kennedy assassination chronicles

8/14/2019 KENNEDY ASSASSINATION CHRONICLES

1/55

VOL. 7, ISSUE 4 WINTER 2001 DEDICATED TO THE STUDY OF PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY

IN THIS ISSUE: Jamey Hecht

John Williams Larry Hancock

Rex Bradford


2/55

JFK Lancer Kennedy Assassination Chronicles Vol. 7, Issue 4 1

JFK LANCER

PRODUCTIONS &

PUBLICATIONSServing the research community

educating a new generation.

KENNEDY ASSASSINATION CHRONICLESSenior Editor: LARRY HAAPANENEditor: ALAN ROGERSManaging Editor: DEBRA CONWAYLayout: DEBRA CONWAY

4 Issues annuallyhttp://www.jfklancer.com/Chronicles.html

SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION:US $30Single/Back Issues $30 per yearCheck your mailing label for the ending issueof your subscription.VISA MASTERCARD DISCOVER, PAYPAL

accepted.Check or money order must be drawn on U.S.bank.SUBMIT ARTICLES FOR PUBLICATION TO:[email protected]

NOVEMBER IN DALLAS RESEARCHCONFERENCEHeld each year in November Dallas, TXhttp://www.jfklancer.com/Dallas.html

LANCER INDEPENDENT NEWS EXCHANGEMedia Alert Servicehttp://www.jfklancer.com/LNE

JFK ALLIANCE for OPEN ARCHIVESDeclassification/Access Advocacy Grouphttp://www.jfkalliance.com

RESEARCH & PRODUCTIONDebra Conway

817-424-0292 [email protected]

Digital Document ImagingMaterials on President John F. Kennedy& related subjects.Free catalogTom Jones332 NE 5th StreetGrand Prairie, TX 75050972-264-2007 tel/fax888-259-6317 toll free tel/fax

http://www.flash.net/~jfklancr

VISA MASTERCARD DISCOVER accepted.Check or money order must be drawn on U.S.bank.

Features:2 Voices

3 Passages

7 Library Patrons

6 In The News

48 JFK Lancer Resource Mail Order

Articles:8 November In Dallas

Conference ReviewDebra Conway, Jamey Hecht, Ph.D.

17 Reports of the PresidentsForeign Intelligence Advisory

Board: An Introductory OverviewJohn Williams, Ph.D.

20 Mysteries of the 112th

Intelligence CorpLarry Hancock

28 More Mexico MysteriesRex Bradford

Please dont forget tore-subscribe to KAC.

And tel l your fr iends i f

t hey are interested in t heKennedy Assassination to

give us a look.
http://www.jfklancer.com/Chronicles.htmlhttp://www.jfklancer.com/Dallas.htmlhttp://www.jfklancer.com/LNEhttp://www.jfklancer.com/jfkalliancehttp://www.jfklancer.com/jfkalliancehttp://www.jfklancer.com/LNEhttp://www.jfklancer.com/Dallas.htmlhttp://www.jfklancer.com/Chronicles.html


3/55

2 JFK Lancer Kennedy Assassination Chronicles Vol. 7, Issue 4

VOICES

Look for links to documents orresource materials from this issue at

JFK Lancer Online:

Jamie Sawa regarding the Miller Center:Here is an update on the information put out by the Miller Center, in Virginia. They have a quarterly report

that I just received in the mail (I downloaded the prior versions from their website). They have been transcribingand releasing JFK transcripts and just put out a 3-volume set of JFK transcripts (I ordered a set from bn.com)

along with a CD-ROM included of the actual recordings. Their website, in case you haven't heard of them, is:http://www.millercenter.virginia.edu

They have been releasing things over the last year or so on JFK in their reports. You can either download

the report from their website each quarter, or sign up for the free version by mail.

Jamie Sawa via email

Joe Backes regardingBody of Secrets book Review:There is no news here. There is no revelation here. None at all. This material was an ARRB release

January 29, 1998. Bamford acts like he got this material declassified, he did not. That it's getting media atten-

tion at all is because someone the media will pay attention to put it in a book, only after it was removed from all

context of the JFK assassination, the JFK Act, and Board that got it declassified in the first place. Thats

insulting.

Its getting new media attention to try to tie it into the September 11th attacks, as though the US govern-

ment had similar plans to plow commercial airliners into buildings. The National Security Archive thought this

was news in April -

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/I think we are being used here, by Bamford to promote his book as Project Northwoods is something

getting a lot of attention from that book, and Bamford had nothing to do with getting it out to the public, we did.

If you want to thank someone for them, thank Doug Horne.

I think JFK assassination researchers need to point out who got this material released. Also, it should not be

seen as having any connection to the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Here are the RIF numbers.1.) 198-10004-10204

2.) 198-10004-10038

3.) 198-10004-10147

4.) 198-10004-10150

Joseph Backes via the internet

http:www.jfklancer.com/kac_winter01/Note: The Northwoods documents are

available at

http://www.jfklancer.com/kac_winter01/
http://www.millercenter.virginia.edu/http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/http://www.jfklancer.com/kac_winter01/http://www.jfklancer.com/kac_winter01/http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/news/20010430/http://www.millercenter.virginia.edu/


4/55


5/55


Charles A. CrenshawNovember 19, 2001

By DRAKE WITHAM and LINDA

STEWART BALL / The Dallas

Morning News

Dr. Charles Andrew Crenshaw,

one of several who treated President

John F. Kennedys gunshot wounds nearly 38 years ago,

went to his grave insisting Lee Harvey Oswald was not

the lone gunman.

Dr. Crenshaw, chairman emeritus of the Depart-

ment of Surgery at John Peter Smith Hospital, died of

natural causes at his Fort Worth home Thursday. His

family said Dr. Crenshaws health had been deteriorat-

ing in recent years. He was 68 years old.

He was quite a guy, said Dr. David McReynolds,chairman of the surgery department at John Peter Smith.

He's one of those guys that demanded respect, earned

it, and got it. It wasnt Chuck. It was Dr. Crenshaw or

The Chief.

Dr. Crenshaw started the surgery department at

John Peter Smith single-handedly in 1966, Dr.

McReynolds said, and was its backbone in those early

years, on call practically every night.

But some controversy surrounded Dr. Crenshaw's

later years when he recounted his emergency room treat-

ment of Kennedy and Oswald in two books question-

ing the findings of the Warren Commission.Dr. Crenshaw, an emergency room doctor at

Parkland Memorial Hospital on the days Kennedy and

Oswald died in November 1963, wrote about his expe-

rience in the 1992 bookJFK: Conspiracy of Silence.

In it, Dr. Crenshaw detailed his contention that Kennedy

had been shot twice from the front, contradicting the

findings of the Warren Commission that Oswald was

the lone assassin, firing from behind the president.

It was just supposed to be this little book, a pa-

perback in which he wanted to say what he saw, said

his wife, Susan Lea Crenshaw. Then it just exploded,

and he was getting all of this national, and even inter-

national, attention. He was disappointed that some

of the other doctors did not come to his defense, Ms.

Crenshaw said, adding that the few who did remain

good friends.

Im very sad that he died, Dr. Bob McClelland

said. The professor of surgery at University of Texas

Southwestern Medical School at Dallas was in the op-

erating room at Parkland when Dr. Crenshaw, then a

resident, found him. The pair rushed to the

emergency room to help tend to the president.

He was a very bright person, Dr. McClelland

said of Dr. Crenshaw.

Of course, he got a lot of notoriety with

that book he wrote. He certainly was not writ-

ing on the basis of his imagination. ... Unfor-

tunately, there were some misconceptionsabout it on both sides of the fence on his

side, and on the side of people who criticized

him.

The published account made him somewhat of a

hero in the eyes of those who have said all along that

there was more than one gunman. Other doctors spoke

out, but he was the most vocal of them, said Tom

Bowden, president of the Conspiracy Museum in Dal-

las. Thats the key.

Mr. Bowden said Dr. Crenshaw was well known

among those who discount the Warren Commissions

findings. Many were eagerly awaiting his next book,

released [last November]. Unfortunately, a lot of the

witnesses of those days are dying off, Mr. Bowden

said. That does create a loss for the conspiracy com-

munity, those guys who believed in what we believe

in.

Dr. Crenshaws second book, Trauma Room One,

includes the first book, plus information about lawsuits

that Dr. Crenshaw brought against his detractors and

details that had come out since his first book was pub-

lished, Ms. Crenshaw said.

He was so happy that the book came out, Ms.Crenshaw said. He just wanted to live long enough

for this book to come out so it would prove that what

he said in the first book was true. But she said her

husbands true passion was medicine. His legacy is

not a book, she said. "His life was building John Peter

Smith Hospital, and that's his legacy.

