ASSASSINATION ARCHIVES

AND RESEARCH CENTER

  • Founder’s Page
  • About the AARC
  • AARC 2014 Conference Videos
  • Analysis and Opinion
  • COLD WAR CONTEXT
  • CURRENT FOIA LITIGATION
  • Dan Hardway Blog: Sapere Aude
  • Destroyed Files
  • DOCUMENTS AND DOSSIERS
  • FBI Cuba 109 Files
  • FBI ELSUR
  • Joe Backes: ARRB Document Release Summaries, July 1995-April 1996
  • The Malcolm Blunt Archives
  • MISSING RECORDS
  • News and Views
  • Publication Spotlight
  • Public Library
  • SELECT CIA PSEUDONYMS
  • SELECT FBI CRYPTONYMS
  • CIA Records Search Tool (CREST)
  • AARC Catalog
  • AARC Board of Directors
  • AARC Membership

Copyright AARC

A CRUEL AND SHOCKING MISINTERPRETATION

© 2015 Dan Hardway —

Phil Shenon and I agree on at least a few things. In any resolution of the mysteries surrounding the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, Mexico City will undoubtedly be important. The investigation into what happened there in 1963 was, for some reason, seriously curtailed by the U.S. government. The government has, since then, fought tooth and nail to keep the full story about what happened there secret.

While I have never met Mr. Shenon, I have spoken with him several times by telephone. I first heard from him when he called me around 2011. He introduced himself as a reporter for Newsweek Magazine. He said he was working well in advance on an article for that magazine for the 50th anniversary of JFK’s murder. He wondered whether I would be willing to talk about the HSCA’s investigation in Mexico City. I agreed to speak with him.

Over the course of that first conversation, and several follow-up calls from him over the next couple of years, it became apparent to me that Mr. Shenon was only interested in our work investigating what had happened in Mexico City in 1963 insofar as it might provide some kind of basis for linking Oswald to Castro or the Cubans. I tried to discuss the details of the HSCA investigation into what happened in Mexico City in its anomalous issues, but he was uninterested in those details. While there is an acknowledgment in his book, A Cruel and Shocking Act, stating that Ed Lopez and I were “generous with their time and interviews for this book,” precious little, if any, of what we shared with him made it into the book or any of his subsequent writing on the subject of Mexico City. Not only does Mr. Shenon ignore the post-HSCA materials we tried to bring to his attention, he also ignores the primary thrust of our report written for the HSCA.
41hm0PONQ1L._SX258_BO1,204,203,200_

I would not take issue with Phil Shenon if I thought what he is claiming is, merely, that the possibility of Cuban assistance to Oswald should be investigated. While I think the evidence of that is very weak at best, I will not deny that any avenue of investigation that remains open should be pursued. What I take issue with Mr. Shenon about is his single-minded concentration on that one issue and the resultant misrepresentation of facts and questions related to, and arising from, Lee Oswald’s activities in Mexico City. It appears to me that Shenon may be carrying water for the proponents of the original conspiracy theory – that Castro did it – rather than offering any objective review of the complete evidentiary base of that underlies the Mexico City visit. Shenon deliberately ignores the indicators and evidence that suggest Oswald’s trip to Mexico was either designed in advance, or spun in the aftermath, to give the appearance of Cuban and Soviet collusion in the Kennedy assassination.

Shenon’s thesis, as most recently explicated in his article in Politico, “What Was Lee Harvey Oswald Doing in Mexico?”, is built on suspicions expressed by some government officials after the assassination and Charles Thomas’s reporting of the Duran twist party – a report based on a story first told by Elena Garro de Paz. Many had initial suspicions after the assassination: Lyndon Johnson alleged a communist conspiracy within twenty minutes of JFK’s death; Bobby Kennedy’s first question to CIA Director John McCone that day was, “Did some of your guys do this?” (The Warren Commission, in Executive Session, was very concerned about Oswald’s intelligence connections, but Allen Dulles told them it was something that couldn’t really be proven, as a good intelligence officer would lie under oath to the Commission.) When Shenon and I talked, I tried to get him to consider evidence and facts that have come to light about Mexico City and the CIA’s handling of various investigations since, including the one I worked on in 1978, in his evaluation of the twist party story that lies at the root of his speculations. My efforts had no effect. Any possible explanation other than Cuban complicity has been ignored by Mr. Shenon who seems hell-bent on promoting the idea that Castro was behind the assassination, refusing to address any other possibility.

