This CIA strategy ended up giving the Archivist unauthorized and uncontrolled discretion over the CIA’s HSCA Sequestered Collection, controlled only by CIA guidelines, which is not permitted in any provision of the JFK Act. The Archivist and staff who controlled these records in the 1990s needs to be questioned about (a) exactly how the Archivist exercised his discretion pursuant to section 5(d)(3) of the JFK Records Act and (b) specifically about the extent of the HSCA/CIA records that did not receive a RIF number and were not disclosed to the ARRB for review and release final determinations.
These are JFK assassination records of the CIA for the HSCA investigation, which are critical to the historical record. These are probably some of the most important CIA records out there because they were handled in a highly secretive manner before the JFK Act took effect. As discussed by James DiEugenio and Judge Tunheim before the Task Force, we know how hard the CIA fought the ARRB on postponement requests for records that were in the JFK Collection under the JFK Act. It is clear that this “Sequestered Collection” of HSCA records, apparently turned over in a clandestine manner to the National Archives before the appointment of the ARRB and without RIF numbers and proper cataloging, was even more sensitive to the CIA.
Also note that this CIA Memo was not released by the Archives until November 1, 2021. The Identification Aid Form for this assassination record, as required by the JFK Act in 1992, was not generated until 2005. Not only is this delay and selective treatment of critical assassination records a direct violation of the JFK Act, but this CIA Memo is a prime example of the need for a full investigation of assassination records that were handled only the by the CIA and NARA before and after the ARRB and without any identification, cataloging, periodic review and mandated full releases on or before October 26, 2017 as required by the JFK Act.
The link to this CIA memo is found here:
https://test-ks-and-k.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/docid-32404131.pdf
I believe the February 10, 1992 Secret CIA Memo should be mandatory reading for the Task Force and a strong basis to take appropriate action to compel the Archivist to locate and determine the status of the entire HSCA Sequestered Collection. The CIA may still claim some equities in these records, but they are assassination records that must be reviewed for declassification under the standards of the JFK Act.
ARRB Final Determinations and Periodic Review
Judge Tunheim acknowledged on the record that the ARRB reviewed over 27,000 assassination records in response to postponement requests from agencies. As a result, each assassination record currently held in the “Protected Collection” at NARA is the result of an ARRB “Final Determination” under the JFK Act. When the ARRB made these final agency determinations on each record it reviewed between 1994 and 1998, it created an “ARRB Final Determination Notification” form (FDN). Each FDN included a specific standard under the JFK Act that formed the legal basis for postponement either in full or in part. The FDN also provided an unclassified reason for each postponement decision, along with the ARRB’s final determination for periodic review and/or release (e.g. a covert agent’s death, or a source or method no longer requiring protection).
The mandate of Congress in the JFK Act was clear, as expressed in sections 5(g) and 9(c) of the JFK Act. After the ARRB made a final decision on a postponement request from agencies, that decision was published in an unclassified FDN. Agencies were notified of the decision to release or postpone until a specified date. If postponement was approved by the ARRB, originating agencies and the Archivist had a duty to periodically review those records until such time as a specified occurrence or other date (as identified by the ARRB) warranted a mandated release of the record. There is no record that any of this was undertaken by the Archivist of the United States. Only the location and status of the ARRB’s Final Determination Notifications can provide a basis to determine the status of the most important records reviewed by the ARRB. Once all of the Final Determination Notifications and associated assassination records are accounted for, the Task Force can confirm whether those critical assassination records have been disclosed and released in full in compliance with the law.
Some may argue that the ARRB’s Final Determinations are merely recommendations and that all declassification authority ultimately lies with the President. That is only true to an extent. The ARRB’s Final Determinations are agency final orders. This is consistent with American administrative law principles. The ARRB was an independent government agency. The ARRB’s chief function was to make final declassification decisions on postponement requests. For each postponement request (in over 27,000 records), the ARRB held a meeting and heard the originating agency’s appeals. The ARRB made a final decision and notified the agency, thus ensuring due process to the agency. The ARRB also notified the President of its Final Determinations, and the President had 30 days under the JFK Act to override the ARRB’s decision. If the President did not exercise his authority to override the ARRB, the ARRB’s decision became a final agency order that the Archivist was required to follow.