Dr. Crenshaw was born and raised in Paris, Texas,

before graduating from Southern Methodist University

in 1953 with a bachelors degree. He earned a masters

degree in biology from East Texas State Teachers Col-

lege, now Texas A&M-Commerce, in 1955 and a doc-

torate from Baylor University in 1957. He earned amedical degree at the University of Texas Southwest-

ern Medical School in 1960 and interned at the Veter-

ans Administration Hospital in 1961. He completed his

assistant residency in surgery at Parkland in 1965 and

his senior residency in surgery in 1966.

He served as the chairman of the surgery depart-

ment of John Peter Smith Hospital in Fort Worth from

1966 to 1992, and he was a member of several medical


6/55


Authors Note:

Why This Book Was Updated

By Charles A.

Crenshaw

The book I origi-

nally wrote with Jen

Hansen and J. Gary Shaw,JFK: Conspiracy

ofSilence, was published

in April, 1992 and was

well-received across the

nation by the American

public. I had broken the

edict of silence thrust upon

us, those who tried to save

President John F. Kennedy,and, two days later, his ac-

cused assassin, Lee Harvey

Oswald. My observations

contradicted the official

version of the assassination,

as reported in the Warren Report. I stated that Presi-

dent Kennedy was shot at least once, and I believe twice,

from the front, and Oswald could not have been a lone

gunman. I had anticipated criticism from some, but I

never expected the vicious attack from my medical col-

leagues.

In May 1992, the editor and a writer for the Jour-

nal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) called

a press conference in New York to promote a JAMA

article which attacked me both personally and profes-

sionally. They quoted some of my fellow physicians

who had been in the Parkland Emergency room on that

tragic day, with statements that varied significantly from

the testimony that they had sworn to before the Warren

associations.

Services were held at the First Presbyterian

Church, 100 Penn St., in Fort Worth. Cremation pre-

ceded the services.

Besides his wife, Dr. Crenshaw is survived by his

son, Charles A. Crenshaw II; his daughter, Adelaide

Andrews; and two grandchildren.

Commission.

I repeatedly asked JAMA for a retraction and cor-

rection and received correspondence denying our re-

quest. My coauthor Gary Shaw and I were advised to

sue JAMA, and on November 22, 1992, exactly 29 years

since that fateful day in Dallas, we filed suit for slan-

der with malice. In October, 1994, we agreed to court-

ordered mediation and accepted a monetary settlementoffered by JAMA. The litigation details and exposure

of JAMA s unethical publication are included in this

book in the section written by our attorney, D. Bradley

Kizzia.

The House Select Committee on Assassinations

(HSCA) concluded in 1979 that President Kennedys

death was the result of a probable conspiracy, but their

records were sealed until the year 2029. The 1992 Presi-

dent John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collec-

tion Act (JFK Act) was a unique solution to nearly thirty

years of government secrecy, and the government was

required to release whatever information it had con-

cerning the assassination. The JFK Act created an in-

dependent board that would oversee the governments

implementation of the Act, the Assassination Record

Review Board (ARRB).

Many of the revelations from the ARRB have

substantiated my allegations in the original book. Ac-

cording to Saundra

Spencer, the autopsy

photographs of Presi-

dent Kennedy that

she developed at theNaval Photography

Center in 1963 were

different from those

in the National Ar-

chives since 1966.

The ARRB Report also suggests that Dr. Humes, one

of three autopsy physicians, appears to have changed

his Warren Commission testimony when his deposi-

tion was taken under oath by the ARRB. Additional

testimony questioned the autopsy and brain photogra-

phy that are now in the National Archive and Records

Administration.I have no idea who shot President Kennedy or

why. What I do know is that somehow and for some

reason, there was a medical cover-up. The official

autopsy photos do not depict the same wounds I saw in

Trauma Room One at Parkland. The wounds I saw were

wounds of entrance, and thus they could have not come

from the rifle of Lee Harvey Oswald.

Copyright 2001 Charles A. Crenshaw

I have no idea who shot PresidentKennedy or why. What I do know isthat...there was a medical cover-up


7/55


IN THE NEWS

CIA Places Electronic Reading Room

Online (Freedom of Information Act)http://www.foia.cia.gov/default.asp

This new Reading Room replaces the clunky Elec-

tronic Document Release Center (FOIA). The site is

fully searchable and has an advanced interface which

allows limiting by date. A browsable list of Frequently

Requested Records is also available. From the site, The

CIA has established this site to provide the public with

an overview of access to CIA information, including

electronic access to previously released documents.

Because of CIAs need to comply with the national se-

curity laws of the United States, some documents or

parts of documents cannot be released to the public.

February 6, 2002

New Tapes: JFK Questioned Value of

Nuclear Build-Up

Boston: The John F. Kennedy Presidential Library to-

day made public 240 minutes of newly declassified tape

recordings of White House meetings and conversations

that took place in the Cabinet Room on November 21,

27 and 29, and December 5, 1962.

Portions of the tapes may be heard by visiting the

John F. Kennedy Librarys web page at

http://www.jfklibrary.orgThe conversations between President John F.

Kennedy and his advisors took place shortly after the

Cuban Missile Crisis and centered on U.S. policy to-

ward Cuba, the accuracy of American press reports on

matters of national security, the military budget, and

the value of nuclear weapons, both as a deterrent and

as a practical weapon.

Of particular interest are President Kennedys

candid views of nuclear weapons, nuclear war and de-

terrence. At one point during the December 5 meeting

with Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara and other

military advisors, President Kennedy questions the use-fulness of nuclear weapons as a deterrent, stating:

If the purpose of our strategic buildup is to

deter the Russians, number one; number two,

to attack them if it looks like they are about

to attack us or be able to lessen the impact

they would have on us in an attackif our

point really then is to deter themwe have

an awful lot of megatonnage to put on the

Soviets sufficient to deter them from ever

using nuclear weapons. Otherwise what good

are they? You cant use them as a first weaponyourself, they are only good for deterringI

dont see quite why were building as many

as were building.

March 1, 2002

Kennedy Library Opens Personal Papers of

Arthur Schlesinger

Boston: Researchers, libraries, members of the press, and

members of the public are advised that the John F. Kennedy

Presidential Library has processed and made available for

research four additional series of the Personal Papers of

Arthur M. Schlesinger.

Arthur M. Schlesinger served in the Kennedy Admin-

istration as Special Assistant to the President and is the au-

thor ofA Thousand Days andRobert Kennedy and His Times.

The Personal Papers of Arthur Schlesinger -- Classi-

fied Subject File is now open for research. The documents

in the Classified Subject File cover the period from 1961 to

1963 and are arranged alphabetically by subject. There are

31 boxes in this open series. Highlights of the collection in-

clude the folders on disarmament, British Guiana, Cuba, and

the United Nations. Researchers will note that classified por-tions still remain closed. Withdrawal sheets describing the

closed materials will allow the researchers to request addi-

tional review.

Also opened today is the Personal Papers of Arthur

Schlesinger -- Classified Chronological File that consists of

once classified onion skin copies of memoranda and corre-

spondence written by Arthur Schlesinger to President

Kennedy and other members of the staff from 1961 to 1963.

The file is arranged by year in reverse chronological order.

Copies of many of these documents will be located in other

series within the Schlesinger Papers. Researchers should use

this series in conjunction with the regular Chronological File

of the Schlesinger Papers. Researchers will notice that thereis some duplication between these series.

The Personal Papers of Arthur Schlesinger -- Memo-

randa to the President File is also now available for research.

The series consists of memoranda written to President

Kennedy by Arthur Schlesinger on various topics from 1961

to 1963. They are arranged by year in reverse chronological

order. The Personal Papers of Arthur Schlesinger -- Remarks

for the President File is also now open and consists of speech

and statement drafts written for President John F. Kennedy
http://www.foia.cia.gov/default.asphttp://www.jfklibrary.org/http://www.jfklibrary.org/http://www.foia.cia.gov/default.asp


8/55


by Mr. Schlesinger. The two boxes are organized by title or

location and date and are listed chronologically. Research-

ers may find these speech files very useful when used in

conjunction with the speech files already available in the

Presidents Office Files and the Papers of Theodore Sorensen.

The collections are available for research use in the

Librarys Research Room. The hours of operation are Mon-

day Friday from 8:30 am - 4:30 pm, and appointments

may be made by calling (617) 929-4534.Materials housed at the John F. Kennedy Library have

come to the Library through two routes. First, as Federal

records which come from executive departments, commis-

sions and committees of the Federal government. Access to

these materials is controlled by the originating agency. In

addition, many of these materials contain national security

classified information, which under laws and executive or-

ders must be reviewed by the appropriate agency for pos-

sible declassification. Some of the materials, such as civil

rights cases or litigation, also have privacy restrictions.

