Conspiracy Nation -- Vol. 1 Num. 21

("Quid coniuratio est?")

RESOLVED: President Kennedy was killed as the result of a conspiracy.

[Continuation of my transcription of a radio debate which took place in the Fall of 1993 between Peter Dale Scott and Gerald Posner. Today, Mr. Scott gives his closing statement.]

MODERATOR: You will now each have 6 minutes to close. Mr. Scott, you have 6 minutes.

PETER DALE SCOTT: The Warren Commission, and again, now, Mr. Posner, tell us that Ruby and Oswald each were people who acted alone. What I've learned in my years is that each of these two individuals take us to very important institutional secrets that are part of what I call the "deep politics" of this country.

To start with Jack Ruby: He came out of Chicago, in the 24th ward of Jake Arvey, which was a signal point of corruption in the Democratic party in Chicago and in the nation. A man called James Ragen was killed in 1946. Oswald {1} knew the two assassins intimately. One of them was used by the Chicago FBI to make the case that Oswald {2} is not mob connected. They said that this man Dave Yaras... They sent this memo out and it was sent on to the Warren Commission: "Dave Yaras says that Oswald was not mob connected." They granted that Dave Yaras knew Oswald, but [what] they didn't say was that Dave Yaras was a top syndicate killer and that the killing of Ragen in 1946 (which he was guilty of) was one which [J. Edgar] Hoover was personally involved in. And we have it from one of Mr. Posner's own sources in the FBI that it was Hoover himself who dropped the investigation when Mr. Ragen was investigated. I have a [unclear] of that case, because it is a signal event in the evolution of organized crime in this country.

Lee Harvey Oswald, in 1963, was involved with the most conspiratorial Cuban anti-Castro group (such as Alpha-66), whose main target by then was not so much Castro as Kennedy. Their... most of their raids were against Soviet ships in order to embarrass Kennedy's policy of detente with Kruschev. And the kind of story that Mr. Posner will not tell you is that a Dallas sheriff had said that Oswald had been seen with anti-Castro Cubans at a Harlandale(?) address in Texas which -- in Dallas -- which he says nothing more about, but which the FBI files show us was the Dallas headquarters of the Alpha-66 in Dallas and that they had been buying guns. And at least one of their milieu was an Oswald look-alike.

It is a symptom that the investigation was mishandled; that this rather significant lead which corroborates the leads in New Orleans of Oswald and anti-Castro Cubans, all of whom were arms trafficking. That is probably the key to why Oswald himself ordered guns. Because I believe that he was working part of the government's campaign against arms sales.

Now you tell me, Mr. Posner, that Bringuier denies his DRE connections. Mr. Bringuier has also denied his connections to the Cuban Revolutionary Council [CRC]. (And I can't remember if that's in your book, but it's certainly in the Warren Commission.) And yet I found a Cuban "Who's Who" of Cuban exiles, and it's listed in Mr. Bringuier's biography, in print, that he was the propaganda secretary for the CRC -- as I report in my book. (And I hope you have a refutation of it.)

If we had more time, I would respond to what you said about my book. But yes, all of these things are part of the deep politics. But they could also have been lone assassins. You're drawing conclusions that cannot be drawn.

What I have been trying to say and say is that the more we look into the, this case, pressure has forced the FBI to "cough up" files. The... forced just recently, the CIA to force up files. And the more documents we get, the less and less and less Oswald looks like a loner. If he was a loner, why did every single junky FBI report on him go over to CIA and get read in at least 10 sections of the CIA? Why are there references that are still blacked out? Why are so many of the crucial documents suppressed?

We have a record here which we have to get to the bottom of. And, uh, I am open-minded about this. I don't quite know how you prove someone is a loner after you have already established that there's such intense and continuous government interest in him -- including documents we've been denied which are only one and two days before the assassination.

But I can tell you one thing: When the CIA called him Lee Henry Oswald it wasn't from a clumsy accident, as you suggest. Because they had been doing it consistently for 3 years in a file which had been... treated him as a secret case, when other defectors were treated as unclassified ones. He was a very special "defector" among those defectors. And the CIA falsified not only his name [but] the name of his wife, the name of the city in which he was born. The conclusion is unmistakable that he was part of some kind of operation that was being kept secret even in CIA files. And if you're going to prove me wrong, Mr. Posner, you're going to have to join with me in getting the rest of the files declassified.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Mr. Scott. Mr. Posner, you have 6 minutes.

(to be continued)

--------------------------<< Notes >>---------------------------- {1} Mr. Scott says "Oswald" here. He may mean "Ruby". Due to pressure of allowed time, Mr. Scott may have inadvertantly mixed the names.
{2} Again (see note #1, above), Mr. Scott says Oswald, but may have meant to say "Ruby."

I encourage distribution of "Conspiracy Nation."

If you would like "Conspiracy Nation" sent to your e-mail address, send a message in the form "subscribe my-email@address" to -- To cancel, send a message in the form "cancel my-email@address." && Articles sent in are considered.
Aperi os tuum muto, et causis omnium filiorum qui pertranseunt. Aperi os tuum, decerne quod justum est, et judica inopem et pauperem. -- Liber Proverbiorum XXXI: 8-9