I thought it would be a good time to offer some information about the upcoming JFK Lancer Conference in Dallas as well as on the subject of where we stand on the 50th Anniversary. Certainly given the number and quality of presenters the Lancer conference is hosting, attendees will receive a breadth of information that may be hard to replicate in the future. If you have not taken a look you should check out the speaker list and schedule on the Lancer site:
For my part, other than helping with speaker moderation and staff work – which will be much greater this year with several rooms and venues involved – I will be doing a short presentation and chairing several focus groups ranging from one on the Coverup and one on Cuban exile connections to a joint group on the Oswald impersonations in Mexico City with Bill Simpich. For those who are not following Bill’s work on Oswald and Mexico City, chapters from his new book – State Secret – are being posted on the Mary Ferrell Foundation web site prior to the full book becoming available. As I’ve mentioned before, Bill is presenting a level of detail rarely seen before and in regard to Mexico City and its relationship to the JMWAVE station in Miami, never seen before, since nobody else slogged though the documents as Bill has.
Which leads me a few remarks on the general perspective of the assassination after 50 years and after that to my topic and Dallas presentation. As of the 50th anniversary a great number of people who make light of any possible conspiracy in regard to the murder of President Kennedy are stressing two points – first that the evidence presented by the Warren Commission is definitive and second that subsequent work, in particular the work of the ARRB, and the release of an immense number of documents has offered no solid proof of conspiracy. Generally speaking they prefer not to mention the HSCA report although they often cite its medical evidence while panning the rest of its work.
My comment on both those positions is that the first response is simply a form of denial. With an open mind it is simply not possible to study Breach of Trust by Gerald McKnight or Eyewitness to History by William Law and not admit that certain items of the official evidence are highly questionable – and that that the evidence was filtered to support the official story of a single shooter. You only have to read William’s interviews with the FBI agents at Bethesda, or the ballistics panel evaluation of CE399 or the FBI memo describing Frazier’s absolute denial that the paper sack shown to him Friday evening was not the sack he and seen Oswald carry to the TSBD that morning to know that there are fundamental problems with the Warren Commission evidence.
The second point, that no documentation of conspiracy has been uncovered in the files is….well either naive or intentionally obtuse….to think that any government agency would have solid evidence of conspiracy and leave it in files to be released is just ludicrous. Do I have proof of such a harsh statement, well actually there is some and I’ve written about it. One item would be the missing meeting information from a national security session of Sunday November 24, which apparently dealt with the assassination and Mexico City. A more striking example would be the information we now have about an internal investigation of possible Cuban exile participation, ordered by Ted Shackley, carried out by Tony Sforza and the AMOTS and addressing a number of very specific questions – a report which disappeared and an investigation which Shackley denied under oath was ever ordered.
Now, at this point I was going to share some remarks about my presentation in Dallas and what I think we do know about the assassination, very specifically in regard to the tactical events in the period of August through November 1963 which led to the attack in Dallas. What I will be discussing in Dallas pertains to connecting the dots from New Orleans though Mexico City to Dallas. But I’ve already been too long winded here so I’ll hold that for a follow on post on “Connecting the Dots”. The strange thing is that we can pretty well do that at this point in time, with specific events, groups and people…but of course that’s something those folks who prefer to deny a conspiracy would also find a way to avoid.