Second, as personal papers, which come from indi-

viduals under deeds of gift and deposit agreements negoti-

ated between the National Archives and the donor or his/her

heirs. These materials, called donated historical materials,

comprise the bulk of the Librarys holdings. Deeds of gift

and deposit agreements cover the administration of the col-

lections as well as the title, literary rights, and any restric-

tions requested by the donor or necessitated by the nature of

the materials. Many donors retain literary rights and/or re-

strict personal financial or medical information. A review of

personal papers for national security classified information

also sometimes occurs depending upon the nature of the pa-

pers themselves. The Librarys holdings currently include

246 personal papers collections, of which 175 are open fully

or in part for research use.To document the life and career of President Kennedy

and to provide insight into people, events, and issues ofmid-

20th century American history, the John F. Kennedy

Library and Museum collects, preserves and makes

available for research the documents, audiovisual ma-

terial and memorabilia of President Kennedy, his fam-

ily, and his contemporaries. The Librarys Archives

includes 36 million pages of documents from the col-

lections of 340 individuals, organizations, or govern-

ment agencies; oral history interviews with 1,300

people; and over 30,000 books. The Audiovisual Ar-

chives administers collections of over 400,000 still pho-

tographs, 8,550,000 feet of motion picture film, 1,200

hours of video recordings, over 9,000 hours of audio

recordings and 500 original editorial cartoons.

Johnson County Library, Overland Park, Kansas

Project JFK, Mark Taylor

Grand Prairie City Library, Grand Prairie, Texas

Hoffman Family/JFK Lancer

Dallas Public Library, Dallas, Texas

Self-Sponsored

Greensburg Public Library, Greensburg,

Pennsylvania

Bob Schwartzmiller

Cistercian Preparatory School, Irving, Texas

Chris Marcellos

The State Historical Society of Wisconsin

Self-Sponsored

Tulsa City-County Library, Tulsa, Oklahoma

Craig Roberts

Hughson Public Library

Bill Mills

Mary Parker Memorial Library

Jerry Ballenger

Brattleboro Union High School

William Holiday

Tippecanoe County Public Library, Lafayette,

Indiana

Jerry RobertsonGallaudet University Library,Washington, D.C.

JFK Lancer, Ed Hoffman, and Ron Freidrich

Brehm Prepretory School, Carbondale , Illinois

Self-Sponsored

Goodland High School, Goodland , Kansas

Brad Parker

Please contact us to donate a Library Subscription of

the Kennedy Assassination Chronicles.

Library PatronsOur list of those who generously donate a

subscription of KAC to their local library.


9/55


JFK Lancers

NOVEMBER I N DALLAS

2001 CONFERENCE

November 16, 17, and 18, 2001

OBSERVING THE 38TH ANNIVERSARY OF

THE ASSASSINATION OF PRESIDENT

JOHN F. KENNEDY

In the past five years since the initial November In Dallas Conference on

the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy, NID has become an

important annual forum for the presentation and exchange of in-

formation on vital research and new developments. Past confer-

ences have consistently brought together witnesses and lead-

ing persons from various backgrounds to address these is-sues.

This years conference theme was You Are the

Jury. A grand jury, to be exact. Unlike trial

juries, grand juries don't decide if someone is

guilty of criminal charges that have been brought against

them. Grand juries listen to evidence and decide if some-

one SHOULD be charged with a crime. What could a

grand jury evaluate in the assassination of President John

F. Kennedy. What is evidence? What is proof? What is

opinion? What are the facts?

The 2001 NID Conference presented

information that you should evaluate and hopefully,

find answers to those questions.

A Message from JFK Lancer and November In Dallas 2001.

Debra Conway and Tom Jones

JFK LancerYOU ARE THE JURY


10/55


Mary Ferrell - JFK Lancer

Awards 2001

New Frontier Award"In appreciation for your contribution of new

evidence and futhering the study of the assassination

of President John F. Kennedy."

Mark Sobel

Legacy AwardsPresented in appreciation for your permanent

additions to the record of the

assassination of President John F. Kennedy.

Larry Hancock

Malcolm Blunt

Ed Sherry

Student of the YearElizabeth Toleno, Honorable

Mention

Joe Biles, Scholarship Winner

Continuing our tradition of documenting the record andsharing research materials.


11/55

1 0 JFK Lancer Kennedy Assassination Chronicles Vol. 7, Issue 4

Speakers

REX BRADFORD has devoted himself to scanning documents and digitalizing audio recordings related to

the assassination of JFK, most recently in relation to Lee Harvey Oswald's alleged visit to Mexico City. An

author and a designer of games for computers, he resides in Massachusetts.

AL CARRIER has an extensive background as a crime scene investigator and in weapons and ballistics

with military and police units. He has also attended the US Secret Service Dignitary Protection Course. Among

his special interests in the death of JFK are the shot sequence, ballistic evidence, Secret Service failures, and Lee

Oswald's connections to US intelligence agencies.

GEORGE COSTELLO, a graduate of Johns Hopkins with a J.D. from Duke Law School, is an attorney for

the Congressional Research Service of The Library of Congress. He has authored several important book re-

views of Gerald Posner's Case Closed, of Gaeton Fonzi's The Last Investigation, and, most recently, ofMurder

In Dealey Plaza, which appeared in The Federal Lawyer(May 2001).

TONY CUMMINGS has applied his unique understanding of computer graphics and digital enhancements

to the photographic record. In collaboration with Bill Miller and through his company, Interactive History, he

will present a presentation of some of the best visible details of the assassination that have ever been made

available to the JFK research community.JAMES H. FETZER, McKnight Professor at the University of Minnesota and Co-Chair of NID 2001, has

organized symposia and conferences on the death of JFK and produced a 4 1/2 hour video, "JFK: The Assassina-

tion, the Cover-Up, and Beyond". He is the editor of two collections of new studies,Assassination Science and

Murder In Dealey Plaza.

STEWART GALANOR is the author of the highly-acclaimed study, Cover-up, which Gaeton Fonzi has

described as the single best book on the assassination of JFK. The author ofCalculus: A Visual Approach and of

The Paradox OF Tristam Shandy, he is a multimedia consultant and technical writer for financial institutions and

the television industry.

NICK GERLICH, Ph.D., an associate professor of marketing at West Texas A&M University, serves as the

editor on the subject of conspiracies forSkeptic Magazine and as an e-commerce and internet consultant. Largely

a skeptic of conspiracy theories, he has written about the death of JFK and attended NID 2000, which was the

basis for a new piece forSkeptic that is forthcoming.JAMES GORDON, a graduate of Edinburgh University, teaches Computing and English at Selkirk High

School in the Scottish Borders. His interest in the death of JFK is of long-standing and, in his courses, he uses the

assassination as a subject for his students' writing assignments as well as conducting mock trials of Lee Oswald

for oral presentations.

Hiawatha Daugherty, Litigation MediaBetty WindsorJessie, Office Max

Dee, Ramada InnJim Fetzer

Tony Cummings

Mary FerrellBeau Crouch

Tomie JonesSteve Conway

Family and FriendsBeau Crouch and Tomie Jones

Special Thanks to:


12/55


SHERRY GUTIERREZ, a court-certified senior

crime scene analyst and court certified expert on blood

splatter analysis, formerly headed the Forensic Inves-

tigative Unit for St. Charles Parish of the Louisiana

Sheriff's Department. A consultant to district attorneys

and other law enforcement officials, she is a member

of the International Association for Identification and

has served on its subcommittee for bloodstain pattern

evidence.LARRY HANCOCK, co-author (with Connie

Kritzberg) ofNovember Patriots, a work of historically-

based fiction concerning the death of JFK, has spent

the last thirty years dealing with computers and com-

munications. Currently Marketing Director for Zoom

Telephonics, Inc, he has expended considerable effort

conducting research on intelligence aspects of the as-

sassination, including the involvement of Richard Case

Nagell.

BILL HOLIDAY, JFK Lancer - Mary Ferrell

Teacher of the Year, 1997. A 31 year teacher of SocialScience at Noblesville High School, Noblesville, Indi-

ana, where he also serves as Department Chairperson.

Noblesville's Board of School Trustees have recognized

Mr. Hitchcock's students by regularly hearing presen-

tations regarding their research and internship. Mr.

Hitchcock , through his Congressman, Dan Burton, and

David Marwell, Former Executive Director of the As-

sassination Records Review Board, arranged, for the

summer of 1995, an internship oppor-

tunity with the Review Board for these

students. Five groups from Noblesville

High School, totaling 56 students, in-

terned with the Board. Current student's

Michele Aleck and Elizabeth Toleno

will be assisting.

