That Joannides presented himself to the US House Select Committee on Assassinations as wholly unaware of his own actions as the director and financier of the Directorio Revolucionario Estudantil (DRE), or Student Revolutionary Directorate (a group of Cuban exiles whose officers had contact with Lee Harvey Oswald in the months before the assassination), and performed such obstruction at the express direction of the CIA leadership to coverup the CIA's actions to frame Oswald, speaks volumes not just of the CIA's complicity in the assassination, but also how to this day, the Agency is unwilling to reveal just how deeply involved they were.
That the Agency still withholds records detailing Joannides pre-assassination connections with Oswald shows nothing has changed: the CIA is (somewhat understandably) unwilling to reveal that they had a top-level, coordinated set-up of Oswald in place beginning with his first year in the Marines in 1959. This continuing coverup, combined with the destruction of Secret Service files pertaining to JFK's trips, along with the immediate "cleaning" of the presidential limousine (which was technically a crime scene) as well as the replacement of its windshield, and the absolutely criminal autopsy performed at Bethesda, complete with falsified photos, provides clear evidence not just that this was a coup involving multiple agencies, but that those agencies still maintain its false narrative to this day.
Throw the National Archives in that bucket as well - where do they get the nerve to prohibit this committee and researchers from viewing and studying the Zapruder film?
I wouldn't be so quick to judge the National Archives. If not for them we might not have learned what has been learned so far.
Have you ever heard the phrase, "discretion is the better part of valor".
I'm not criticizing but positing that sometimes it may be better to not rock the boat when the captain is 'off in the belfry' or otherwise experiencing the effects severe mental decline.
Jeff Morley seems to have a certain finesse with regard to his plying efforts with these folks.
Well, it seems to me there's nothing "quick" about any of this - and remember that we really have no idea to what extent they are being recalcitrant about other evidence buried in their collections. IMO the bottom line is they are supposed to be catetakers, not gatekeepers.
Sadly, too many CIA employees did not see it that way.
But when you don’t have transparency with the actions you consistently take, (CIA COINTEL), then the bubble you live in is your choice. (CIA OPERATIVES).
The other interesting thing about Joannides is that immediately after his role at the US HSCA, he retired "for good," in late 1973. Seems like that was the last role he was ever expected to play, and maybe by going into "retirement" for a second time, the Agency expected he would be harder to interview, if anything ever surfaced about his blatant duplicity.
I did not know that Alexis Coe was at the hearing urging everyone to not pay any attention to the rest of the testimonies. Where do I sign up for that job? I'll happily be a "in the grand scheme of things this doesn't matter" guy for any Congressional hearing, any subject, anytime.
Use the wiki for a quick down and dirty on Alexis Coe She works now and has for some time for the New Your Times.
We all need to remember the wiki does have it's faults however as a source for other leads it can be very useful. The same vehicle for incomplete or bogus information is also a site where those with over sized egos brag incessantly about themselves, which in this case seems to apply.
That Joannides presented himself to the US House Select Committee on Assassinations as wholly unaware of his own actions as the director and financier of the Directorio Revolucionario Estudantil (DRE), or Student Revolutionary Directorate (a group of Cuban exiles whose officers had contact with Lee Harvey Oswald in the months before the assassination), and performed such obstruction at the express direction of the CIA leadership to coverup the CIA's actions to frame Oswald, speaks volumes not just of the CIA's complicity in the assassination, but also how to this day, the Agency is unwilling to reveal just how deeply involved they were.
That the Agency still withholds records detailing Joannides pre-assassination connections with Oswald shows nothing has changed: the CIA is (somewhat understandably) unwilling to reveal that they had a top-level, coordinated set-up of Oswald in place beginning with his first year in the Marines in 1959. This continuing coverup, combined with the destruction of Secret Service files pertaining to JFK's trips, along with the immediate "cleaning" of the presidential limousine (which was technically a crime scene) as well as the replacement of its windshield, and the absolutely criminal autopsy performed at Bethesda, complete with falsified photos, provides clear evidence not just that this was a coup involving multiple agencies, but that those agencies still maintain its false narrative to this day.
These agencies are giving us all the middle finger after sixty years.
Throw the National Archives in that bucket as well - where do they get the nerve to prohibit this committee and researchers from viewing and studying the Zapruder film?
I wouldn't be so quick to judge the National Archives. If not for them we might not have learned what has been learned so far.
Have you ever heard the phrase, "discretion is the better part of valor".
I'm not criticizing but positing that sometimes it may be better to not rock the boat when the captain is 'off in the belfry' or otherwise experiencing the effects severe mental decline.
Jeff Morley seems to have a certain finesse with regard to his plying efforts with these folks.
Well, it seems to me there's nothing "quick" about any of this - and remember that we really have no idea to what extent they are being recalcitrant about other evidence buried in their collections. IMO the bottom line is they are supposed to be catetakers, not gatekeepers.
Point well, taken.
Good point.
Excellent comment. And Joannides received a distinguished service award (from Admiral Bobby Inman of CIA). Hmmmmm ……
Sickening. They are traitors, and they are proud of themselves.
Sadly, too many CIA employees did not see it that way.
But when you don’t have transparency with the actions you consistently take, (CIA COINTEL), then the bubble you live in is your choice. (CIA OPERATIVES).
AWL, I agree with what you’re saying…
The other interesting thing about Joannides is that immediately after his role at the US HSCA, he retired "for good," in late 1973. Seems like that was the last role he was ever expected to play, and maybe by going into "retirement" for a second time, the Agency expected he would be harder to interview, if anything ever surfaced about his blatant duplicity.
Couldn't have said it better myself! It's perfect evidence of a coup!
I did not know that Alexis Coe was at the hearing urging everyone to not pay any attention to the rest of the testimonies. Where do I sign up for that job? I'll happily be a "in the grand scheme of things this doesn't matter" guy for any Congressional hearing, any subject, anytime.
What an embarrassment. I got the impression she was the Democrats' choice.
I wonder if David Robarge from the CIA will ever testify during these fact finding inquiries?
Could be very interesting to hear what a CIA historian has to say after all of these revelations.
I think the “Limited Hang Out” time is past its sell by date.
You do realize if and when the democrats gain majorities in both the House and the Senate they be badgered in earnest to get this information out .
No excuses, simply to their job and get it out. No reasons exists for any democrat to not want it out, unless of course there is more we don't know.
Use the wiki for a quick down and dirty on Alexis Coe She works now and has for some time for the New Your Times.
We all need to remember the wiki does have it's faults however as a source for other leads it can be very useful. The same vehicle for incomplete or bogus information is also a site where those with over sized egos brag incessantly about themselves, which in this case seems to apply.