I tried, in vain as it turns out, to get Mr. Shenon to consider that what we had learned about Oswald’s activities, and the government’s reaction to those activities, could support a different explanation which also pointed to an additional avenue of investigation that needed to be publicized and followed. In my view, Oswald’s activities are more consistent with his being involved in an intelligence operation being run by U.S. intelligence than with him trying to make contact with Cubans to garner support for an assassination attempt on the sitting leader of this country.

To fully appreciate why I say that, a little background from Washington in 1978, is necessary. In 1978 the CIA resisted the HSCA’s inquiry into Mexico City more than any other area of inquiry. The chief counsel, G. Robert Blakey, told the Committee on August 15, 1978, “[T]he deeper we have gotten into the Agency’s performance in Mexico City, the more difficult they have gotten in dealing with us, the more they have insisted on relevance, the more they have gone back in effect on their agreement to give us access to unsanitized files. For a while we had general and free access to unsanitized files. That is increasingly not true in the Mexico City area….” And we have since learned that they used George Joannides to shut down the investigation into Oswald and Mexico City. In doing so, they lied to us about who he was. He ran propaganda operations in

George Joannides

George Joannides

Miami in 1963-64 and was the case officer for DRE, the anti-Castro group that scored the anti-Fair Play for Cuba Committee coup using Oswald in New Orleans in August of 1963. As G. Robert Blakey has since acknowledged, “The CIA not only lied, it actively subverted the investigation.” I think the CIA expected we would take the superficial approach of considering the “Castro did it” theory, but when we went beyond the initial appearances and began pushing our investigation into the propaganda sources, seeking interviews with the actual penetration and surveillance agents, seeking to find others in Mexico City who may have seen Oswald, then the Agency resistance to our investigation turned to a stonewall. Shouldn’t it be enough to raise serious questions that when a Congressional Committee investigating specific disinformation operations ran by the CIA, the CIA brings one of those involved in the operation being investigated and uses him in an undercover capacity to forestall and subvert the investigation? But that’s not all.

Consider the scenario of U.S. intelligence involvement in Oswald’s activities in Mexico City that we were not able to fully investigate in 1978. Let’s start with some background on David Phillips. David Phillips was one of, if not the, most experienced, ingenious, respected, and qualified disinformation officers in the CIA. In 1963 he was stationed in Mexico City, but, in early October, he was temporarily assigned to duty at Headquarters because he was being promoted from running anti-Castro propaganda operations to overseeing all anti-Castro operations in the

David Atlee Phillips

David Atlee Phillips

Western Hemisphere. He was an experienced hand. In the late 1950’s he had been under non-diplomatic cover in Havana, where he worked  with student leaders who would eventually form the Directorio Revolucionario Estudantil (“DRE”). During the Bay of Pigs, Phillips was stationed at CIA Headquarters where he had responsibility for the propaganda and psychological warfare aspects of the antiCastro operations. In running those operations he not only oversaw the operations he ran personally from Headquarters, he was also the supervisor of the propaganda operations flowing out of the JMWAVE station in Miami by William Kent (aka Doug Gupton, William Trouchard). When the students who had been recruited by Phillips fled Cuba, they were reorganized under Kent’s tutelage into the DRE based in Miami.

Phillips was transferred to Mexico City later in 1961 after the Bay of Pigs. Kent was promoted to Headquarters, and George Joannides took over Kent’s position in Miami, including supervision of DRE. While still stationed in Headquarters in the early 60’s, David Phillips had worked with Cord Meyer to develop the first disinformation campaign aimed at discrediting and disrupting a group of Castro sympathizers who had organized themselves into the Fair Play for Cuba Committee (FPCC). In the summer of 1963 Lee Harvey Oswald formed a chapter of the FPCC in New Orleans. In August of 1963 Lee Harvey Oswald, still in New Orleans, had an encounter with DRE which led to a lot of publicity linking Oswald to communists, labeling him as pro-Castro, and discrediting the FPCC. In July and August of that year there is strong evidence that Oswald was used to identify and contact pro-Castro students at Tulane University. In early September, Oswald was seen with David Philips in Dallas.