DAVID W. MANTIK, M.D.,

Ph.D., practices radiation medicine at

the Loma Linda University Medical

Center. He has made path breaking

studies of the original autopsy X-rays,

the medical evidence, and the Zapruder

film, which have been published inAs-

sassination Science and Murder In

Dealey Plaza.

BILL MILLER is an Illinois resi-

dent who has researched the assassina-

tion for nearly two decades. His current interest is in

the analysis and the synthesis of the photographicrecord, especially in relation to witness testimony. His

recent findings have included hidden images on the 6th

floor immediately following the shooting and detect-

ing features of JFK's rear head wound in several assas-

sination films.

JIM OLIVIER, a Louisiana-based television jour-

nalist, has been researching the assassination for more

than 30 years. He has produced numerous television

Author Craig Roberts in the Book Room.

Teacher Bill Holiday and his high school group talk

with Adele Edisen.


13/55


segments on various aspects of the assassination, in-

cluding several with Jim Garrison, former District At-torney of New Orleans, who tried Clay Shaw for in-

volvement in a New Orleans-based conspiracy to kill

President Kennedy.

JERRY POLICOFF became absorbed by the study

of the assassination during

the mid-1960s, when he met

Sylvia Meagher, Harold

Weisberg, Mark Lane, and

other critics ofThe Warren

Report. As an advertising

trainee in New York, he be-

came interested in mediacoverage of the event, which

led to a long piece on the role

of The New York Times in

promoting the cover-up. He

has since published inNew

Times, The Washington Star,

Rolling Stone, The Villlage

Voice, and The New York

Times Op-Ed Page.

CRAIG ROBERTS, a

former Marine Corps sniperin Vietnam with extensive

law-enforcement experi-

ence, has authored Kill

Zone: A Sniper Looks At

Dealey Plaza, widely ac-

claimed as an outstanding

contribution to studies of the

death of JFK. He is an ex-

pert on why many powerful

groups--including the CIA, the Mafia, and banking in-

terests--preferred JFK not remain President.KENNETH A. RAHN, is an atmospheric chem-

ist and professor at the Graduate School of Oceanogra-

phy, University of Rhode Island, where he has been

since 1973. He received a B.S. in chemistry from MIT

in 1962, and later a Ph.D. in meteorology from the Uni-

versity of Michigan in 1971.

His specialty is measuring

trace elements in aerosols by

neutron activation. He pres-

ently offers courses in chem-

istry, atmospheric chemistry,

global change, scientificwriting, and the JFK assas-

sination at the university. He

became interested in the JFK

assassination in 1992, first its

general aspects and later its

scientific aspects. Most re-

cently, he has been focusing

on the neutron activation

analysis of the bullet frag-

ments by the FBI and the

HSCA, and is continually

being surprised by how im-

portant these results are turn-

ing out to be.

MICHAEL SPARKS

leads a non-profit think tank,

The 1st Tactical Studies

Group (Airborne), originally

based out of Ft. Bragg, NC,

which field-tests military

Beau Crouch

(head down), Rex

Bradford, and

Stewart Galanor

prepare equipment

for the next

presentation.

Crime scene expert Sherry Gutierrez


14/55


The conference audience listens attentively.

Debra, Tom, and Steve after the Awards Banquet

November In Dallas: A Reviewby Jamey Hecht, Ph.D.

November in Dallas 2001 was a success. The at-

tendance was unusually low, because the 9-11 attacksreduced our mobility. And yet these same attacks added

an urgency to the proceedings. The whole country was

buzzing with the phrase wake-up call, and suddenly

the things and ideas and institutions to which our orga-

nization pays such anxious attention violence, in-

ternational traffic in arms and narcotics, government

malfeasance and deception, equal protection under law

and all that threatens it began to draw very broad

public acknowledgement. Although it felt a little risky

to get on a plane and fly to Dallas, it also felt like that

city was the right place to be in the new millennium,confronting difficult truths and sharing the burden of

longing for an elusive justice. I couldnt attend quite

all the sessions (so I cant comment on them all here),

nor meet quite all the attendees. But this was my first

NID conference and it was unforgettable.

Craig Roberts spoke persuasively about a wide

variety of episodes and the linkages among them. He

seemed to me especially well acquainted with the

machinations of the Nixon-Kissinger administration

during the Vietnam War, and the criminal activities of

those officials and their associates throughout the

1970s. I got the impression that his primary expertiselay in the heroin and banking adventures of that pe-

riod, on which he was quite an arresting speaker. But

he also made it clear that there was continuity between

the narcotics-banking fiasco of the old Nugan Hand

Bank and BCCI, and more recent stuff in places like

Afghanistan. I got his autograph on a copy of hisKill

Zone: A Sniper Looks at Dealey Plaza.

Stewart Galanor, the author of the celebrated

equipment and makes recom-

mendations to the U.S. Army at

no charge. His primary interest

in his spin-off group, The 4th

Tactical Studies Group (Con-

spiracy), is to solve the assassi-

nation of JFK and to restore

confidence in our government.DONALD THOMAS,

who specializes in entomology

and has been employed by the

US Department of Agriculture

since 1983, has also undertaken

research on the death of Presi-

dent Kennedy, including, most recently, a major study

of echo correlation in Dealey Plaza recorded during

the assassination, which appeared in a British journal

of forensics. He holds adjunct appointments at Texas

A&M and at the Universidad Nacional Autonoma

Mexicana and is also a research associate of The

Carnegie Museum and The Nebraska State Museum.

STU WEXLER, currently a Web Developer, who

graduated from Tulane University in 1998 with a de-

gree in history and a minor in philosophy. He has been

researching the JFK assassination since the 7th grade,

and has made presentations on the subject at his high

school. Wexler's main interests in the case are Oswald's

background and the physical evidence.

JOHN WILLIAMS, Ph.D., has developed a keen

interest in the history and activities of the Foreign In-

telligence Advisory Board, especially from November1962 to October 1964. A faculty member at the Uni-

versity of Wisconsin-Stout, Menomonie, WI, he offers

courses in its Department of Human Development,

Family Living, and Community Educational Services.


15/55


Cover-Up, gave a witty and incisive talk

about the witnesses in Dealey Plaza and the

way the Warren Commission and the HSCA

offered misleading and even mendacious

summaries of their testimony. In this as in

so many other areas, the Commission and

its successors falsified, omitted, and distorted

the sworn testimony of witnesses for whoseintegrity they cared not a whit, having sold

their own in exchange for a place in the new

order of things. Galanors devastatingly spe-

cific array of examples filled the audience

with the too-familiar mood of frustrated in-

dignation, along with a keen gratitude for

his labor and his integrity.

John Williams described the role of the

Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board in the

Kennedy Administration and contrasted it

with the use other presidents made of the

same body. This issue is part of a very im-

portant area, since JFKs vexed relationship

with the intelligence community is at the heart of his

murder and bears strongly on his achievement the

Kennedy vision of international peace, shared prosper-

ity, and popular sovereignty. I found Professor Will-

iams articulate, scholarly, and human. I hope others

will emulate his clarity and the compassionate sense of

mission that animated his presentation.

I found the presentations by Jim Fetzer and David

Mantik compelling, detail-oriented, and insightful about

the medical evidence and the many forensic areas ofthe JFK case in which their expertise have purchase.

On the other hand, I share some reservations about their

style, which sometimes struck me as needlessly defen-

sive. The Zapruder-film alteration

controversy has been surprisingly

divisive, since it doesnt touch on

the most politically important as-

pects of the Presidents murder. Its painful to see the

movement wracked by factionalism over issues that are

proportionately tiny compared to our shared concern

with the big issues. It may be extra work to cope with

a few graying alpha males in the room, but its gener-

ally worth it: Jim Fetzers books are highly visible,

valuable resources and his colleagueship is a tremen-

dous asset to Lancer and its mission (particularly be-

cause of his background in the philosophy of science

and methodology). I was honored to meet the guy.Rex Bradfords Mexico City presentation was

helpful because it took account of new document re-

leases and audio-tapes. It was a very complimentary

presentation to the the

Mexico City picture already

come into sharp focus in

1999, when John Newman

brilliantly refined Peter Dale

Scotts account of the story

the Oswald imperson-

ation, the elaborate waltz of

photos and tapes and lies thatthe Mexican DFS and the

CIA danced around the FBI

and the rest of us.

I was honored to meet

Ed Hoffman, who stood on the triple underpass in

1963. I was honored to meet Debra Conway, whose

energy and intelligence and devotion make the con-

ference possible every year.The Award Banquet

Jim Oliver, Awards Banquet MC, Dennis David,

KeynoteSpeaker, and Joe Biles, Student of the Year

Scholarship Winner. (Kelly Creech produced thegraphic on the screen and also the banquet film.)


