The o' chile effect is sponsored by Wallstreet, Window dot com and listeners like
you Yeah, Yeah, Yeah Odio February one, twenty twenty four, allegedly
according to that thing we call a calendar, and I'm glad I didn't trip
over that and say the wrong numbers. This is the o'celly effect. And
it is Thor's day now. I haven't done a lot of live broadcasts this
week, but we have been re releasing some of the JFK Myths episodes.
I think five or six so far have gone out. We're not going to
re release all of them, but that is due to the high demand,
the high request level of please bring back the JFK Myths episodes. And it
so happens two of the people that were involved with some of those, the
main guy involved with them is with me tonight, Carmine Savastano. Of course
Tpaak Two Princes and a King. That's the name of his book, Two
Princes and a King about three assassinations during the nineteen sixties. But Tpaak or
tpok dot com, that would be the website where Carmine writes his articles,
has an evidence collection, a vault of all sorts, of interesting things,
and by the way, some visual stuff, not exactly you know, the
top of the line flashy visual stuff, but a lot of interesting visual things
that are not online elsewhere, like I don't know, pictures to go with
some of the file names that we've read about for many, many years.
Stuff like that. He's worked on the Kryptonyms project over at Mary Farrow Foundation,
presented at Lancer. If you know my show at some point, if
it's not just in the past few months, you know, Carmin Savastano and
yeah, I hear you. We're gonna redo, not redo. Actually we're
going to continue the jfk Assassination Myths series very soon. So tonight is sort
of an appetizer y later on kind of has to be because you know,
sixteen episodes wasn't enough to cover it all, okay, even with our special
guests. And the last one I just released was one that you know,
I got mixed feelings about because good to hear from Sherry Feaster again, despite
the fact that she's no longer with us. But that was one of the
best ones in my mind, simply because we had somebody who was, you
know, an absolute expert, somebody who could testify in court regarding the particular
area she covered on the assassination. And you know she used the word myths
in the subtitle of her book, just saying, you know, Enemy of
the Truth is Sherry Feaster's book. I advise that the links are there with
the show notes on the podcast, which has now been re released, and
I don't think it is publicly available anywhere else on the internet, although I
did sneaky put up a YouTube channel again guys, So anyway, it's out
there, you guys can get it. And if you can't find it,
just go to my feed. It is there on the front page at ocelli
dot com under re release along with all the other podcasts. But time another
integral part of the show you just heard from Carmine. But let's see,
I did give your website, I did give your book name, Yes I
did. But another integral part of the show that you hear about in the
first few seconds of every show on the o'celly effect set is guess who Mike
Swanson, the guy behind Wallstreet Window dot com be in the no go to
Wallstreet Window dot com. Now activity has changed over there and the face of
the website has changed and I'll tell you it's been improvement, improvement, improvement.
We'll find out some stuff about maybe what's coming up on Wallstreet Window dot
Com. It's not just about Wall Street definitely covers geopolitical stuff, local issues,
depending on what local means to you, and a variety of interesting things,
original articles and re releases of articles, et cetera, et cetera.
In fact, I've even released an article or to off of Wallstreet Window dot
com as a mirror, And this week there's going to be a special combination
platter of articles coming up, along with the fact that I'm also releasing the
archives. But I'll get to that later. Mike Swanson, the guy behind
Wall Street Window dot com, the author of the War State, highly recommended
book Says Me and Why the Vietnam War. Now, that's just two of
the many books that Mike has written. But in all brutal honesty, I
didn't read his financial books. He's got books out there about money. He's
got a book about Danville, Virginia. There is something that he kind of
put together with him and his dad, a little ebook out there regarding certain
histories. Things like this. Check out Mike Swanson's writing because it's always well
done, It's extremely relatable. The guy takes complex things and makes them extremely
accessible, especially when you're talking about geopolitics and history as it is being revised,
rewritten, and well possibly understood as we go forward. That's why I
recommend The War State and will recommend the upcoming books that'll go along with Why
the Vietnam War, which is only the first of three planned volumes on that
particular conflict. Anyways, all of that altogether, and you can see the
Red Book with Ike on the front cover on the sidebarbochelley dot Com. Again,
I recommend him not just because he's part of the sponsorship here, but
because he's a damn solid author, and I loved hearing from people at Lancer
when he presented that they had the same idea. I love how you take
ideas that are kind of a little confusing out there, difficult to understand,
and make them easily understood. That's Mike's best talent as a writer, in
my opinion. Also not a bad researcher. Hell of a nice guy as
well. Mike Swanson, how you doing tonight? All doing good? It's
great to talk with you and Carman and a lot to talk about a lot
of interest in the assassination and new podcasts coming out kindling that interest. And
on the Wall Street Windo website this week I got an article really it's a
video myself out this week's Fed Reserve meeting and how it might impact investors.