Why is this information so critical? Lawyer Andrew Iler recently uncovered a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) prepared by ARRB chief counsel Jeremy Gunn with respect to the President’s 30-day window to override any ARRB final determinations. Mr. Iler is also a coauthor of The JFK Assassination Chokeholds, and I consider him to be the world’s leading expert on the JFK Act and how it was intended by Congress and the ARRB to operate. The ARRB realized it was practically impossible for President Clinton to review over 27,000 ARRB final declassification orders in short order, so Dr. Gunn and the ARRB simplified the process for the President. If the President wished to override any ARRB final decisions under his authority in the JFK Act, he could do so within 30 days of notification from the ARRB. If the President did not respond with a written certification overriding the ARRB’s decision(s), it would be deemed Presidential Certification and consent to the ARRB’s Final Determination under the JFK Act. Mr. Iler discovered clear written confirmation that President Clinton approved this MOU with the ARRB. Please refer to: https://jfkchokeholds.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/Box09-Folder13- 9504452-Pages015-021.pdf
The result of President Clinton’s approval is that the ARRB’s Final Determinations for assassination records in the Protected Collection are the final and binding authority for declassification. As such, the National Archivist was required to periodically review these FDN’s, without new appeals and interference from agencies on the same records, and abide by the declassification decisions of the ARRB (which were certified by President Clinton).
Between September 1998 and October 26,2017, virtually no mandatory periodic review took place as required by sections 5 and 9 of the JFK Act. If this mandatory periodic review had occurred, by October 26, 2017 there should have been very few records left in the Protected Collection held at the National Archives.
Instead, because of the Archivist’s failures to abide by the JFK Act for 25 years and the unwarranted interference from the intelligence community at the eleventh hour, President Trump was pressured to delay the declassification process for an undetermined number of unidentified assassination records, which we know he did not want to do in 2017. If the Archivist had followed its ministerial duties under the JFK Act and provided President Trump with the handful of remaining withheld records (if any) and the corresponding ARRB’s Final Determinations, President Trump could have simply followed precedence established by President Clinton and the job would have been done with respect to records actually made available to and reviewed by the ARRB. [1]
To compound all of these problems, the ARRB Final Determinations have been unlawfully kept secret at the National Archives and the public has been denied access to these critical, binding and enforceable legal orders.
To resolve the actual status of the ARRB’s Final Determinations and the associated assassination records, Andrew Iler recently made a FOIA request to NARA for copies of the FDN’s (there should be over 27,000 of them at NARA), and he personally visited the National Archives with other researchers in College Park, Maryland in November 2024 in search of the FDN’s.
Mr. Iler has written about this experience at the National Archives. He has also thoroughly researched and written about the ARRB’s operations and the critical historical importance of the ARRB’s Final Determinations. When Mr. Iler and his colleagues finally obtained a box of FDN’s at the Archives, they were only provided with approximately 450 of them by complete coincidence. That is less than 2% of what NARA should have been able to produce on this visit in response to a very focused records request.
In response to Mr. Iler’s FOIA request to NARA for digital copies of the ARRB’s Annual Reports and Final Determination Notifications, NARA sent an email to Mr. Iler dated June 13, 2025, which states:
“Thank you for your follow-up message regarding your request (our tracking number RF 25-32296) for digital copies of the Assassination Records Review Board’s (ARRB) Annual Reports and Final Determination Notifications. We have not been able to identify any additional digital Annual Reports for Fiscal Years 1997 and 1998 or a set of Final Determination Notifications [emphasis added]. As my reference colleagues noted, a search of the ARRB finding aids and the Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) only identified Annual Reports for Fiscal Years 1995 and 1996. We have not located any evidence that the ARRB produced Annual Reports in 1997 or 1998.”
This is a remarkable response from NARA considering that they produced approximately 450 FDN’s to Mr. Iler and his colleagues at their physical inspection at NARA in November 2024. As of June 13, 2025, NARA’s official position is that the National Archives has no record of the ARRB’s meticulous review and final postponement decisions. These are the very records that were required by law to serve as the basis for NARA’s duty under the JFK Act to periodically review and ensure an accountable, transparent and enforceable process to downgrade and declassify the Protection Collection.