16/55


Perhaps the movements most important public-

ity achievement since Oliver Stones film (and Peter

Dale Scotts winning of the University of California

Press as the publisher for his Deep Politics and the

Death of JFK) has been the vindication of the HSCAs

findings on the dictabelt recording and the grassy knoll

shot. Donald Thomas presented a version of his Echo

Correlation Analysis and the Acoustic Evidence, thesame paper that recently won worldwide attention af-

ter publication in a prominent British journal. Attend-

ees congratulated Dr. Thomas and thanked him for his

impact on the public.

For me, the most moving event of the day was

Larry Teeters long and spellbinding speech about the

Robert Kennedy murder. Teeter is Sirhan Sirhans cur-

rent attorney, and he knows the case as well as anyone

does, perhaps better than anyone now living. He spoke

without notes, with the

passion and urgency of an

inspired lawyer. If you

only know the JFK case,

as I did, you risk missing

the horrific reach of the

problem, the way it un-

dermines American juris-

prudence, compromises

equal protection, vitiates

the public will to elect

officials of our own

choosing, and fosters a

culture of cynicism and even despair. Larry Teeterspelled out the long-range planning of RFKs murder

and the chilling chicanery of its judicial aftermath, the

way it all ran on violence, deceit, bribery, and an impe-

rious contempt for the law on the part of the guilty of-

ficials and their confederates. As Ted Kennedy said at

Bobbys funeral, he saw warand tried to stop it.

Thats why hes gone.

At the Dallas conference, we come together to

expose ongoing deception, to offer our findings to our

colleagues, to articulate hypotheses and to exchange

information, to speculate and to affirm and to mourn.

Most of the people who killed the Kennedys and Dr.King are dead now. The methods of the unpunished

conspirators and opportunistic accessories continue and

many of their secrets remain hidden, despite the heroic

efforts of the much-maligned Church Committee and

its successors like the ARRB. So a conference like this

one brings up a great deal of difficult thought and emo-

tion, a yearning for possibilities lost and a bitterness

over wasted human potential. If the Indochina War had

never escalated, to choose just one example of CIA-

driven aggression, another 58 thousand young Ameri-

cans of all colors and a million Vietnamese might to-

day be working, loving and laughing. If the idealism

of the New Frontier were in the ascendant today

with its respect for learning and the arts, its genuine ifpolitically vexed love of peace, and its confidence in

the ability of the human intellect to identify and meet

genuine human needs we might not be in the envi-

ronmental, economic, and geopolitical peril that domi-

nates our daily attention. November in Dallas is a hard

experience. But the act of telling the truth in the pres-

ence of ones fellow citizens has a remarkably salutary

effect.

The poet Holderlin wrote, where grows the dan-

ger, there grows also the

saving power. Though

the violence and the con-

tempt for the law con-

tinue, though the intelli-

gence budgets are soar-

ing and the world is mili-

tarized as never before,

people now know that

the government routinely

lies. They know that it

does so when big busi-

ness and the military sub-

vert popular sovereignty. And they are beginning torealize that the government is a public institution which

they can collectively change for the better, so that it

works for peace and economic justice, educating the

population instead of jailing it. Though the world ails

miserably, it is also rife with viable solutions waiting

for widespread acceptance. The kind of truth-telling

exemplified by, say, South Africas Truth and Recon-

ciliation Commission may be the lever that eventually

overturns American denial, and turns our faces away

from current obsessions (sports, celebrities, cars, guns,

beef, etc) and toward policy once again. JFK Lancer

and its sister organizations in the political justice move-ment are a central part of this bright possibility, more

central than is generally acknowledged. Im proud that

I was there last November, and until we meet this No-

vember I wish you all clean reading glasses, loud voices,

sharp pens, and solidarity.

Perhaps the movements most impor-tant publicity achievement sinceOliver Stones film ... has been the vin-dication of the HSCAs findings on thedictabelt recording and the grassyknoll shot.


17/55


FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 16 NID01-V01 A MAJOR MOTIVE (1.5 hrs.) $20

Craig Roberts, JFK, THE CIA, AND THE SOUTHEAST ASIADRUG CONNECTIONS

NID01-V02 THE STUDY OF DEALEY PLAZA WITNESSES (1.5 hrs.) $20James Gordon, Stewart Galanor

NID01-V03 PIECES OF THE PUZZLE (2 hrs.) $30TEACHING JFK MODELS OF INSTRUCTIONBill Holiday, Michele Aleck, Elizabeth TolenoHOW TO THINK ABOUT CONSPIRACYMichael Sparks

NID01-V04 DOCUMENTS UNDER THE JFK ACT (1.5 hrs.) $20John Williams, FOREIGN INTELLIGENCE ADVISORY BOARDLarry Hancock, ARMY INTELLIGENCE GROUP 112TH

NID01-V05 MEXICO CITY DOCUMENTS AND AUDIOTAPES (1 hr.)$20Rex Bradford NID01-V06 Larry Teeter, Attorney for Sirhan Sirhan (3+ hrs.) $35

Ron Redmon, JFK, RFK, AND MLK Similarities in the ThreeAssassinations

SATURDAY NOVEMBER 17 NID01-V07 PIECES OF THE PUZZLE (1.5 hrs.) $20

Bill Miller and Tony Cummings, PHOTOGRAPHIC ANALYSISLarry Hancock, THE DAL-TEX PHOTO

* NID01-V08 JFK AND THE MEDIA, Moderator, David Mantik (2 hrs.)$30Nick Gerlich, George Costello, Jerry Policoff

* NID01-V09 THE FILM, THE PHOTOS, AND THE SHOTS (3 hrs.) $45

Al CarrierDavid Mantik, REVIEW OF MOORMAN PHOTO EXPERIMENT

NID01-V10 CRIME SCENE EVIDENCE (2.5 hrs.) $35Sherry Gutierrez, BLOOD SPATTER ANALYSISDonald Thomas, ECHO CORRELATION ANALYSIS AND THEACOUSTIC EVIDENCE

NID01-V11 BANQUET and AWARDS CEREMONY (1.5 hrs.)$20MC: Jim OlivierAwards Presentation, Tom Jones, and Debra ConwayFilm Tribute, Kelly CreechBanquet Address, Joe G. Biles, 2001 JFK Lancer-# Winter2001 Vol 7 Issue 4Mary Ferrell

Student Scholarhip WinnerBanquet Address, Dennis DavidConcluding Remarks, Jim Olivier

SUNDAY NOVEMBER 18 NID01-V12 NEUTRON ACTIVATION ANALYSIS (2 hrs.) $30

Jim Fetzer, Ken Rahn, Stewart Galanor, Stu Wexler

NID 2001 Videos

Tapes may be

ordered

individually

or

as a complete

set of 12 for

only $199.00

(thats $86 off

the $285 actual

price!)

Youll find these tapesa most valuable re-

search tool!
http://www.jfklancer.com/dallas01/


18/55


Reports of the Presidents Foreign

Intelligence Advisory Board:An Introductory Overview

By John M. Williams Ph.D.

This significant series of reports is taken from

meetings of the Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board,

which occurred during the terms of Presidents Kennedy

and Johnson. By no means are all the meetings of the

Board included here. Only those deemed to have ma-

terial pertinent to the Kennedy assassination have been

included in the present release.

The Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (FIAB)

was originally appointed under President Eisenhoweras a tactic to forestall the creation of a bi-partisan

Watch Dog Committee recommended in 1955 by the

Hoover Commission on Organization of the Executive

Branch of the Government. In January 1961, Presi-

dent Kennedy decided that there was a continuing need

for a Presidential Advisory Board on Foreign Intelli-

gence, but he temporarily delayed the appointment of

new members for a later date.

Following the disaster of the Bay of Pigs, how-

ever, the President very quickly acted to establish the

FIAB by Executive Order. The Board was at work by

May, and Board Chairman, James Killian appointed

himself and three other Board members to serve on a

Board panel . . . to study the extent to which the gov-

ernment should be involved in political, psychologi-

cal, propaganda, and paramilitary activities; and the

policy which should be pursued by the U.S. Govern-

ment in these matters. (Excerpts from the Minutes of

the Presidents FIAB meetings with respect to Covert

Actions Matters: Undated Memorandum).

Under President Kennedy, this Board kept a busy

schedule. In approximately two and a half years, the

Board met for 25 meetings covering a period of 39 days.Of these, only 10 meetings covering 19 days are in-

cluded here. These reports provide an important, yet

very partial view of the Boards work during this time.

In accord with the purpose of this release, material from

four Board meetings under President Johnson are also

included. Further details concerning the Boards his-

tory are provided in a summary given by Clark Clifford

for the first meeting with President Johnson on Janu-

ary 30, 1964.