A lot of stuff about gold. But I also got one of the articles
Carman has just put out about how the government officials destroyed some of the JFK
files a couple of decades ago. And it's pretty shocking stuff. Well,
isn't that you know? And and now some people would say yawn, Mike,
right, because we already know they destroy stuff. Yeah, of course
you do. But here's the thing. There are outlandish claims constantly made.
See I'm I'm drawing back to that myths. Uh you know that that that
myths efficacy coming up real soon here that that that vibe that needs to come
out of the myths shows again. Sorry, I was just speaking out loud
about thoughts bouncing around in my head, Mike. The thing is people often
make these outlandish statements, right, and some people want to be dismissive and
well, why should I care about the documents or what was destroyed? Or
whatever, because they destroyed everything already. And they say that, and then
the next thing, you know is we'll turn up. And it does take
some work because it's not like they put it out in you know, plain
sight, and there's no smoking you know, where's the smoking gun? Where's
the smoking gun? They either demand the smoking gun or claim that there can
possibly be nothing of value because the government eliminated everything already. Right, They've
destroyed everything, They've killed off everybody. Look at all the dead witnesses.
I do not endorse any of the things I just said. I'm making an
example out of this. They'll often say that anything that does exist is either
faked or has long since been destroyed, time and time again. Guess what
researchers, people that look into it, organize these things, follow it,
and indeed pressure the government, which, by the way, there's been a
little bit of news on that front. Reason well, in regards to what
you're saying that, I've read something last week in Academic History Journal, and
it was a review of some academic history book that makes the argument that academic
history is sort of dissolving in our society because what goes for history on the
internet, what on YouTube, podcasts, articles even is not the type of
history that academic historians produce, which is in archives and research and pretty much
dry reading. And what works according to this book, and I mean the
way, you know, the way this reviewer is reading, It's like this
is a they're saying, this is dire situation for academia. It was saying
that what works on the internet is what attracts the algorithms, what attracts the
clicks. And you know, I've complained about that a lot when in all
sorts of topics, the stock market, how the financial niche has changed over
the years, but this is a perfect example of it too. This topic
of the Kenny assassination is complex and what is exciting for people? And you've
had many shows debucking different people in different myths, the gd Baker stories,
the you know, for example, is what is exciting are people that provide
quick solutions and promise to have all the answers when they don't even have any
evidence for what they're saying. Yeah, but it gets the attention and then
gets distributed and the good research, the real research, can get drowned out
by that. So the thing that academic academic people I was reading your complaining
about infects everything on the Internet, including this topic. Yeah see, now
here's here's look. I always like to take it down to the street level,
and I appreciate how you will boil things down in the most proper way
so that it can be consumed by somebody who is interested. Right, But
here's the reality that you know, these academics, as per usual, wake
up to several decades after something happens. When when the genre of literature emerged
that became a contemporary historical writing. Okay, when that emerged, when contemporary
history had a literary place that didn't require seventy five years of the concept of
perspective the French word, right, that always required that seventy five years.
That whole concept went out the window when somebody wrote something called the Rise and
Fall the Third Reich. This was a hugely popular thing. This is long
before you know, the interwebs were accessible by the common folk like you and
me. You know, the military had it in like the nineteen seventies at
least. But hey, let's not split hairs. Long before the internet became
a global influencer itself, this was already happening where people wanted accessible stuff and
obviously urban myth, the juicier topics, the fact that the Inquirer could keep
printing itself right, the fact that there was a play sport in society,
the fact that tell all books were being released, you know, maybe a
year or two after an event, back in those days when it wasn't all
digital. This has always been a problem. We're common folk that have access
to whatever the facilities are of the day. Utilize it. However they utilize
it. Then historians have always had to go back, revise, reset,
and re educate. Look, here's the things we know now that we didn't
know then, different justifications for it. We were in war, this was
an ongoing investigation. Whatever it might be. This is not a new problem.