On September 16, 1963, the CIA informed the FBI that it was considering action to counter the activities of the FPCC in foreign countries. To my knowledge, the operational files on this new anti-FPCC operation have never been released by the CIA. In New Orleans, on September 17, 1963, Oswald applied for, and received, a Mexican travel visa immediately after William Gaudet, a known CIA agent, had applied for one. On September 27 Oswald arrived in Mexico City. This activity did not occur suddenly or in a vacuum. Oswald had started establishing his pro-Castro bona fides earlier that summer in New Orleans, including establishing an FPCC chapter there.

There are too many similarities between Oswald’s activities in New Orleans and Mexico City to simply dismiss, without investigation or discussion, the possibility that he was being used in an intelligence operation, either wittingly or unwittingly, in both cities. In addition to his contacts with the Soviet and Cuban diplomatic facilities in Mexico City, which could have been part of an intelligence dangle, an attempt to discredit the FPCC, or both, there is now also evidence of Oswald’s contacts with students at the National Autonomous University of Mexico and his presence at social events with Cuban Consulate

Secret Wars Diary by David Atlee Phillips

Secret Wars Diary by David Atlee Phillips

employees. David Phillips frequently lied about Oswald and Mexico City, but in a footnote in a little known book he self-published, Secret Wars Diary, he wrote: “I was an observer of Cuban and Soviet reaction when Lee Harvey Oswald contacted their embassies.” [Emphasis added.] One purpose served by an intelligence dangle is to enable the dangling agency to observe the reaction and, from that observation, identify roles of employees, procedures and processes of the enemy.

There can be little doubt that Oswald’s activities, especially the more flagrant, blatant and egregious ones such as those alleged by Shenon to have occurred at the Cuban Consulate, could only have scandalized the Cuban diplomats who heard the threats and bluster – all to the discrediting of the FPCC, just as the publicity about the New Orleans encounter between Oswald and the DRE formed one of the propaganda nails in that organization’s coffin. It is much more likely, in my opinion, that the seasoned Cuban diplomats would be offended than it is that they would support someone exhibiting Oswald’s alleged behavior to attempt an assassination. It is much more likely that the Cuban diplomats would have, as the evidence shows they did, consider Oswald as a U.S. intelligence provocation. The Cubans knew of the surveillance on their facilities. Why would they use someone to do such a job who showed up under surveillance and announced his plans? On the other hand, someone as provocative as Oswald should have generated a cascade of response that, when observed by the watchers, would have revealed an abundance of information. It could also serve to discredit the FPCC with the Cubans. The CIA prevented us, in 1978, from interviewing then surviving penetration and surveillance agents who would have known more about such an operation.

In 1978, we knew not only about the allegations of the twist party, but also about the stories of Oswald’s contact with students. The CIA prevented us from interviewing Oscar Contreras, a student Oswald contacted. But Anthony Summers, and others, have interviewed him since. Contreras acknowledges that Oswald, in late September, 1963, approached him and three other students who were members of a pro-Castro student organization. He asked them for help getting a visa to Cuba from the Consulate. Contreras did have contacts at the Consulate and spoke to the Consul and an intelligence officer. Both warned him to have nothing to do with Oswald as they suspected he was trying to infiltrate proCastro groups. Contreras still wonders how Oswald identified him and his friends as the students, out of the thousands attending the University, as the ones with contacts in the Consulate. Shenon, some way or another, sees this incident as supporting possible Cuban involvement in the assassination. No mention is made to the similarity to what Oswald was doing with Tulane students in New Orleans.

While in New Orleans, Ruth Paine had asked fellow Quaker, Ruth Kloepfer, to check on the Oswalds while they were in New Orleans. Mrs. Kloepfer’s husband was a professor at Tulane University. There is information in the extensive records in this case that Oswald passed out FPCC leaflets near Tulane University and the homes of some of the professors there who were members of a local leftist group. The

Lee Oswald in New Orleans leafleting for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee

Lee Oswald in New Orleans leafleting for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, 9 August, 1963

individuals who helped pass out pamphlets on the last occasion when Oswald passed out his FPCC literature in downtown New Orleans, were introduced by Oswald as students from Tulane. There are, keeping things in parallel, indications in the documentation about the case that Oswald, while in Mexico City, made contact with Quakers studying at the Autonomous University. There are indications that one Quaker student at the University at that time was an active agent of the CIA, although that person has never been identified and it has not been determined that he had any contact with Oswald in Mexico City. The reason that it has not been determined is that it has not been investigated.