The reports given here cover Board meetings

which occurred

from November 9,

1962 to October 2,

1964. Some memo-

randa from these

meetings contain

material, which

dates back as early

as May 15, 1961.

However, historians

and researchers

must be ready to

face a patchwork

of releases from the

overall reports,

which might accu-

rately be described

as an Assassination

Review Boards

Sampler. This author cannot help wondering howmany chefs and what kind of chefs it took to cook up

this curious compilation of reports. We need to look

further at this question.

What, first of all, are some highlights of these

important reports?

1. The first highlight comes in the last cited meeting of

the Board for this release on October 1 and 2, 1964.

There we read that the Chairman, Clark Clifford, had

met with President Johnson a number of times for

discussion of various subjects, and on these occasions

had taken the opportunity to progressively acquaint the

President with the work of the Board. Mr. Clifford

pointed out to the Board that, unlike President Kennedy,

who had reconstituted the Board in 1961, and was

THOROUGHLYacquainted with its functioning,

President Johnson had not been as intimately associated

with the Board, PRIMARILY FOR THE REASON

THAT NO INTELLIGENCE RELATED INCIDENTS

HAVE THUS FAR ARISEN in President Johnsons

Clark Clifford: Presidential

advisor and head of PFIAB

for JFK


19/55


ing such matters as reports on the Mongoose Pro-

gram, some concerns raised by the President con-

cerning intelligence operations, and Allen Dulles

view of the importance of covert operations programs

which may have brought him into direct conflict with

President Kennedy.

Readers must be prepared to find themselves

perplexed and frustrated by the number of postpone-ments or deletions from the material which interrupt

the flow of thought, or suddenly cut off discussion of

issues at hand. In many instances, the blocking out of

information, even on meeting agendas is crudely done.

It suggests a reckless haste on the part of censors. Apart

from blockages filling whole parts of pages, this reader

noted the outright deletion of 328 additional pages

which would have brought the Memoranda cited to

nearly 750 pages rather than the 416 pages of text that

were actually released. In a supposed democracy, this

sort of crudity in censorship is unconscionable! It se-

verely stunts the scope of these reports.

These omissions open up an important question:

What were the criteria for determining the selection of

reports which were, at least in part, released? It may

be that the original order of releases gives some hint

concerning the criteria of selection for this series. The

first four selections in the series came from late 1963

(2) and 1964 (2). This is where the meetings of No-

vember 22, 1963 (last under Kennedy) and January 30,

1964 (first under Johnson appear). This readers hy-

pothesis is that the criteria for relating these meetings

to the assassination were not formed apriori, but weredeveloped in the process of selection with those hav-

ing the most obvious connection selected first.

This makes the question of how this series was

seen as connected to the assassination an ambiguous

one. With the paramount emphasis given to material

on Cuba, and intelligence operations connected to the

Cuba situation, this author wonders whether the select-

ing editor suspected that the material might have some

bearing upon the issue of whether an anti-Castro or pro-

Castro Cuban force was motivated to be involved in

the assassination, or whether these documents might

throw some light upon such a Cuban related motive.Whatever the criteria may have been, what these

reports actually say or suggest to their readers may be

very different than what the selecting editor intended

or the criteria might have emphasized. To this reader,

the struggle by members of the Board over the ques-

tion who had de facto jurisdiction over covert opera-

tions became an increasingly salient question through

this series of reports. Clearly this issue put the intelli-

term to evidence his special need for the Boardsassistance. (Memorandum for the File: October 1-2,

1964: Italics added). Could it be that we are faced with

two Presidents whose very different foreign policies

eventuated in a very different relationship to the

intelligence agencies around foreign intelligence?

Under President Kennedy, the deliberations of this

Board served a vitally necessary role. What exactly

this role was is suggested in this series of meetings.

2. The second highlight of this series of reports is in

their ambivalent, yet increasing, focus upon

understanding and evaluating the covert action

programs being carried out during this period of the

Cold War, especially by the Central Intelligence Agency

(CIA). (Cf. PFIAB No 206-10001-10017: undated

report as a starting point). An important turning point

in the Boards audit and evaluation of these programs

seems to have been reached sometime in early 1963

from this authors reading of extant sessions. These

reports constitute an important source for helping to

open up this issue.

3. Another highlight of the Reports is an immense

volume of material relating to both intelligence

reconnaissance as well as covert sabotage operationsrelating to Cuba. (See especially the FIAB

Memorandum for Jan 11, 1963, and the General

Chronology for the Meeting of January 25-26, 1963,

among others).

4. A fourth highlight is the mixed sequence of reports

the Board received from various sources, especially CIA

Concerning the situation in Vietnam. Among these are

reports by Richard Helms and John McCone to the

Board in 1964 concerning how seriously the political

situation had deteriorated in Vietnam by late 1964.

5. Another point of interest is the summary of the series

of recommendations made by the Board to PresidentKennedy from May 1961 to November 1963 as

summarized in the meeting of January 30, 1964.

Unfortunately, the report does not indicate which of

the recommendations Kennedy approved and which

ones he deferred or rejected.

These are some highlights of this series of reports.

However, there are other issues raised in them which

may be of interest to researchers or historians includ-

Unfortunately, the report does not in-dicate which of the recommendationsKennedy approved and which ones hedeferred or rejected.


20/55


gence agencies into some conflict with the President

and his Executive Branch; yet how serious this con-

flict may have been remains to be resolved.

The issuance of these reports suggests a glaring

defect in the historical record around the Kennedy Ad-

ministration, one pointed out by John Newman and oth-

ers in their writings. Not enough attention has been

given to the kinds of disagreement between PresidentKennedy and various members of his Administration

as well as others outside of it over important issues of

foreign policy, which occurred during his administra-

tion; nor have the degrees of conflict over these issues

been evaluated carefully enough. The patchwork of

these reports does not adequately assist in clarifying

these issues and the extent of conflict around them, but

they do provide some important indications of it. Fur-

ther clarification requires as full a release of the docu-

mentation of all these meetings as possible. Such re-

lease is mandatory if historians, researchers, and con-cerned citizens are to be entitled to do their work of

furthering an accurate understanding of this important

moment of United States and world history.

Memorandom

for Files:

M e e t i n g

D e c e m b e r

27-28, 1962,

just after the

C u b a n

M i s s i l e

Crisis.


21/55


MYSTERIES OF THE 112

INTELLIGENCE CORP GROUPpresented by Larry Hancock

One of the ongoing areas of mystery and speculation in regard to events in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963

has been the activities of the 112th Army Intelligence unit. The documents available to us now appear to resolve

many of these mysteries, all except the most fundamental one the actual role of the 112th in Dallas.

This paper and its related document collection address the following mysteries:

1. Organization, mission and personnel of the 112th Intelligence Corps Group (INTC)

2. Organization, mission and personnel of the 316th Intelligence Corps Detachment

3. Activities of 112th Group II (Dallas) personnel on November 22, 1963

4. Performance of Protective Service duties by the 112th INTC

5. The role of Specialist James Powell and the history of his TSBD photograph

6. Possible identification of 112th personnel as mystery Secret Service agents

7. The role of Warrant Office Edward Coyle; attendance at the Armory robbery meeting on November 22, 1963

8. Errors in the sworn testimony and statements of Col. Jones, 112th INTC G2 officer

9. Errors or contradictory intelligence in 112th and 4th Army intelligence reports

10. Stand-Down of the 316th Detachment on November 22, 1963

he specified and was serving as intelligence officer

(G2), not operations officer (G3). It is also now clear

that we lack any statements from 112th Group Com-

mander, the actual 112th Operations Officer and either

the Dallas Unit commander or his Deputy Commander

- indeed all of the officers in direct line of commandfor any unit field activities in Dallas during the Presi-

dential visit.

However, we do have intelligence spot reports

transmitted from the 112th personnel in Dallas to their

headquarters in San Antonio and relayed to other gov-

ernment organizations. They give us a picture of the

type of information that the 112th was collecting in

Dallas, its sources within the DPD and they allow us to

judge the quality and effect of this information. What

Why there should be any mystery in regard to the

role of the 112th is itself perplexing since we have ac-

cess to extended, sworn interviews with its Operations

Officer, first with the Church Committee and then the

HSCA. In addition, we now have an extensive inves-

tigation by the ARRB and further interviews with ad-ditional group personnel.

Unfortunately, as we will see, the statements by

these individuals are totally at odds with each other

and with the statements and reports of Secret Service

Dallas trip lead agent Lawson as well as with memo-

randa from the Department of Defense and 112th unit

history. In fact, we now know that the purported Op-

erations Officer giving sworn statements to the Church

and House Select Committees never held the position


22/55


we see in the Dallas reports and the information re-

layed by Col. Jones, the units G2 Intelligence of-

ficer, shows the unit to have been involved in intel-

ligence collection - not in protective service as

maintained by the same Col. Jones in his statements

to the Church and House Select Committees.