Mr. Iler’s published articles on these issues are also critical reading for the Task Force. They can be found at the following links on James DiEugenio’s website, “Kennedy’s and King”:
Post-ARRB Activity at NARA – Periodic Review Failures
The issue of the ARRB’s Final Determinations covers the serious problem at NARA with respect to records that agencies did turn over to the ARRB for review of postponement decisions. What about records that were not made available to the ARRB as required by law? This also requires serious investigation in light of Judge Tunheim’s compelling statement to the Task Force on May 20, 2025 about the CIA “waiting out the ARRB” and his observation that records were sent to NARA “at a later time.”
As discussed above, the winding down of the ARRB did not excuse NARA from continuing to collect, organize and downgrade declassification of assassination records. However, neither the Archivist nor originating agencies had the legal authority to make declassification decisions on their own after the ARRB. Only the ARRB had that authority with respect to each and every assassination record that existed as of October 26, 1992.
For the records not made available to the ARRB, and for agencies and government offices that “waited out” the ARRB and haphazardly sent records to the National Archives after the ARRB’s tenure in violation of the JFK Act, that is a wholly separate investigation. The Archivist should be questioned on activities at NARA after the ARRB. Were the records received at a “later time” inventoried and assigned RIF numbers for cataloging and indexing as part of the JFK Collection? Exactly who reviewed them for downgrading and declassification, and when? The Archivist has a duty to collect and catalog records, however, neither the Archivist nor agencies had independent authority under the JFK Act to perform the actual declassification decisions mandated by Congress in 1992.
A prime example was the FBI release of approximately 2,400 records in response to President Trump’s 2025 Executive Order. How did this happen, and how many other similar incidents of this occurred after 1998 when the ARRB left office? Until these records are accounted for and declassification decisions are made under the standards of the JFK Act, an accurate collection and accounting of JFK assassination records in the possession of agencies is not complete.
A strong solution for ensuring the complete accounting for and declassification of assassination records is the appointment of a new ARRB, or similar independent agency. This is completely consistent with section 12(b) of the JFK Act, which states:
“The remaining provisions of this Act shall continue in effect until such time as the Archivist certifies (emphasis added) to the President and the Congress that all assassination records have been made available to the public in accordance with this Act.”
In summary, the ARRB could only review and make declassification decisions on records that were available to it under the JFK Act. As explained above, the ARRB did just that and issued Final Determinations on each record where agencies sought postponement. For the undetermined number of records that were not made available to the ARRB, the Archivist cannot possibly comply with section 12(b) and issue a certification of final disclosure until those records are located and reviewed by a new ARRB (or similar independent agency), or Congressional oversight committee under the JFK Act (specifically, section 6). Assuming that there is no legitimate reason to protect information in those records in 2025 under section 6 of the JFK Act, those records can also be accounted for in a complete and reliable collection of JFK assassination records at the National Archives.
Conclusion and Recommendations
It is clear that the CIA and other agencies subverted the entire JFK Act from even before its passage in October 1992. Another recent example of this is the release of certain CIA files on officer George Joannides. The Task Force should certainly be commended for compelling the CIA to release more files on George Joannides, which further demonstrate the CIA’s focused effort to obstruct the HSCA investigation and conceal the CIA’s intelligence connections to and operational use of Lee Harvey Oswald. However, there should be no tolerance for any kind of CIA policy to omit disclosure of its operational files that are related to the assassination. If the CIA can demonstrate a need in 2025 for continued postponement under section 6 of the JFK Act, that postponement decision should be made independently and with appropriate oversight as discussed above.
For those who may claim that the CIA, the Archivist or other agency are permitted to employ separate policies or rules for declassification of certain assassination records, I believe the correct response is found in sections 2(a)(5) and 2(a)(6) of the JFK Act. Those provisions collectively state that the JFK Act was necessary because FOIA and Executive Order No. 12356 (entitled “National Security Information”) have prevented the timely disclosure of records relating to the assassination of President Kennedy. Further, section 11(a) of the JFK Act makes it clear that when the Act requires transmission of a record to the Archivist for public disclosure, that the JFK Act takes precedence over any other law, judicial decision or common law doctrine that would otherwise prohibit such transmission or disclosure. [2]
The bottom line is that the JFK Act is the binding and ultimate legal authority with respect to any government record that is related to the assassination of President Kennedy. A thorough investigation of the CIA and the National Archives on the handling of assassination records before, during and after the tenure of the ARRB is critical to the stated goals of the Task Force. I believe that Congress has a duty under the JFK Records Act to conduct exactly this kind of oversight.