Okay. Even the people that still believed you should do certain things in
a first aid way, they were wrong. You know the differences they changed
the way that you're supposed to do CPR on people. If nobody knew about
it, all that, you know, all that happens is the people that
are educated directly might learn about it. But the people in public who might
make an attempt, who might have been given the Red Cross treatment at some
point and went and gone to you know, the learning center locally to learn
how to do it so that people didn't drown in their pool or whatever.
They might have outdated information, They might have inaccurate information that at one time
was thought to be a great solution, that was thought to be accurate,
that was thought to be a proper understanding of something. History is no different.
History is no different than what it is you learn about somebody after they
die, the truth. You know, Oh my, I didn't realize Rock
Hudson was gay. Okay, doesn't matter if it's that, or if it's
a significant historical event. Later on people learn better, and now historians are
going, gee, it's the internet in our way. Well before it was
the fact that people irresponsibly published books. Before that, it was the Inquirer
was the thing. Before that, it was Oh my god, a talk
radio guy can get on the air and make wild and crazy statements about significant
political and historical events that are happening right now, and they might not be
accurate. They've complained all the way. Welcome to the party. Now I
say this, and it sounds almost strange coming out of my mouth, because
what is the premise of this show to be a countermeasure to the official mythology,
to be a countermeasure to the misunderstanding, to get clarity, to get
at real information, to get at you know, what do they always call
this, you know, the truth seeking media, the alternative media, whatever,
independent media. Now that and social media has become the irresponsible town crier,
except you're no longer confined to your town. You're no longer confined to
your urban myths. So we've been through a bit on this, Mike,
I would say, and it is significant, and indeed we're going to touch
on all of this tonight in a way. So I mean the academic arguments,
I mean, what are your thoughts on that, Mike, That really
they're complaining about something that has always been there in one form or another,
but now welcome to the Internet version of it. Am I right or wrong?
Or you think, God, Chuck, you're just you know, you're
off on a strange tangent here mentally, this is wrong? What do you
think, Mike? I mean both can be true. I mean that's the
Internet. Yeah. The responsible answer is there's nuance here right where some of
it is somewhat true but also somewhat not true. Because people can be informed
about things, certain things can't be hidden as easily. Number one, but
number two, yes, there is a whole lot of space for people to
spin minute. People are getting dubber and dubber all the time, and that's
it is making it dumber. I tell you that. I'll give you an
example. I wanted Mike to say it. Carmine. I'm sorry, go
ahead, Mike. I mean, I forgive about the history stuff, but
the stock market. When I got into the stock market, you know,
I went to the bars Noble and bought like twenty books and went read up
and they're in magazines and so forth, and I still have some of these.
I had these books later on right, and twenty twenty comes around,
twenty years later, and I know twelve people that got into stock trading on
robin Hood and they didn't read a single book, and they just get on
a message board and watch YouTube videos and they didn't know what they were doing.
And I told them, go read here's one book, go read it.
None of them want to read it. These people didn't even know what
bonds were. I mean, they have no idea of anything, and they're
just seeing people tell them buy this crypto coin or buy this stock, and
you're going to get rich, and that was enough for them to act.
That's all they needed to hear. And with a culture that's almost illiterate,
going on the Internet and hearing some guy talking with Kenny assassination and say,
you know, they know who did it. Here's four or five gunmen.
That's enough to make them happen. Yep. And here's the thing, it's
the answer they want. It doesn't matter that the information is outdated not sourced.
It's irrelevant because just like in the monetary business, right, some of
that information you got back then is still valuable. Some of it is outdated,
but you would not know that because people that say, well, I
do my research. That to me is funny in and of itself, because
it doesn't matter if we're talking about money or the Kennedy assassination or whether you
should take an aspirin or not. Here's the fun part. There are people
that think research can all be done just by going to Google. Yah,
and that's it. And that's if you're lucky they're going to Google. They
might skip that and say, well, forget that, I'd rather go to
YouTube. And people use the phrase YouTube university, which, by the way,
it's a very valuable resource. If you want to figure out how to
fix a lamp, or if you want to figure out how to you know,
actually change your own oil and you have no idea about it, you
can find a step by step video on YouTube. Or to fix your computer,
or you know, or to do drywall. You know, practical things
that maybe is something that you would have to hire somebody to do, you
can learn all by yourself. Whether it's that or playing a guitar, or
it's you know, where to find certain things on the planet, you can
turn to a tool online. Tech and technical abilities are no longer something that
you have to you know, scratch and sniff and go find for yourself.
