Post by Rob Caprio on Aug 14, 2023 19:42:19 GMT -5
All portions ©️ Robert Caprio 2006-2024
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e6/FrankChurch.jpg
truthstreammedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/churchcommittee.jpg
In 1975 the United States Congress formed a committee to look into the country's intelligence agencies, particularly the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). This committee would take the name of the senator who headed it up, and thus, they are known today as the Church Committee (CC).
In my opinion they limited their results from the beginning by limiting their time and focus to just the FBI and CIA as other intelligence groups like the Office Of Naval Intelligence (ONI), Army Intelligence (CIC), the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the National Security Agency (NSA) had possibly even more power than the two they investigated. They claimed that it was due to time constraints, but one has to wonder if that is the real reason. All of this was brought to the forefront of the country's attention because in December 1974 the New York Times had published a report highlighting illegal domestic activities conducted by the CIA. When the CIA was formed in 1947, they were forbidden from operation within the United States so this report drew a large public outrage.
The main purpose of the CC was to explore the past behavior of the FBI and the CIA in many areas, but they also examined how these groups performed following the assassination of President John F. Kennedy (JFK) and this is the focus of this series.
From the outset the CC either showed a naivete towards these groups or they were intimidated by these groups as they wrote this early on in their findings.
Quote on
history-matters.com/archive/church/reports/book5/pages/ChurchVol5_0004b.gif
The Committee emphasizes that this Report's discussion of investigative deficiencies and the failure of American intelligence agencies to inform the Warren Commission of certain information does not lead to the conclusion that there was a conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy. (CC, Book V, p. 8.)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1161#relPageId=8
Quote off
How could the CC decide that "investigative deficiencies" and the failure to inform the WC of certain information NOT have affected their final conclusion? I think it is kind to call the total inept investigation both the FBI and CIA "conducted" a "deficiency" to begin with.
Neither agency searched for the truth. Both focused entirely on Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) as the only person involved in the assassination. How could that NOT lead to a conclusion of just LHO being involved? A murdered president deserves the very best investigation that is possible so this deficient investigation alone points to the possibility of conspiracy.
Then we have to consider that the FBI and CIA were deciding on what information to withhold from the WC! Why would they withhold any information IF it all happened the way the WC would conclude it did? The excuse we have been given for nearly sixty years is that particular information might endanger an operation or assets in the field could be harmed if this information is known, but again, the OFFICIAL conclusion was that ONE man acted all alone and he had NO TIES to any part of the intelligence system. If this is true, and they have told us it is for nearly sixty years, how could releasing all the information harm anyone? Even in the 1960s or 1970s because it was ONLY LHO supposedly. It sounds like they want their cake and to eat it too.
Why was the CC going along with this by acting like it was no big deal IF they were really looking to hold these agencies accountable? Withholding information is serious and failing to conduct a proper and legal investigation is travesty to JFK's memory and to the country's integrity. This is why many feel that America has never been the same since November 22, 1963.
Instead of dealing with these very important issues the CC wanted to look at the relationship between the FBI, CIA and the WC. Clearly, the "relationship" wasn't a good one as the FBI withheld information from the WC, the CIA withheld information from the WC, the CIA didn't trust the FBI, the FBI didn't trust the CIA, and the lead counsel for the WC, J. Lee Rankin, wanted to charge FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover (JEH) with perjury, but was prevented from doing so. All we have to do is read the Executive Sessions from the WC's meetings to see this. Here is but one example.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcexec/wcex0127/pages/WcEx0127_0047a.gif
Mr. Rankin. Part of our difficulty in regard to it is that they [FBI] have no problem. They have decided that it is Oswald who committed the assassination, they have decided that no one else was involved, they have decided—
Sen. Russell. They have tried the case and reached a VERDICT ON EVERY ASPECT.
Rep. Boggs. You have put your finger on it.
Mr. McCloy. They are a little less certain in the supplementals then they were in the first.
Mr. Rankin. Yes, but they are still there. THEY HAVE DECIDED THE CASE, and we are going to have maybe a thousand further inquiries that we say the Commission has to know all these things before it can pass on this.
And I think their reaction would probably be, “Why do you want all that. IT IS CLEAR.” (WC Executive Session 1/27/64, p. 171) (Emphasis added)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1328#relPageId=47
Quote off
Notice the date of this Executive Session too -- it is January 27, 1964. And yet, the FBI has "reached a verdict on every aspect" and "decided the case" BEFORE the WC has even called a single witness or heard about a single piece of evidence! What relationship could there be besides the WC doing exactly what they were told to do by the FBI and CIA?
The CC then went on to say that the Cuban operations were of "particular emphasis", but failed to mention that this was the particular area that the FBI and CIA withheld from the WC! The WC was never told about the assassination attempts on Cuban Premier Fidel Castro, and believe you me, there were a ton of them. Why would the CC focus on this when they have already said that withheld information DOES NOT LEAD to a conspiracy? Why rehash the same old stuff then? If you aren't going to take what was withheld (some of it anyway) and consider its importance to the assassination then why bother?