It has to be pointed out that June Cobb, a known CIA agent, was very involved in Agency actions aimed at the FPCC in the early 1960’s. She appears again as the first person to report Elena Garro de Paz’s story about the Duran/Oswald twist party. At the time she made that report to the Mexico City CIA station, Cobb, a CIA asset, was renting a room from Elena Garro de Paz, Sylvia Duran’s cousin. And Shenon bases most of

Elena Garro De Paz

Elena Garro De Paz

what he writes on a supposition that, based on this twist-party story, Duran was at the center of the Cuban recruitment of Oswald. But the fact is that it is still very much in question whether Duran had been recruited as an asset by the CIA. David Phillips, as well as other CIA employees, in 1978, were of the opinion that she may have been targeted for recruitment by the CIA. The CIA, then and since, has gone out of its way to keep details about Duran buried, claiming, among other things, to have destroyed her Mexico City P file.

But the point is, the activities in Mexico City in September and October, 1963, are a capsule version of Oswald’s activities in New Orleans in June, July and August of 1963. In the context of the other information we’ve learned about the CIA’s FPCC black propaganda operation, the people involved in those operations and the role of at least one of those people, George Joannides, in subverting the HSCA investigation, how can anyone not seriously consider whether Oswald’s Mexico City activities were part of a CIA anti-FPCC operation? The very first conspiracy theory, that Castro and the communists killed JFK – the one expressed by President Johnson 20 minutes after the assassination, and first seeing print in the DRE’s CIA funded newspaper, Trinchera, on November 23, 1963 – still has followers and proponents, the latest being Phil Shenon. None of the proponents, it seems, have ever really considered whether they may be the victims – or a part – of a very good, deliberate disinformation operation – possibly the best Phillips and Joannides ever ran.

 

 

________________________

Dan Hardway, J.D. Attorney in private practice; former investigator, House Select Committee on Assassinations.

Filed Under: News and Views

Rex Bradford: State of the JFK Releases 2023

Rex Bradford is the president of The Mary Ferrell Foundation

State of the JFK Releases 2023

The National Archives has released thousands of documents online between 2017 and 2023, many of which still feature redactions

On June 27 of this year, the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) put 1,103 documents online, all of them updated versions of documents previously released, with some blacked-out areas (“redactions”) removed to reveal the underlying text. The vast majority of these documents still feature some redactions, as do a few thousand other records in the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection (JFK Collection) that NARA maintains at its facility in College Park, Maryland.

This release was the fourteenth time since the summer of 2017 that NARA put JFK records online, in the wake of the triggering of a “sunset clause” of The President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992 (JFK Records Act). This clause mandated that, absent specific presidential action, all records in the JFK Collection would be released by October 26, 2017, 25 years after the JFK Records Act was passed. But instead of allowing full release, two successive presidents authorized agencies to postpone disclosure of certain records and presided over a process of release of some records and repeatedly kicking the can down the road on the remainder.

Apparently the can has now been kicked well down the road. Despite thousands of records remaining partially redacted, an order from President Biden decrees that further review and disclosure of withheld records will be done not in accordance with the JFK Records Act, but rather under “Transparency Plans” developed by each relevant government agency, and approved by NARA. The outcome is predictable, and the intent appears to be to kill off the stringent disclosure requirements of the JFK Records Act without bothering to try to officially terminate an act of Congress.

This essay starts with a bit of background on the history of revelations in the JFK assassination saga. It then reviews the last 6 years of document releases, and discusses where we are now, coming up on 60 years after the murder of a U.S. president in broad daylight at the height of the Cold War.