Okay, you can just go pick up some of the shortcuts and get it
done. That's an advancement that some people take advantage of. But to actually
research a topic, to delve into it. If you're relying on only the
things that the search engine is going to bring to the top, you've already
surrendered a whole lot of your critical thought process to Google. I'm not kidding.
That's what they do. There are people that call themselves researchers that all
they're able to do is navigate things online and find links. Now, I'm
not saying that links aren't valuable. What I'm saying is it's a one dimensional
approach. It's like calling yourself a versatile, all around artist of visual arts
when meanwhile, you know how to sketch with a pencil. Do you know
how to work with clay? Do you know how to work with paint?
Do you know how to work with dye? Do you know how to work
with stone? Do you know how to do anything else artistic? But you
call yourself a diverse artist because you know how to sketch cartoons. I don't
refer to myself as an artist. I can sketch a decent cartoon every now
and then. I've sketched one of both you and Carmine. Actually, Mike,
I've made little cartoon images of you guys. I mean, look,
they're not perfect or anything. But I don't say I'm a cartoonist or I'm
a visual artist based on that. I've done a few sketches. But that's
what people who call themselves researchers that go online and search. I'm just presenting
this as a window into You're not going through the whole process or doing this
all the way through are you. What do you think, Mike, Well,
today there's a lot of people that call themselves artists because they go to
a website and it says ai R and they get something made and then they
copy and paste it. Sure, well, I think one of the sorry,
go ahead, go ahead, cab, I just quickly want to interject.
I think that a lot of what you guys are saying is true,
but it's the scope that people couldn't anticipate as where in the past we had
a National Inquirer, there was a limited amount of nonsense that could be generated,
and now it's an endless amount and it's on every subject. And there
are people that are claiming to be specialists and you know, experts. That's
always a great one for me. If someone starts out with claiming to be
an expert, they're probably not. The experts don't have to claim it.
You can just tell who's an expert. I'll shut up in a second.
That's when the National Choir. I met their reporter, the man that wrote
and broke a lot of their stories, like the bat Boy, all that
stuff, right, And I met him in a bar in the Bahamas and
I asked him, how did you discover those stories. Yeah, and he
said he'd go in the bar and get drunk and then he'd sit down and
write. He used his imagination. At least he did that, was he
Now there's an artist, you know, sectional artists. Your medium, you
know, your medium is bullshit, but it's still it's a medium if you
go well and at least and it's the inquirer. So, I mean back
then there was the is that it was all rush. I got mixed up.
It is a Weekly World next week. I got the two publications mixed
up. No, but it's fine. It's the same thing. Look,
it's it's the same genre. And in fact, the Weekly World News was
a much more outlandish. It still survives today as some sort of website.
Actually, but of course everything survives as a website. I mean, they
don't make certain cookies anymore. It's now a website, which, by the
way, I have a old cookie story on hydrox cookies. But anyway,
I'm not going to go into that right now. The thing is, I
just wanted to say, what would I think that? So you have the
unlimited amount of nonsense that's possible. You have people that are claiming to be
experts, who surely are not experts and who haven't done the work to actually
figure out what's going on. I have told my friends this and this is
my what I'd like to consider this portion of history is we have not entered
the unenlightenment, the opposite of the prior enlightenment of the seventeen hundreds, where
people are now growing dumber, but the technology is getting better. So like
we have a and it's frightening. There was that was ritten article the other
day in a weapons system that Britain's developed called Dragonfire, and it's a laser
and I mean laser beams. They can fire a laser beam and just chop
people into pieces. So we have laser technology at the same time we have
people eating deep with toothpicks. So right, I mean literally, that's where
we are. Literally, we live in a world where instantaneous communication. Right,
you don't have to go through the trouble of finding people you know so
much developing a way to decrypt and find a phone number. You don't have
to find addresses by asking around and getting directions, none of that anymore.
You can navigate the majority of the populated planet with ease. Okay, you
can get in contact with almost anybody on any other part of this planet instantly.