Oh, I get it now, instead of focusing on the gazillion attempts we were making on killing Castro, the CC was focused on Castro trying to kill JFK.
Quote on
However, the Committee cautions that it has seen no evidence that Fidel Castro or others in the Cuban government plotted President Kennedy's assassination in retaliation for U.S. operations against Cuba. (CC, Book V, p. 8.)
Quote off
This is pretty slick by the CC as they avoid the issue of the CIA withholding their plots against Castro from the WC and turn it around to the silly theory Johnny Roselli and Frank Sturgis came up with. Both had ties to the CIA by the way. Columnist Jack Anderson would make this red herring popular in his columns too. Castro had no reason to want JFK dead as Lyndon B. Johnson (LBJ) was a far greater threat to him as president. JFK and Castro were opening up back channels too in order to reach a peaceful solution to their issues. Furthermore, Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy (RFK) had worked hard to shut down the base of operations the anti-Castro Cubans were using to launch attacks at Cuba from. These Cuban groups were sponsored by the CIA too. JFK and RFK also had tried to put a halt to Operation Mongoose, but once again the CIA wouldn't listen as they continued their attacks and attempts to kill Castro.
Why did the CIA keep all of this from the WC? Why did the FBI keep from the WC the fact that they had a file on LHO since at least 1960 if not sooner? Ditto the CIA. Why did the FBI deny that LHO worked for them in at least a role of an informant when the media and Texas Attorney General Waggoner Carr said that he had (S179)? None of this makes sense IF LHO acted alone with no assistance as you can't blame the FBI or CIA if he did it and did not work for them, but, IF he worked in some capacity for these groups as researchers have felt for decades then you see why the secrecy is needed. IF LHO was a loner as claimed then there is NO need to withhold a single thing. It is only when you consider the scenario of him either having help or not being guilty at all that subterfuge is needed.
Castro did not kill JFK as all that would have done is give the United States the perfect excuse it needed to do what its intelligence and military wanted to do all along -- invade. What did the CC mean by "U.S. operations" in the above quote? JFK never sanctioned raids on Cuba or assassination attempts on Castro, so how could these be "U.S. operations" as the CC writes? These were independent covert operations by the CIA who wanted Castro out of Cuba dead or alive.
While the CC did a little good we again see the same preconceived conclusion being employed by them with NO real attempt to see if there was a conspiracy. While they provide some good information on the FBI and the CIA for the most part it is just another governmental rubber stamp of the official conclusion. Disappointing.
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e6/FrankChurch.jpg
truthstreammedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/churchcommittee.jpg
In 1975 the United States Congress formed a committee to look into the country's intelligence agencies, particularly the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). This committee would take the name of the senator who headed it up, and thus, they are known today as the Church Committee (CC).
In my opinion they limited their results from the beginning by limiting their time and focus to just the FBI and CIA as other intelligence groups like the Office Of Naval Intelligence (ONI), Army Intelligence (CIC), the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) and the National Security Agency (NSA) had possibly even more power than the two they investigated. They claimed that it was due to time constraints, but one has to wonder if that is the real reason. All of this was brought to the forefront of the country's attention because in December 1974 the New York Times had published a report highlighting illegal domestic activities conducted by the CIA. When the CIA was formed in 1947, they were forbidden from operation within the United States so this report drew a large public outrage.
The main purpose of the CC was to explore the past behavior of the FBI and the CIA in many areas, but they also examined how these groups performed following the assassination of President John F. Kennedy (JFK) and this is the focus of this series.
From the outset the CC either showed a naivete towards these groups or they were intimidated by these groups as they wrote this early on in their findings.
Quote on
history-matters.com/archive/church/reports/book5/pages/ChurchVol5_0004b.gif
The Committee emphasizes that this Report's discussion of investigative deficiencies and the failure of American intelligence agencies to inform the Warren Commission of certain information does not lead to the conclusion that there was a conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy. (CC, Book V, p. 8.)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1161#relPageId=8
Quote off
How could the CC decide that "investigative deficiencies" and the failure to inform the WC of certain information NOT have affected their final conclusion? I think it is kind to call the total inept investigation both the FBI and CIA "conducted" a "deficiency" to begin with.
Neither agency searched for the truth. Both focused entirely on Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO) as the only person involved in the assassination. How could that NOT lead to a conclusion of just LHO being involved? A murdered president deserves the very best investigation that is possible so this deficient investigation alone points to the possibility of conspiracy.
Then we have to consider that the FBI and CIA were deciding on what information to withhold from the WC! Why would they withhold any information IF it all happened the way the WC would conclude it did? The excuse we have been given for nearly sixty years is that particular information might endanger an operation or assets in the field could be harmed if this information is known, but again, the OFFICIAL conclusion was that ONE man acted all alone and he had NO TIES to any part of the intelligence system. If this is true, and they have told us it is for nearly sixty years, how could releasing all the information harm anyone? Even in the 1960s or 1970s because it was ONLY LHO supposedly. It sounds like they want their cake and to eat it too.