Recommendations
- Conduct a hearing with past and present senior officials from the CIA and National Archives regarding the handling of the CIA’s Sequestered Collection of HSCA assassination records. These are legislative branch records, and while the CIA may still claim certain equities in these records, they are assassination records that must be reviewed by the Task Force or appropriate oversight committee(s) under the standards of the JFK Act for declassification. The executive branch (e.g. the CIA and the National Archives) should not have unfettered authority to seize control of and make its own classification decisions on these records.
- In the same hearing, seek answers on whether operational files of the CIA or other agencies were excluded from disclosure to the ARRB and on what basis.
- Conduct a hearing with senior officials from the National Archives regarding the ARRB Final Determinations, their location and status, and the disclosure status of each associated assassination record reviewed by the ARRB.
- Conduct a hearing with senior officials from the National Archives regarding each assassination record transferred to NARA after the ARRB’s termination, their location and disclosure status at NARA.
- Demand the National Archives to comply with the JFK Act and finally create and maintain a comprehensive and searchable catalog and index of all assassination records in the JFK Records Collection. It is critical for the public to know precisely what is actually held and maintained at NARA at this time.
Finally, there may be some who believe that the Task Force does not have enough time to investigate the CIA and National Archives on these issues. I do not believe that is the case. Section 4(e) of the JFK Act provides express oversight authority and jurisdiction over the JFK Collection to the Committee on Government Operations of the House and the Committee on Governmental Affairs of the Senate. There is no time limit on that unlimited oversight authority in the JFK Act. Important work can still be done by Congress until the Archivist can legitimately make its required final certification required by section 12(b) of the JFK Act.
Thank you for your attention to these details and to these important remaining issues. I remain available to meet with you and your colleagues to discuss the above matters and recommendations as may be of assistance to you.
Respectfully Submitted,
Mark E. Adamczyk, Esq.
cc: Washington D.C. Office, 226 Cannon House Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20515
[1] It is critical to note that the ARRB’s Final Determinations and the associated records were the most important historical work performed under the JFK Act. These are the records that agencies provided to NARA for ARRB review and fought fiercely with the ARRB to protect. Due to the Archivist’s failure to perform its ministerial duty of periodic review, there were still an undetermined number of assassination records being fully or partially withheld by NARA in October 2017, which put President Trump in a difficult position. An accurate number was impossible to calculate because of the broken down and functionally inoperable identification aid and cataloging program that NARA and agencies failed to adequately maintain pursuant to their legal mandate. ARRB staff provided NARA with a meticulous digital cataloging program for NARA to use for periodic review, downgrading and final declassification after ARRB termination and ultimately disclose every assassination record to the public in accordance with the ARRB’s Final Determination. There is simply no valid excuse for this failure of the Archivist to perform functions that were integral to the JFK Act.
[2] The only exceptions under section 11(a) are section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code and deeds of gift.
-
“Echoes of a Lost America” by Monika Wiesak – A Review
Monika Wiesak has followed up her fine volume on the presidency of John F. Kennedy with a book about JFK’s murder. But it also includes a look at the RFK case and a glimpse into the psyche of John Kennedy Jr.
Echoes of a Lost America
By Monika Wiesak
Three years ago, in 2022, Monika Wiesak published America’s Last President. This remains one of the best, if not the best, of all contemporary books on the presidency of John F. Kennedy. If you have not read it, I strongly urge you to do so. (Click here for my review https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/last-president) Wiesak has now published a book about the assassination of President Kennedy, entitled Echoes of a Lost America.