Okay. You don't have to weigh celebrities, which was almost possible just
a few. Yeah. Literally, you can theoretically get the attention of anybody
in the world, from the president, okay, to the guy who showed
up world leaders to world leaders, to the guy who showed up on a
you know, an episode of The Office twenty years ago and happened to be
a side character. Once you can find that guy, you can find your
high school sweetheart that you haven't seen in thirty years, no problem, you
can do that instantaneously. You can access information, okay. The Warrant Commission
Report in and of itself one of those things we often have to reference discuss,
et cetera. The twenty six volumes, and indeed twenty seven because there
was the report, also twenty seven volumes of this thing. Big books,
okay, big like as in, I know, Grandpa, we don't know
what an encyclopedia is anymore, but used to be something called an encyclopedia anyway,
a practically freestanding encyclopedia of information produced by the government printing Office, which
you would have had to buy one volume at a time, or you would
have had to go and get and acquire and in decades nowadays, if you
want to set of them, By the way, I can't find one for
less than three grand. And I would still love to have one, if
for nothing else but to be a prop behind me on videos. But the
point is that that information which you had to go out of your way to
go get or sit down at a local I know, here's another weird word
library and actually interact with a physical piece of paper, a cupboard and cardboard
book, okay, which had thousands upon thousands of words all committed to the
page via ink Okay. You had to deal with that, and it took
some time, it took some effort. You can have that instantaneously downloaded,
in fact, faster than you can say the President's Commission on the Assassination before
you even finish the proper title. Twenty seven volumes can be on your desktop
right now. If you want them, I can send them to you.
But anyway, there it is. But never been less success. And that's
the thing. Despite all of the access, remember that big word when they
said everybody has access to great health care. Sure they do. You have
access to the world's knowledge. You have access to communication with nearly anyone on
the planet who is within the vicinity of an electronic device. And guess what
if you don't use it. Remember the old expression, if you don't use
it, you lose it. Use it or lose it. Right, you
don't use it, you're not gonna lose it. But you're also going to
gain nothing. And so people are gaining less with having access to everything.
You know, like I say, with the whole access to and you know,
people access to the great You have access to the greatest healthcare system on
the planet in America. You have access to it. I also have access
to billions upon billions of dollars. It doesn't mean I'm gonna get to actually
use them, whether I want to or not. But outside of that,
the things that I do have free access to, if I don't take advantage
of them, what's the point anyway? Real information is out there, real
work is being done, real things are being published, but now it drowns
in a sea of the ease of reproduction, the ease of distribution, the
ease of communication. And indeed, there are people like and now I'm going
to drop a name, John Hankey, who made very entertaining videos regarding the
Kennedy assassination and the death of JFK Jr. Very entertaining stuff. He did
another entertaining one on nine to eleven, another entertaining one on the dangers of
meth and how they are destroying a significant portion of American culture, that meth
is a destructive force in and of itself. Probably people listening to me right
now are even deeply steeped in the conspiracy world. They're not aware that he
ever made that video, and it's probably the one that's loaded with the most
accurate information. His JFK stuff, while entertaining, while I catching, while
constructed in an artistically sound way, are loaded with a bunch of crap which
features George hw Bush was actually present in Dealey Plaza according to him, and
was part of the assassination team according to him in some way or other.
Not here to split hairs on it, but been over that which, by
the way, I had a weird encounter with Russ Baker at Lancer this year.
He wasn't part of answer. He showed up and it was a weird
little Neither one of us said anything, but we had an exchange and we
shook hands. But anyway, I'm going to tell that story, probably on
Friday, because I haven't told that one. Anyways, I want to get
to the subject matter, because why does all this matter? Well, here's
the thing. First off, Carmine passed me an article which I think is
a great interest, and we're not going to cover it in depth at all.
I just want to mention it just to give you an idea of some
of the real world information and that, you know, what people are attracted
to a whole lot of this other mess that's out there, you know,
the love stories and so on and so forth, whether it's Jackie was actually
screwing RFK or it's Judy Baker had a relationship with Lee Harvey Oswald for the
time that she was at that temp company, and over the course of the
summer got to know David very well enough to write five hundred pages on a
guy she knew for a couple of months. Yeah, all of that,
which sounds attractive because it's salacious, it's juicy, it's interesting, it's controversial,
it's a little greasy, little grimy. Okay, fine and dandy,
but you know, real world stuff is greasy, grimy, and confusing enough
without adding fan fiction. Carmen passed me this article, which was from Business
Insider dot com, and I'm just gonna give you if you guys don't mind,
just the headline if you will, and maybe, oh, there's actually
some subheadlines, so I'll give you those as well. Take me less than
thirty seconds, probably, And here's the headline from the Business Insider. This
was published, let's see on the twenty ninth of January. DOJ charged an
Iranian operative with hiring Hell's Angels bikers for assassinations in the US. This is
not from the onion folks. Once again, three subheadlines here the bullet points
with the article, and that's all I'm gonna do. I'm gonna drop the
link in the live chatroom at o'celli dot com and attach it to this show's
notes. An Iranian operative has been charged with hiring Hell's Angels four assassinations in
the US. DJ says bullet point number two, the suspects allegedly conspired to
hire biker group members to murder two Maryland residents. Bullet point number three,
DOJ said the Iranian agent employs his network to target Iranian dissonance and activists.