CONTINUE READING AT MFF

Filed Under: News and Views

NEWEST EVIDENCE CONFIRMS AND CORROBORATES THE JFK ACOUSTICS … AGAIN

D.B. Thomas|16 September 2023

When President Kennedy was shot to death on the streets of Dallas, a motorcycle in the police escort had its radio microphone open and captured the sounds of the assassination gunfire over the police recording system. For his recent book, Last Second in Dallas, author Josiah Thompson arranged for a sound-processing expert named Richard Mullen to provide measurements on a set of audio artifacts that occur at places on the same Dallas Police recording. The results are counter to the misrepresentations about the artifacts used by the National Research Council as a pretext to declare the acoustical analysis invalid. The results likewise discredits the study by Sonalysts, the firm engaged by Larry Sabato for his otherwise inconsequential book on John F. Kennedy. The NRC panel and Sonalysts exploited these artifacts in a cynical effort to obfuscate the scientific evidence of a gunshot from the grassy knoll. What the new measurements tell us about the artifacts is explained herein. Clarification: the NRC panel claimed that the acoustical evidence was invalid on the grounds that the putative “gunshots” were not synchronous with the time of the assassination. The claim was spurious as it was contrary to the evidence then available. The new evidence contradicts the NRC claim and corroborates the acoustics. Similarly, Sonalysts asserted falsely that the motorcycle with the open microphone was not in Dealey Plaza (Fig. 1) at the time of the assassination, an assertion that was contrary to the evidence then available. The new evidence further contradicts Sonalysts claims and adds another layer of corroboration to the acoustical identification of gunfire.

   *    *    *    *

AARC Board Member

Donald B. Thomas received his Ph.D from the College of Agriculture at the University of Missouri. Following graduation, he held post-doctoral research appointments at the University of Arizona and the University of Nebraska. He is currently a senior scientist with the United States federal government and is on the graduate faculty at the University of Texas. He is a former President of the Coleopterists Society and presently serves as a subject editor for the Annals of the Entomological Society of America.

Dr. Thomas is the author or co-author of more than one hundred scientific journal articles, book chapters and books. His 2001 article in the journal Science & Justice, The Acoustical Evidence in the Kennedy Assassination Revisited led to publication of Hear no Evil, a book which places the acoustical evidence in a larger context. He currently resides in Texas with his family.

Filed Under: Uncategorized

Secretary-General’s remarks Commemorating the 62nd Anniversary of the Death of Dag Hammarskjöld

Courtesy of Dr. Susan Williams

13 September 2023

Secretary-General’s remarks at Wreath-Laying Ceremony Commemorating the 62nd Anniversary of the Death of Former Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld

 

 Excellencies, Ladies and gentlemen,

We gather to pay tribute to Dag Hammarskjöld on the 62nd anniversary of his death.

We honour a virtuoso of multilateral action.

With passion and compassion, courage and curiosity, diplomatic skill and boundless stamina, Dag Hammarskjöld lived – and died – for the ideals of our United Nations.

I welcome the General Assembly’s resolution in December 2022 to continue the investigation into the cause of the plane crash in which Dag Hammarskjöld died, and echo the General Assembly’s call for Member States to release any relevant records in their possession.

We have a shared responsibility to pursue the truth – for Dag Hammarskjöld and those who died alongside him, for their loved ones, and for the United Nations and the people we serve. I remain personally committed to that quest and intend to write to relevant Member States on the matter.

Dag Hammarskjöld shaped our United Nations in innumerable ways – setting new standards of public service and launching our Organization on its active career as the custodian of world peace.

His legacy endures, not as distant memory, but as a living guide for our shared mission.
He recognized that the United Nations may be imperfect – but he knew it was indispensable. And he summoned us all to reach higher.

As he once said: “It is when we all play safe that we create a world of utmost insecurity.”

Let us take inspiration from the courage of his convictions and the power of his example.

Let us move forward together in unity and purpose.

And let us keep striving to narrow the gap between the world as it is, and the world as we know it can be.

I would like to ask all of you to join me in a moment of silence.

[Moment of silence]

Thank you.

  *   *   *   *   *

MULTIPLE ARTICLES RELATED:

Investigation into the conditions and circumstances resulting in the tragic death of Dag Hammarskjöld and of the members of the party accompanying him

 

 

 

Filed Under: News and Views

Publication Spotlight: PRAYER MAN: MORE THAN A FUZZY PICTURE

 The publication of Prayer Man: More Than a Fuzzy Picture represents an unprecedented decade-long investigation of Lee Harvey Oswald’s last 48 hours.

Author and archivist Bart Kamp has produced a comprehensive work which delves into Lee Harvey Oswald and the other Texas School Book Depository employees inside the building during and shortly after President Kennedy was assassinated on November 22nd 1963.