I
She begins her new book by looking at the crime in a macroscopic manner. She describes some of the things that Kennedy was doing as president that likely disturbed people in the higher circles. She labels his foreign policy as anti-imperialist and mentions his attempt to forge a rapprochement with Fidel Castro in 1963. She uses a telling quote on Vietnam by Gen. Maxwell Taylor: “I don’t recall anyone who was strongly against sending combat troops, except one man, and that was the president.” (Wiesak, p. 10; all references to paperback version) She then discusses how, after Kennedy’s murder, LBJ Americanized the Vietnam War and provoked the Gulf of Tonkin incident in 1964. (Wiesak, p. 6) She continues in this vein by mentioning reversals by Johnson of Kennedy policies in the Dominican Republic, Indonesia, and the Congo.
Unlike almost all other authors in the field, Wiesak brings in Kennedy’s clashes with Israeli/Zionist interests as part of her overview. For one example, she mentions Kennedy’s backing of UN emissary Joseph Johnson’s Palestinian refugee plan. Kennedy supported this concept until the end of his presidency. It allowed three methods of repatriation for the Palestinians. Either they could stay where they were and be compensated for their loss during the Nakba; they could move elsewhere and the UN would pay for it; or they could return to where they were originally. Secretly, President David Ben Gurion violently opposed the Johnson Plan. (p. 16)
She also brings in a rather ignored piece of information. Namely, the highly enriched uranium that was used by the Israelis at the Dimona nuclear reactor was very likely stolen from the United States. (p. 21). This data is examined in minute detail by author Roger Mattson in his book Stealing the Atom Bomb. (Click here for a review https://consortiumnews.com/2016/09/11/how-israel-stole-the-bomb/) She adds that this heist was likely known to James Angleton. She concludes that Kennedy’s Middle East policy was overhauled in almost every aspect by President Johnson. And she adds this telling fact:
The 92 million in military assistance provided in fiscal year 1966 was greater than the total of all official military aid provided to Israel cumulatively in all the years going back to the foundation of that nation in 1948. (Wiesak, p. 23)
From here, she goes to Kennedy’s economic policies by beginning with an appropriate Kennedy quotation:
The president must serve as the defender of the public good and the public interest against all the narrow private interests which operate in our society. (p. 26)
Like many observers on this topic, she points out the importance of the appointment of James Saxon as Comptroller of the Currency. (p. 27). She wisely quotes from the famous interview that Saxon gave to US News and World Report just before Kennedy was killed. Saxon was trying to loosen bank regulations and also encouraging the opening of more state banks. He and Kennedy wanted an easier flow of credit and loans to small businessmen and farmers. This put Saxon at odds with the Federal Reserve Board. As the magazine summed up his policy:
The Comptroller approved scores of new national banks, and branches, spurred key mergers, revised outmoded rules. Result: keener competition for deposits and customers. (p. 28)
During this interview, Saxon said something rather bold. In reply to a question about if the Federal Reserve System should be updated or overhauled, his response was–in no uncertain terms–yes. He went as far as to say bank membership in the system should be voluntary. He clearly depicted himself as in opposition to the Fed, but he said he had Kennedy’s backing on this. He added that it was not surprising to him that the big banks in New York, like Chase Manhattan, did not like him. Because he wanted more open competition for deposits. At that time, Chase Manhattan was a Rockefeller controlled bank. This is an important point, and one that few writers have addressed, save perhaps Donald Gibson.
II
Amplifying on Kennedy’s economic reforms, she concentrates on Kennedy building a production-based economy—as opposed to a service economy. One way he was trying to do this was through the investment tax credit. In other words, he was giving companies tax credits if they would modernize their plant and equipment, which would result in higher production rates. This would lead to American products being more competitive in foreign markets. (p.29)
He also tried to help those in need with welfare benefits by doubling the number of people eligible for surplus food, and also signing a bill extending unemployment benefits from 26-39 weeks. He raised the minimum wage and signed off on increased Social Security benefits. (p.29)
She becomes the first writer to accent the showdown between Kennedy and the steel industry since Gibson. She rightly pictures the conflict as a battle. One between Kennedy trying to control inflation, the steel companies initially agreeing, but then reneging on the deal and confronting the president with an accomplished fact: they were raising their prices.