Now this on the backdrop of current other news headlines regarding the idea that there
may be potentially a com inflict directly militarily with the US military in Iran,
that Iran is indeed behind the attacks which have occurred on the nation state of
Israel. Right, they are backing everybody. They're funding terrorism, They fund
acts of terror all over the planet. They are players in the Middle East
conflict, soup to nuts, Iran is involved. They are a great target,
they are a threat. They think of us as the great Satan,
on and on and on. And meanwhile, a real world thing drops here,
where what a shock. Somebody who seems to be doing intelligence type work
might have attempted to hire some organized criminals to get some organized crime done.
Because at the end of the day, an assassination is what something that needs
to be organized, something that needs to be you know, set up,
and if it's if it matters enough to make sure that somebody's dead, and
it is an assassination, not just you know, a crime of passion,
a murder of circumstance generally requires some organizational skills, and why not turn to
an organized criminal just like it tells you to in the Assassination Guide that was
printed by Central Intelligence Agency in the nineteen fifties. It appears that not much
has changed. Funny how that all works. Yeah, it's almost a Castro
plot. Yeah it's not quite, not quite, but it's almost a castro
esque plot. Nobody get the criminals to take out the person you wanta.
And this actually reminds me two of a show we did about the kgbus to
do this too. This is when they hired the two assassins to take out
Russian dissidents. Oh yeah, that's a long countries. I mean, we
could go on and on. We could talk about, you know, Marita
Lorenz And by the way, I am in contact with her daughter, and
I think I might try and bring her on the show this month or so
because she has some interesting stories to talk about. Regarding a character named Frank
Sturgis, Okay, there's a side note and a tease. But you know,
when I think about the odd plots, right, they were gonna give
him, and even the David Fairy style character that you you hear played by
Joe Peshy, which is not relatable to the real David Fairy. Satellites and
everything, just the inside note there here's the funny part, you know,
when he's rant and raving and talking about the exploding cigars make his beard fall
out, you know. And and in real life, by the way,
there was a whole thing about like covering a wet suit on the inside with
a whole bunch of poison so that Fidel would put it on and die,
you know, stuff like that, and they wanted to poison him. And
no, I'm not relating to the alleged cancer plot and that all ridiculous.
No, no, no, this is al Cia documented. That's talking about
with explosives. Yeah, like you said, batcha line, them lining the
inside the suit exploding. Well, the poison pen, the poison pens.
But the mystery of intelligence and Iran has learned nothing because it's like they're reading
these documents and like, oh, let's try that. And again, it's
not just about American castro. I can think back to you and I talking
about, you know, the assassination of Pakistan's leader, right oh yeah,
yeah, one of the few women to yeah, Benzer buddo. You know,
we could go back to that, We could go back to that whole
thing we did on the Kim family in North Korea. Yeah, oh yeah,
well he was totally I mean like his uncle right, or I used
a forty calor a fifty klan. Yeah, he didn't really go through the
trouble of like a cannon, won't it Yeah? Yeah shot, yeah,
basically blast them to pieces. And then there was somebody in Central American and
I can't remember who, and it was just pretty much like just dumped the
poison on his food. I forget who it was, but it was like
maybe it was Ayende. Oh no, no, you know what it was
it was. It might have been well, that might have been that one
too. But also in the Congo when they were trying to take out La
Mumba, they were gonna put a poison in this toothpaste. Yeah, and
they just tried, like, you know what, we got five six different
ideas for here, how to kill him. You know what we'll do,
put them all in motion and also try and just stick him in dangerous way
and something will go. He'll he'll be gone one way or another. It's
like, you know, let's let's shuffle the cards and see which one we
draw on whichever way it goes, I mean, dead is dead, and
yeah, indeed, stuff like this happens. And it's not always just r
CIA or just the AM I. Oh, anybody who's gotten intelligence organization that
operates, you know, extra legally, extra judiciously, you know, outside
of the confines of what's supposed to be legally acceptable, whether it's by their
own nation states laws or international law. Irrelevant point is they're out. There
is no There is no Vienna Convention sub section for assassination, right, It's
not like, okay, so that's the agreement between all the legitimate governments.