Why was the CC going along with this by acting like it was no big deal IF they were really looking to hold these agencies accountable? Withholding information is serious and failing to conduct a proper and legal investigation is travesty to JFK's memory and to the country's integrity. This is why many feel that America has never been the same since November 22, 1963.
Instead of dealing with these very important issues the CC wanted to look at the relationship between the FBI, CIA and the WC. Clearly, the "relationship" wasn't a good one as the FBI withheld information from the WC, the CIA withheld information from the WC, the CIA didn't trust the FBI, the FBI didn't trust the CIA, and the lead counsel for the WC, J. Lee Rankin, wanted to charge FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover (JEH) with perjury, but was prevented from doing so. All we have to do is read the Executive Sessions from the WC's meetings to see this. Here is but one example.
Quote on
historymatters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcexec/wcex0127/pages/WcEx0127_0047a.gif
Mr. Rankin. Part of our difficulty in regard to it is that they [FBI] have no problem. They have decided that it is Oswald who committed the assassination, they have decided that no one else was involved, they have decided—
Sen. Russell. They have tried the case and reached a VERDICT ON EVERY ASPECT.
Rep. Boggs. You have put your finger on it.
Mr. McCloy. They are a little less certain in the supplementals then they were in the first.
Mr. Rankin. Yes, but they are still there. THEY HAVE DECIDED THE CASE, and we are going to have maybe a thousand further inquiries that we say the Commission has to know all these things before it can pass on this.
And I think their reaction would probably be, “Why do you want all that. IT IS CLEAR.” (WC Executive Session 1/27/64, p. 171) (Emphasis added)
www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1328#relPageId=47
Quote off
Notice the date of this Executive Session too -- it is January 27, 1964. And yet, the FBI has "reached a verdict on every aspect" and "decided the case" BEFORE the WC has even called a single witness or heard about a single piece of evidence! What relationship could there be besides the WC doing exactly what they were told to do by the FBI and CIA?
The CC then went on to say that the Cuban operations were of "particular emphasis", but failed to mention that this was the particular area that the FBI and CIA withheld from the WC! The WC was never told about the assassination attempts on Cuban Premier Fidel Castro, and believe you me, there were a ton of them. Why would the CC focus on this when they have already said that withheld information DOES NOT LEAD to a conspiracy? Why rehash the same old stuff then? If you aren't going to take what was withheld (some of it anyway) and consider its importance to the assassination then why bother?
Oh, I get it now, instead of focusing on the gazillion attempts we were making on killing Castro, the CC was focused on Castro trying to kill JFK.
Quote on
However, the Committee cautions that it has seen no evidence that Fidel Castro or others in the Cuban government plotted President Kennedy's assassination in retaliation for U.S. operations against Cuba. (CC, Book V, p. 8.)
Quote off
This is pretty slick by the CC as they avoid the issue of the CIA withholding their plots against Castro from the WC and turn it around to the silly theory Johnny Roselli and Frank Sturgis came up with. Both had ties to the CIA by the way. Columnist Jack Anderson would make this red herring popular in his columns too. Castro had no reason to want JFK dead as Lyndon B. Johnson (LBJ) was a far greater threat to him as president. JFK and Castro were opening up back channels too in order to reach a peaceful solution to their issues. Furthermore, Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy (RFK) had worked hard to shut down the base of operations the anti-Castro Cubans were using to launch attacks at Cuba from. These Cuban groups were sponsored by the CIA too. JFK and RFK also had tried to put a halt to Operation Mongoose, but once again the CIA wouldn't listen as they continued their attacks and attempts to kill Castro.
Why did the CIA keep all of this from the WC? Why did the FBI keep from the WC the fact that they had a file on LHO since at least 1960 if not sooner? Ditto the CIA. Why did the FBI deny that LHO worked for them in at least a role of an informant when the media and Texas Attorney General Waggoner Carr said that he had (S179)? None of this makes sense IF LHO acted alone with no assistance as you can't blame the FBI or CIA if he did it and did not work for them, but, IF he worked in some capacity for these groups as researchers have felt for decades then you see why the secrecy is needed. IF LHO was a loner as claimed then there is NO need to withhold a single thing. It is only when you consider the scenario of him either having help or not being guilty at all that subterfuge is needed.
Castro did not kill JFK as all that would have done is give the United States the perfect excuse it needed to do what its intelligence and military wanted to do all along -- invade. What did the CC mean by "U.S. operations" in the above quote? JFK never sanctioned raids on Cuba or assassination attempts on Castro, so how could these be "U.S. operations" as the CC writes? These were independent covert operations by the CIA who wanted Castro out of Cuba dead or alive.
While the CC did a little good we again see the same preconceived conclusion being employed by them with NO real attempt to see if there was a conspiracy. While they provide some good information on the FBI and the CIA for the most part it is just another governmental rubber stamp of the official conclusion. Disappointing.