As Gibson introduced the episode through John Blair:
The April 1962 face-off between President Kennedy and US Steel had been described as the most dramatic confrontation in history between a president and a corporate management. (John Blair, Economic Concentration, p. 635)
Kennedy felt he needed the steel company/labor union agreement to keep inflationary forces from spiraling throughout the economy. He figured his increase in minimum wages would be eaten up by what he called “the cruel tax of inflation.” (Wiesak, p 29) Kennedy thought he had an agreement that the workers would not demand higher wages and the company would not raise prices. But four days after the labor contract had been signed, on April 10th, Roger Blough, Chairman of US Steel, visited Washington. He then handed the president a PR release: the company would announce a 3.5 % price increase at midnight. (Gibson, Battling Wall Street, p.10) Kennedy reportedly said, “My father always told me that all businessmen were sons of bitches, but I never believed it till now.” (Wiesak, p. 30).
After five other companies joined US Steel to break the agreement, Kennedy decided that, if his economic policy was going to have any impact or credibility, he would have to begin a counter-attack. Which he did. This was through Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara and Attorney General Robert Kennedy. The former stated that no company that broke the agreement would be given any more Pentagon contracts. The latter began investigating charges of collusion and price fixing by issuing subpoenas, some at 3 AM. (Ibid). Kennedy also used the bully pulpit to hit back. On April 11th, he said that he thought the American people would find it difficult to accept,
A situation in which a tiny handful of steel executives whose pursuit of private power and profit exceeds their sense of public responsibility can show such utter contempt for the interest of 185,000,000 Americans. (Gibson, p. 13)
Within 48 hours of handing over the announcement, big steel had taken back the price rise. Her synopsis of the crisis is fine, I just wish she had done a bit more with the part of Gibson’s book that deals with Kennedy’s struggle against the CFR globalists.
From here, she goes on to describe Kennedy’s advocacy of Rachel Carson’s work against the chemical and pharmaceutical industries. Although Carson was attacked for Silent Spring, Kennedy formed a committee that vindicated the book in May of 1963. (Wiesak, p. 31) Kennedy also backed the work of Dr. Frances Kelsey against the drug thalidomide, and this then led to the FDA having approval over when a drug could be marketed. (ibid., p 32)
With the banks, steel companies and big pharma, Kennedy was not looked upon as a friend of big business.
III
After adroitly laying out this backdrop, Wiesak now shifts over to the assassination itself. She begins with an examination of the alleged assassin, Lee Oswald. Was Oswald really a self-declared Marxist? There is a lot of evidence to indicate the contrary: namely that he was really an agent provocateur. And she wastes little time in mounting a case showing that he was. She includes the puzzle about Oswald’s 201 file, or the lack of the CIA opening one for the first 13 months after he defected to the Soviet Union. (p. 45). She adds that James Angleton’s successor, George Kalaris, gave a possible answer as to why it was finally opened: Oswald had made queries “concerning possible reentry into the United States.” (p. 45) This would suggest that Oswald understood he had failed to gull the KGB and wanted to return for reassignment.
So once Oswald returned to Texas, he kept up this image by subscribing to communist and socialist newspapers. (p. 48). But at the same time, he is ingratiating himself with the White Russian community in Dallas, who all loathe communism and want a return to a monarchy. In the face of this returned Soviet defector and his strange behavior, inexplicably, the FBI closed their file on Oswald in October of 1962. Then they reopened it in March of 1963, allegedly based on communist periodical subscriptions that the Bureau already knew he had.