Kamp’s detailed research also examines the period of Oswald’s incarceration and interrogations. It presents an entirely new and deep perspective of how the law enforcement agencies gathered their evidence that weekend. It reveals a dramatic new context in relation to understanding Lee Harvey Oswald’s innocence.

Within these pages are many new and never before published revelations that contrast the altered accounts that were represented before the Warren Commission and challenges many commonly accepted assumptions and interpretations.

Excerpt from the Back Cover:

In Prayer Man: More Than A Fuzzy Picture, Bart Kamp has produced a rare and meticulous compendium of what exists within the documentary record about Lee Harvey Oswald, the employees of the Texas School Book Depository, the local police and federal investigators, the reporters, witnesses and peripheral figures associated with the minutes leading up to and the immediate aftermath of the attack upon President Kennedy’s motorcade in Dealey Plaza.

Bart’s journey from commercial and fashion photographer to JFK assassination researcher and author is an inspiring reminder of the first-generation critics of the Warren Report. His indefatigable determination, matched with reason and an innate intolerance of BS, has brought us closer than we have ever been to being able to assess for ourselves, without being told what or how to think, the questions associated with history’s unstable verdict on the enigma of Lee Harvey Oswald.

Order now now in Kindle and Paperback formats from Amazon.

 

Filed Under: News and Views

Cyril H. Wecht Institute of Forensic Science and Law/Citizens Against Political Assassinations: NOVEMBER 15-17 SYMPOSIUM

The JFK Assassination at 60

About the 22nd Annual Symposium

Three score since the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, what could possibly remain to be learned about his death? Quite a lot, as it turns out.

Even as the U.S. government continues to withhold files scheduled for release in 2017 and the mainstream media persists in disparaging those pursuing an answer to this mystery as “conspiracy theorists,” independent investigators around the world – including scientists, physicians, attorneys, educators and journalists – are advancing lines of research ranging from criminalistic analysis of events in Dealey Plaza to Oswald’s and Ruby’s connections to shortcomings of prior official investigations, and beyond.

Now, in keeping with a tradition initiated on the occasion of the 40th anniversary of the assassination in 2003 and perpetuated on the 50th anniversary in 2013, the Cyril H. Wecht Institute of Forensic Science and Law, in partnership with Citizens Against Political Assassinations, is pleased to announce its plans to host a three-day, hybrid academic conference to coincide with the case’s 60th anniversary this November 15-17.

The JFK Assassination at 60:  New Frontiers in Scientific, Medical, Legal and Historical Research will convene experts from a variety of fields, along with lay researchers, to help us advance and clarify our collective understanding not only of how JFK died, but why, as well as why it still matters today.

Whether you’re a professional interested in earning continuing education credits, an educator or student of any number of associated disciplines, or simply an armchair sleuth with a fascination in the subject matter, we hope you’ll consider joining us.

TICKETS AND REGISTRATION

Preliminary Program Agenda

Prepare to immerse yourself in captivating presentations, thought-provoking discussions, and the opportunity to connect with experts and fellow enthusiasts alike. The Annual Symposium Program Agenda promises a dynamic and comprehensive experience that paves the way for new perspectives, lasting connections, and the exchange of knowledge that will shape the future.All presentations are scheduled to take place in the Duquesne Union Ballroom, unless otherwise noted.

Wednesday, November 15 

  • 5:30 p.m. Reception
  • 7:00 p.m. Welcome and Introductions, Benjamin E. Wecht, M.A.
  • 7:10 p.m. Opening Remarks, Cyril H. Wecht, M.D., J.D.
  • 7:20 p.m. Keynote Introduction, Ken Gormley, J.D.
  • 7:30 p.m. Keynote Address: Barbara Perry, Ph.D., Why JFK’s Camelot Endures – and Why It Still Matters
  • 8:30 p.m. Alec Baldwin, Why JFK’s Assassination Will Not Go Away (Confirmation Pending)
  • 9:00 p.m. Adjourn