The organization and mission of the 112th INTC

and 316th as military units is far from mysteriousand has been further documented in great detail by

the work of the ARRB.1, 2, 3, 4, 7

The United States Army was and is organized into

a serious of Regional Army Commands. Each of these

commands being staffed with integrated resources in-

cluding intelligence/counter intelligence organizations.

The command assigned to the Southern region of the

US in 1963 was the Fourth Army and its intelligence

unit - the 112th Military Intelligence (INTC) Corps

Group was headquartered, along with Fourth Army it-

self, in San Antonio, Texas at Fort Sam Houston.

The 112th was structured into seven operating

regions encompassing five states - Texas, Louisiana,

Arkansas, Oklahoma and New Mexico. The regional

units maintained physical offices and limited staffs in

major metropolitan centers. Region II staff were lo-

cated at 902 Rio Grande, in the Rio Grande Building,

Dallas. The Region II unit in Dallas was commanded,

in the Fall of 1963, by Lt. Col. Roy Pate and his Deputy

Commander was Lt. Col. Edgar Boyd.

The unit history also lists a Col. Willard W. Mize

as overall 112th INTC Group Commander - with his

G3 Operations Officer as Lt. Col. Stanley Greer andhis S2 Intelligence Officer as Lt. Col. Robert Jones.

The Operations/S3 for the 112th had been Col.

Reich, however, in December of 1962 the 316 INTC

detachment had been transferred from Fort Jackson,

South Carolina to Fort Sam Houston and attached to

the 112 th. Actually no people or equipment moved

with the transfer and 316 members were still desig-

nated as 316th - the Region I (San Antonio) 112th com-

mander was initially designated acting 316th detachment

commander. The 316th would eventually emerge as a

truly separate unit in 1964, once staffing slots were

back filled, but during 1963 it appears that personnelassigned to the 316th assumed tasks within Region I

and their activities are actually reported under Region

I in the 112 th unit history. Whether or not the 316th

performed any unique activities or whether it operated

outside of San Antonio is unclear. Col. Reich being

moved to become 316 Detachment Commander in July

of 1963 and his S3 Operations officer position was

filled by Lt. Col. Stanley Greer.

The ARRB determined from unit records that Col.

Jones was never assigned to the position of S3/Opera-

tions and served as S2/Intelligence Officer in 1963 and

later was reassigned to 112 th Group Executive Officer

in 1964. This is of considerable importance as the

Group Intelligence officer only reviews reports, col-

lects intelligence and prepares reports for Headquar-

ters; the S2 has no role in field operations or tactical

assignments of unit personnel.

The primary function of the 112th was intelligence

collection and, as noted, the intelligence officer in

November 1963 was Lt. Col. Robert E. Jones. Unit

activities normally included background investigations,

domestic intelligence against suspect subversive or po-

tentially disruptive organizations and counter intelli-

gence against suspected enemy agents, fellow travel-

ers or potential intelligence leaks. Most of the work of

the 112th involved either standard security background

checks, security inspections of 4th Army units, how-

ever it also engaged in limited monitoring and main-

taining files on individuals and groups seen as domes-tic intelligence targets.

The 112th, as all the Regional Military Intelligence

Groups, provided information to the FBI as well as to

Police Departments and indeed worked at establishing

close connections to major police departments in order

to use their internal resources (including their Special

Services Groups - actually police counter intelligence,

often known as Red Squads). It would not be un-

common to find a MIG performing surveillance on the

same individuals or groups as a police department or

the ATF (Alcohol. Tobacco and Firearms) and to also

find them sharing information among themselves andwith the FBI. Indeed in Dallas on November 22, mem-

bers of all 3 groups were meeting in regard to an ongo-

ing inquiry into armory thefts and gun running to Cu-

ban exiles.8 SA Hosty of the FBI and MI SA Coyle of

the 112th independently corroborate this meeting on the

morning of November 22. Coyles interview with the

ARRB provides background on that investigation and

the inter-agency miscues which led him to call the meet-

Spot reports give us a picture of thetype of information the 112th wascollection in Dallas, its DPDsources...and shows the unit to havebeen involved in intelligence collec-tion -- not protective services.


23/55


ing.9, 18

Unfortunately, the statements of both Coyle and

Hosty are in direct conflict with that of Col. Jones. Jones

stated in his HSCA testimony that Captain Ed Coyle

was on duty on November 22 performing Secret Ser-

vice liaison for the Presidential trip while Agent Hosty

states in his autobiography that Ed Coyle spent the

morning of November 22 in a multi-agency meeting.This is only one of many instances where the state-

ments of Col. Jones is counter to that of all the person-

nel stationed in Dallas - in addition he misstates

Coyles actual rank (which was Specialist 5th, with a

later promotion to Warrant Officer).

An example of the units intelligence work can

be seen in a report from Region I in San Antonio dated

November 1, 1963; this report is on the Cuban Of-

ficer Training Program and examines in detail efforts

being made by Manolo Artime to recruit veterans of

the Bay of Pigs who were then in special officer train-

ing courses. Cubans were being aggressively recruited

to join a revolutionary training camp in Nicaragua.

These individuals were being told that the US had aban-

doned them but that Artime was going to be receiving

support from both France and Germany.10

In their counter-intelligence role, agents of the

112/316th had been very much involved in observing

and collecting information on Lee Oswalds FPCC ac-

tivities in New Orleans. Indeed its agents collected

handbills from his first leafleting beside the carrier

WASP and their files contained the name Hidel from

those handbills as well as the name Oswald. Col. Jonesmaintained, and it seems quite reasonable, that the Os-

wald file at the 112 th was opened based on Oswalds

New Orleans activities.7, 11

We know a good deal about the organization,

mission and roles of the 112th. However we have two

completely different versions as to what a dozen of its

personnel were or were not doing in Dallas on Novem-

ber 22 and we have a major conflict over one of the

key photographs taken of the TSBD by 112 th Special

Agent James Powell.

The contradiction arises entirely from the testi-

mony of Col. Jones, given under oath. Jones was ini-tially interviewed by the Church Committee who

seemed largely concerned with whether his personnel

could have been any of the mystery men seen in Dea-

ley Plaza - and whether their credentials or self iden-

tification could have been as Secret Service Agents. It

is unclear why the Church and HSCA committees se-

lected Col. Jones given that he was not the Dallas Com-

mander nor in the direct 112 th chain of command at all.

However his statements on 112th activities in his HSCA

testimony are very clear and very concrete. 11

As to his duties, Jones states:

Upon my assignment to the 112th, I was ap-

pointed the Operations Officer for the entire

group...I was directly responsible for all coun-terintelligence operations, background inves-

tigations, domestic intelligence and any spe-

cials operations in this area.

The most basic question about November 22, 1963

was whether or not the 112th deployed personnel in

Dallas to perform Protective Services in support of the

Secret Service.

Col. Jones himself gave a firm Yes to that

question:

We provided a small force I do not recall

how many but I would estimate between 8

and 12 - during the Presidential trip to San

Antonio Texas and then the following day,

on his visit to Dallas. The Regions also pro-

vided additional people to assist.

This clearly suggests that local Dallas personnel

were augmented by additional 112th staff and that their

mission was protective service

Jones goes to some length to state that his people

were under the control and supervision of the Secret

Service and were to supplement the manpower of

the Secret Service.

Col. Jones further states that Ed Coyle and Cap-

tain James Powell were among the local Dallas per-

sonnel assigned to these duties:

James Powell was one of those liaison

personnelhe was a Captain and also wore

civilian clothes and was assigned to Region

2 of the 112th

MIG. He was on duty the dayof the assassination.

Col. Jones goes on to state that he was never in-

formed that Captain Powell had taken a photograph of

the Texas School Book Depository Building and that a

copy of the photograph was never submitted to the 112th;

he describes Captain Powell as being negligent in

his actions in regard to the photograph.

Note: Powells records and ARRB interview show him


24/55


to have been a Specialist, probably a Sergeant (E5)

at this time and not an officer; his file also contains

a report prepared for his Region II commander in

which he mentions taking a photograph of the TSBD

with his private camera - this memo does not state

that he was not on duty at the time but does describe

him going to his office after the incident. His FBI

report of January 3, 1964, states that he turned thephotograph in question over to Lt. Col. E. E. Boyd of

Region II, Army Intelligence in Dallas and also

mentions that he observed a Negro male in one of the

windows at the time of taking the photograph. In his

ARRB interview Powell states that none of his group

were involved with the Presidential trip in any way and

that none of them participated in Protective Service.