Wiesak discusses the enigmatic figure of George DeMohrenschildt, nicknamed the Baron. Since he figured right into the midst of this whole contradictory White Russian/Oswald milieu. And she notes that the majority of the Baron’s contact with Oswald was during that six-month period when the FBI closed down their Oswald file. She also discusses the Baron’s acquaintance with Jean de Menil, president of the Schlumberger Corporation, which had close ties to the CIA; and through the Agency to the OAS, which was trying to overthrow French president Charles de Gaulle. DeMohrenschildt and his father also met and worked with Allen Dulles. (p. 49) In early 1963, DeMohrenschildt left for a reputed CIA assignment in Haiti. And now Ruth and Michael Paine have become the best friends of Lee and his wife Marina. And she examines their rather interesting connections to the higher circles. (p. 51)
She concludes that Oswald appears “to be some sort of intelligence asset, either witting or unwitting, who James Angleton closely monitored.” (ibid)
From here, the book segues into what she calls the “Lead Up to the Crime”. Jim Garrison thought the early announcement that Kennedy would be coming to Dallas, which was in the Dallas Times Herald in late April, marked the beginning of the maneuvering of Oswald away from the White Russians. (p. 53). In a bit over two weeks, Oswald would be looking for a job at Reilly Coffee Company in the Crescent City. She makes note that New Orleans DA Jim Garrison found out how some of Oswald’s cohorts moved on to the NASA base at Michoud. She then adds that Oswald thought he was going there also. (p. 54). Importantly, she also relates the heist by Oswald’s friend David Ferrie of arms from Schlumberger, which was operated by DeMohrenschildt’s friend Jean de Menil. These arms were then rerouted through Guy Banister’s office at 544 Camp Street, an office at which several witnesses saw Oswald. It was also the address that Oswald placed on some of the pro-Castro literature he was handing out that summer.
She turns to Clay Shaw and notes the fact that he was reliably identified by the local sheriff as being seen with Ferrie and Oswald in the Clinton/Jackson area in the late summer of 1963. (p. 57) Through the work of Whitney Webb and Michelle Metta, she then links Shaw with DeMenil and Canadian lawyer Louis Mortimer Bloomfield through Permindex. About Permindex, she advances the case that it was a hydra-headed creation: CIA, Italian intelligence and the Mossad. She fingers Bloomfield as a key figure in Permindex because he had access to the majority of the shares in that enigmatic company. (p. 59) She also states that those associated with Permindex were globalists in their views of a world economy, e.g., Bloomfield, Edmond de Rothschild and Shaw. She points out, briefly, that this was opposed to Kennedy’s nationalist views.
She then offers both views of Oswald in Mexico City: that he may have been there, and he might not have been. But when he returned to Dallas, the FBI’s Marvin Gheesling took the FLASH warning on him off the Watch List. (p. 65). If he had not done that, Oswald likely would not have been on the motorcade route. Also, if Ruth Paine had told Oswald about a job offer that came in from Robert Adams of the Texas Employment Commission, he also would likely not have been on the route.
IV
About the assassination itself, in Chapter 4, she does a nice synoptic job of gathering the evidence that Kennedy was undoubtedly killed by a conspiracy. She does this in a microscopic way, but says we should always keep our eye on the Big Picture. (p. 83)
She then turns to Jack Ruby, the slayer of Oswald. We know that Ruby was the original Man for All Seasons. A guy who had connections in many different directions. She connects him to Meyer Lansky, and uses Seth Kantor’s biography to do so. (p. 110) She also notes that Lansky had worked with the ONI and OSS to help create Operation Underworld, where the Mob helped the war effort during World War II. Lansky had large investments in Cuba before the revolution, and she notes he was also involved with the Haganah, a kind of umbrella paramilitary group devoted to the establishment of Israel. (p. 110). Ruby was also known to Mayor Earle Cabell, who ended up being exposed as a CIA asset.
Wiesak notes the connection between PR man Sam Bloom and Ruby. Ruby had Sam Bloom’s contact information scribbled down on a card in his apartment. Bloom was also the PR man for Judge Joe Brown at Ruby’s trial. Ruby’s lawyer Melvin Belli commented that “Bloom was making legal history—the first public-relations counselor to a judge in the history of jurisprudence.” (p. 115)
With Oswald dead and the world seeing Ruby as his killer on TV, the media and the Power Elite were able to fashion and snap on a cover-up almost instantly. To say that it was effective and all-consuming does not do it justice. Wiesak discusses the phone calls from Eugene Rostow and Joseph Alsop to the White House urging Johnson to appoint a blue ribbon commission, because no one was believing what was coming out of Dallas. She also writes that Earle Cabell labeled the assassination “the irrational act of a single man.” (p. 122) And, most pungently, how the New York Times labeled Oswald as the assassin of Kennedy after Ruby killed him. This about a man who always insisted on his innocence and never had a lawyer. Assistant Attorney General Nicholas Katzenbach then cooperated with FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover to close the case in about 48 hours. (p. 125)
What made that so problematic is that, from the beginning, the case against Oswald was full of question marks. And any serious journalist or investigator could have found them. Mark Lane did so in his article published in The Guardian on December 19, 1963. (Lane, Plausible Denial, pp. 335-60). When Lane asked to represent Oswald before the Warren Commission, he was turned down by J. Lee Rankin, the Chief Counsel. (Lane, p. 22) As Wiesak shows throughout Chapter 6, that was purely a decision made upon expediency, not on proper procedure or in the interests of justice. For the Commission’s case, as she demonstrates, was hapless. It would never have withstood the challenge of a properly prepared defense counsel.