Thursday, November 16 – Criminalistics, Forensic Science and Medicine

  • 8:30 a.m. Welcome and Introductions Benjamin E. Wecht, M.A., Pamela Marshall, Ph.D.
  • 9:00 a.m. Converging Lines of Evidence in the Case for Two Headshots, Gary Aguilar, M.D., Josiah Thompson, Ph.D., Doug DeSalles, M.D., Bill Simpich, Esq.
  • 10:00 a.m. The Final Witness: A Kennedy Secret Service Breaks His Silence After Sixty Years, Paul Landis (USSS Ret.); James Robenalt, Esq.
  • 10:45 a.m. Break
  • 11:00 a.m. Forensic Reactions to an Historical Revelation, P. Landis, C. Wecht, Ken Gormley, J.D.
  • 11:30 a.m. Two Brain Exams Following JFK’s Autopsy, Douglas Horne (USN Ret.)
  • Concurrent Session (AR) Forensic Modeling of Human Reactions and a JFK Assassination Timeline, Brian Roselle, M.S.
  • 12:30 p.m. Lunch
  • 1:45 p.m. Gauging the Authenticity of the General Walker Bullet, Lawrence Schnapf, Esq.
  • Concurrent Session (AR) An Audio Forensic Analysis of the JFK Assassination, Donald Maue
  • 2:45 p.m. As Easy as 1-2-3-4-5: Understanding the JFK Assassination, David Mantik, MD, PhD
  • Concurrent Session (613) The Oswald Letter: An Analysis of Dyslexia and How It Changes our Understanding of the Assassination, Jerry Kroth, Ph.D.
  • 3:45 p.m. Break
  • 4:00 p.m. Unmasking the Rockefeller Committee Medical Panel, Russell Kent
  • 5:00 p.m. Adjournment

Friday, November 17 – History, Politics and the Future

  • 8:45 a.m. Welcome and Introductions, Benjamin E. Wecht, M.A., Pamela Marshall, Ph.D.
  • 9:00 a.m. The Assassination of President Kennedy: Understanding the Cold War Context, John Newman, Ph.D.
  • 10:00 a.m. The CIA and JFK: What 30 Years of Reporting Tell Me, Jefferson Morley  
  • Concurrent Session (AR) Edgar Hoover and Lyndon Johnson and how they Obstructed Justice
  • 11:00 a.m. Break
  • 11:15 a.m. New Findings about Texas School Book Depository building owner David Harold Byrd, Daniel Alcorn, Esq.
  • Concurrent Session (AR) Carousel Contortionista: Jack Ruby, His Strippers, and their Moving Horses, Mark de Valk, Ph.D., M.A.
  • 12:15 p.m. Lunch
  • 1:30 p.m. The Death of JFK and the Rise of the Neocons in U.S. Foreign Policy, James DiEugenio, M.A.
  • Concurrent Session 1 (AR) An Inside Perspective on the Relationship between Lee Oswald and the Paines, Robert Manz, M.A.
  • Concurrent Session 2 (613) Lee Oswald: The Patchwork Kid, Greg R. Parker (Pre-recorded by Zoom)
  • 2:30 p.m. Lessons from the Assassination Records Review Board: The Value of Investigative Research with Respect to National Security, David Montague, Ph.D.
  • Concurrent Session (AR) Our Method of Teaching the Assassination: Inspiring the Next Generation of Researchers, Ronald Burda, J.D. and Michael Vollbach, MA, MS
  • 3:00 p.m. Break
  • 3:45 p.m. Why Our Side is Losing the Media War, David Talbot (by Zoom)
  • 4:45 p.m. Adournment

 

Filed Under: News and Views

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • …
  • 66
  • Next Page »
  • Facebook
  • Twitter

Newsletter Signup

    Your Name (required)

    Your Email (required)

    Menu

    • Contact Us
    • Warren Commission
    • Garrison Investigation
    • House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA)
    • Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB)
    • Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
    • Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
    • LBJ Library
    • Other Agencies and Commissions
    • Church Committee Reports

    Recent Posts

    • Rex Bradford: State of the JFK Releases 2023
    • NEWEST EVIDENCE CONFIRMS AND CORROBORATES THE JFK ACOUSTICS … AGAIN
    • Secretary-General’s remarks Commemorating the 62nd Anniversary of the Death of Dag Hammarskjöld
    • Publication Spotlight: PRAYER MAN: MORE THAN A FUZZY PICTURE
    • Cyril H. Wecht Institute of Forensic Science and Law/Citizens Against Political Assassinations: NOVEMBER 15-17 SYMPOSIUM
    Copyright 2014 AARC
    • Privacy Policy
    • Privacy Tools