He makes it clear that he was not on duty but had taken

leave to observe the motorcade and hopefully take

pictures of the Presidents visit.12, 13, 14, 15

Col. Jones also gives an elaborate description of

how his group functioned in conjunction with the Se-

cret Service when called on for such assignments. In-

terestingly enough, although VIP Protection is discussed

in the Standard Operating Procedures for the 316 th

(which happens to be in the ARRB records) the type

of protection it addresses is much more comprehen-

sive and seems to be written for situations where the

Army has primary responsibility for security - such

as the visit of a VIP to a base or Army operations area.

Col. Jones does indeed seem to be comfortable with

Secret Service liaison duties beyond that of his unitsnormal duties.7

But more importantly, because of the assassina-

tion, we have access to the detailed preparations by

the Secret Service for Dallas, including Dallas Secret

Service lead man SA Lawsons trip summary and post-

assassination report. In addition the DPD generated

extensive reporting of their preparations including lists

of all planning meetings and the agencies and person-

nel represented.16

SA Lawson himself was especially detailed in list-

ing all meetings and attendees down to the Fire De-

partment, Trade Center employees and Airport person-nel. All groups involved in security arrangements in-

cluding back up personnel from the Sheriffs Depart-

ment and Texas Department of Public Safety are de-

scribed. Nowhere in any of Lawsons reports or in the

Dallas Police reports is any mention made of contact

with or support by members of the 112 th or 316th, or

any military personnel at all.

Additionally, the Department of Defense advised

the HSCA that no record of any request or action forprotective support exists in regard to the Dallas visit of

the President.5

When all the current evidence is considered, it

seems that the fundamental mystery of the 112th is not

whether or not they were deployed for protective ser-

vice in Dallas but rather why Col. Jones was selected

to explain their role to two Congressional committees

and why he appears to have consistently lied under oath.

Interestingly enough, his first testimony to the Church

Committee was largely devoted to presenting infor-

mation which convinced the committee that 112th per-

sonnel could very well have been mistaken for the

mystery agents with credentials reported in Dealey

Plaza. We now know this to have not have been the

case for 112th personnel in general and SA Powell spe-

cifically.17

One point of speculation might be that the mys-

tery of these men with credentials may have been a

part of an ongoing assassination cover up, otherwise

we are left with an Army Col. who is either am inveter-

ate liar or totally incompetent and unreliable (the

conclusion apparently reached by the ARRB - based

on their internal memos).We do know a good deal about the intelligence

collection activities of the 112th on November 22, pri-

marily based on a series of Spot reports as well as

memos from Col. Powell to other agencies and FBI

memos relating his reports. These reports also give us

a good idea of at least some of the 112ths routine Dal-

las Police contacts.18

One report identifies information as originating

with Captain Dowdy in actuality this is George M.

Doughty who was in charge of the Identification Bu-

reau within the DPD Services division. For reference

it is important to note that Captain Doughty was theofficer in charge of the Identification group located on

the fourth floor of the DPD offices. This group was

part of the Services division which included the Crime

Scene Unit, the Photo section, Fingerprint section and

records section. Given the background and counterin-

telligence tasks of the 112th is certainly makes sense

for them to have a connections the ID group. With Cap-

tain Doughty as a source, it would appear that they

...Why Col. Jones was selected to ex-plain their role to two Congressionalcommittees and lied under oath.


25/55


should have been getting solid and reliable intelligence

about the identity and possessions of individuals taken

into custody on November 22.

This brings us to the other unresolved mystery of

the 112th, nothing more or less than the fact that the

majority of the information given to them and reported

by them to various agencies was either incorrect, inac-

curate or actively suppressed - since it did not becomea part of the official investigation or record. To appre-

ciate this we have to take a look at it item by item.

Apparently the first formal intelligence passed to

Col. Jones was the identity of the suspected assassin.

According to Jones he was given only the name Hidel

with no mention of Oswald and no reference to mul-

tiple IDs or the use of an alias. Indeed Col. Jones is on

record as being able to provide the DPD with the infor-

mation that Hidel was very likely Lee Oswald, based

on the cross index listings in the Oswald file and the

earlier information from New Orleans. Obviously this

is in significant contrast to portions of the official record

including statements by a variety of arresting officers

that both names, multiple identifications documents and

the use of an alias were known from the very begin-

ning and even transmitted by radio from the patrol car

carrying Oswald (said statements however are not con-

firmed by the radio transmission log).

By Friday evening, a lengthy report was provided

to the 112th by the DPD detailing the circumstances of

an incident in Dealey Plaza early that week. This inci-

dent involved men who were observed by civilians and

officers in the area of the grassy knoll fence, appar-ently sighting in a rifle. One of the men was de-

scribed as clearly fitting the description of the subject

(Oswald) and the car associated with the incident was

stated to fit the description which the subject (Oswald)

had been seen driving. This would later cause some

confusion since no DPD report of this incident or any

of this information is in evidence and the facts of this

report present a major contradiction to the official his-

torical record.

By late in the evening, the situation had escalated

to the point where Fourth Army Intelligence developed

a urgent cable which contained the information thatOswald had been proven to be a card carrying Com-

munist and that he had defected to Cuba in 1959.

This urgent advisory cable was sent to the US Strike

Command at McDill AFB in Florida. Strike Command

was, at the time, the combined services quick reaction

military force which had command and control over

operational Army groups (McDill was also heavily

focused on Cuban intelligence gathering). Col. Jones

was questioned about this cable by the HSCA and de-

nied having had any knowledge of it at the time or of

the 112th having provided any of the information refer-

enced in the cable. He stated that such information

was in contrast to that in his file on Oswald/Hidel.

According to this report, the 112th had obtained

these pieces of information from officer Stringfellow

of the DPD Criminal Intelligence section. Stringfellowreported to Lt. Jack Revills command and this unit was

charged with investigating crimes of an organized na-

ture, subversive activities, racial matters and labor rack-

eteering. The CI unit, along with the Vice Squad and

Narcotics squad reported to Captain W. P. Gannaway

(a reserve Army Intelligence officer). Certainly it

makes good sense that the 112th would be in communi-

cations with Revills unit, however, it surely did not

seem to be getting accurate information in terms of the

official story. And if we believe Jones, Fourth Army

gathered the information for its STRIKE command re-

port from the Dallas Police organization though some

other channel than its own intelligence organization.

Note: Lt. Revill also initiated a major controversy by

relating FBI agent Hostys remarks that the FBI was

aware of Oswald and the fact that he was capable of

violent actions.

In the end then, while the organization and mis-

sion of the 112th is no mystery, there are two very large

open questions which relate to the unit. The first be-

ing why their commander would aggressively present

what surely appears to be a false story of the 112th

per-forming Protective Service in Dallas and having de-

ployed a considerable number of personnel to do so.

The second open question has to do with the in-

formation being passed to the 112th. Was it simply

incorrect or does it reflect reality? Reality before a

cover-up? In regard to the information from the Iden-

tification Section and Captain Doughty, we really have

to wonder whether or not the first available identity for

the man taken into custody at the Texas Theatre was

A. Hidel and whether that was the only identification

provided to the DPD in the initial billfold turned into

the ID section.In regard to the information from Lt. Revills DPD

intelligence unit, I would suggest that the question

would be why apparent untruths were given to the 112th

- unless we can find some record that anyone in Dal-

las or even the media thought Oswald to be a Cuban

defector? Or that the DPD has failed to share with us a

CPUSA card with Oswalds name on it (or would that

be Hidel?). Of course, Oswald he did show a CPUSA


26/55


card to Sylvia Duran in Mexico City and Hoover was

talking about multiple trips by Oswald to Cuba that

afternoonperhaps the 112th had the real story on Nov.

22 and it never made it into the official record?

One final area of speculation pertaining to the 112th

is that of the widely circulated Stand Down of mili-

tary protection in Dallas. This story originated in a

contact between a former member of the 316th and Col.Fletcher Prouty.20

The ARRB devoted considerable attention to Col.

Proutys information and interviewed Col. Prouty in

depth as well as the former 316th commander, Col.

Rudolph Reich. In his ARRB interview, Fletcher

Prouty makes it clear that an unnamed individual called

him (the call was unsolicited and Prouty did not per-

sonally know the individual) and described that the unit

had at first been ordered to deploy in Dallas and then

called back at the last moment - creating a major pro-

test by the 316th detachment commander and his deputy.

Col. Prouty did not provide a name for the caller to the

ARRB although he states the caller represented him-

self as an officer of the 316th. However, in one of Col.

Proutys earlier papers he does name the caller and he

is listed on the 316th staff roster as a PFC, Private First

Class. 21

The ARRB interviewed Col. Prouty at length and

was also able to locate and interview the 316 th com-

mander, Col. Reich. Col. Reich directly denied the

stand-down story and e

kennedy assassination chronicles

Documents