V
She closes the book with chapters on the murder of Robert Kennedy, attempts to reopen the JFK case and a brief chapter on John F. Kennedy Jr.
Her chapter on the facts of the RFK case is sharp and compelling. But I wish she had used more of David Talbot’s book on that issue. To give her credit, she does say at the beginning that critics usually consider the two cases as separate matters; but if one thinks that powerful forces killed JFK, then those same forces should be suspects in the removal of Robert. (p. 140) And she repeats this motif at the end of the chapter. (p. 192). If it had been me, I would have spent some more time on this issue, for example, showing that Bobby knew his brother had been killed by a large domestic conspiracy and that Dallas was the perfect place to execute such an action. Also, that he sent such a message to Moscow pertaining to this. (Talbot, Brothers, pp. 29-34)
But I should mention something that I think was quite striking and relevant in this chapter. Quoting from the trial, Sirhan was asked what he thought about John Kennedy:
I loved him, sir. More than any American could have….He was working sir, with the leaders of the Arab governments, the Arab countries, to bring a solution to the Palestinian refugee problem. And he promised these Arab leaders that he would do his utmost and his best to force or to put some pressure on Israel to comply with the 1948 United Nations Resolution sir, to either repatriate those Arab refugees or give them back, give them the right to return to their homes. And when he was killed that never happened. (p. 186)
As we have seen previously, Sirhan was correct on this.
In her review of attempts to reopen the JFK case, she treats Jim Garrison and his case against Clay Shaw with respect. She then describes the figurative earthquake that took place when ABC showed the Zapruder film in 1975 and how that caused the creation of the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA). She has notable disdain for the HSCA. Commenting that their version of the Magic Bullet is as bad or worse than the Warren Commission’s. (p. 205) She is one of the very few writers to note the almost thunderous irony of the alleged plot against Jimmy Carter in May of 1979. Which just happened to involve two men: one named Raymond Lee Harvey and the other Osvaldo Espinoza-Ortiz.
Her chapter on JFK Jr. hits the important points in relation to the topic at hand. She mentions Meg Azzoni, a former girlfriend, who said, “His heartfelt quest was to expose and bring to trial who killed his father and who covered it up.” (p. 213) She also adds that George magazine was really a presidential platform for him. Interestingly, she describes how he was very interested in the Yitzhak Rabin assassination and published an article on that case, which he himself edited, containing lengthy interviews with shooter Yigal Amir’s mother. She believed that Amir had been manipulated by the Shin Bet.
The capper to all this? JFK Jr. was going to run for governor in 2002. (p. 217)
She concludes that what Americans have been handed on the JFK case by the MSM and the political establishment is a counterfeit history. One that its citizens should resist. She also says that she has little doubt that America would be a different place if JFK had lived. And she ends in reference to Kennedy more or less what Kennedy said about Dag Hammarskjold before the United Nations, “Let us not allow his efforts to have been in vain.”
-
Joan Mellen’s Passing
Prolific author on world cinema, the John Kennedy assassination, and particularly Jim Garrison, and professor of English at Temple, Joan Mellen, has passed away. Here is a notice from the AARC.
-
Luna Committee Discovery makes MSM
The latest discovery of the Luna Committee made at the request of Jefferson Morley has made the MSM. Take a look.
-
Video Talk of JFK Relevancy Today
At an exclusive conference in San Francisco, Jim DiEugenio lectures about why the JFK case is relevant today. One reason is because President Kennedy’s ideas about the Middle East were visionary and objective, and tried to be fair to both sides. President Johnson, with help from Mathilde Krim, altered that policy beyond recognition, thus leading to the mess we have today.
View the video here.