Now here's the under the table agreement. No, there is none. It's
just all bets are off and we do what we gotta do. And by
the way, plausible deniability anyway, I'm just pointing out that, you know,
hello, it's twenty twenty four and here we go. Here's some more.
So that's the way it is. And yeah, we're gonna get into
the evidence destruction. But Mike, is there anything else that you think we
ought to set this table with because I think we've had a little fun and
given people some general points to consider. I think the academic pushback against you
know, garbage, you know, garbage in, garbage out as far as
educating people makes sense, but too little, too late in my mind,
because again, they really didn't care when people that were outside of their academic
inner circles wanted to offer them academically sound material. For the most part.
I mean it's loosened up a little bit in the past decade or so,
but in reality, when you and I started researching this, and I don't
mean searching the internet alone, but I do mean actually researching this, you
know, going acquiring books, actually talking to people, looking at and trying
to decipher and learning how to decipher things like documentation, maybe even exploring the
world of the you know, medicine a bit so that you could understand why
a forensic examiner might say this or that, you know, from an educational
standpoint, you know, doing things like that, actually getting a hold of
copies of X rays, turning around and finding out what an X ray should
look like, you know, things like that. Before we started doing that,
there was indeed plenty of this hand ringing regarding we don't want to accept
any of this stuff that's coming from these people. It doesn't matter. I
mean they used to say, look, this guy's a former police officer,
so he knows about how criminal investigation goes. This guy's a lawyer, they
understand the law. Oh they're presenting to you a solid legal argument about why
this is this or why this isn't that, et cetera, et cetera,
et cetera, And even battles going back and forth like the Booglio ci versus
Spence nonsense that they put on television, you know, mock trials. Let's
see what happens if we actually tried to enter things into evidence. Cyrah Weck
coming out saying, look, I'm a doctor, I study dead people.
This is the way it works. All that stuff has been going on for
a long time in academia was resistant to sound information, and in my mind
they are actually accessories after the fact regarding the idea that information that contradicted the
official story was often shut down absolutely across the board, and it didn't matter
if the information was sound, well researched, actually sourced, et cetera.
An agree on one a little bit on what you're saying. One like a
nuance to it, and that is that the big uloses and the resistance that
that you're talking about, the attacks really attacks on research, flat out lies
even cover you know it is uh that. I think that was really coming
from the mainstream media, especially the television networks, promoting all that stuff for
decades. But academia, in the sense of academic historians, I don't think
they really were doing that. I think what they were doing was just avoiding
the topic completely, like burying their heads in the sand. For the most
part, true when it comes to historians. But the sidelines is real fast
again, this little sideline is as follows. Sociologists and psychologists were making statements
political science people were making statements from academic you know, from academic you know,
positions of authority and authenticity. We're saying, you know what, these
people are doing harm to the psychology of the country, These people are doing
harm to America. In fact, there were certain points where people like Wesley
Clark, right, the former general, was actually stating that people that you
know, studied and propagated conspiracy theories were literally equivalent to terrorists. And indeed,
I don't know if you remember in twenty fourteen, only Wesley Clark was
out there making statements like, you know, we should really be able to
round these people up the same way that we could during a time of war,
because they need to be kept and isolated from the rest of society so
as not to contaminate society. Like he was advocating for the idea that in
defense of America, these thought criminals needed to be stopped so they wouldn't infect
more people. It was wild. Do you remember when he endorsed the whole,
Like, you know, when people were really talking a lot about the
FEMA camps because Alex Jones had done that episode. I was right after nine
to eleven. Well, no, this is ten years after nine to eleven,
ten years after and yeah, this is when the FEMA camps and the
Jade Helm thing was starting to get track shot. Oh okay, yeah,
And people were talking about what would happen if they started rounding us all up
into camps. Would they do that to try and defend us from you know,
the terrorist cells from within and the people that are really dangerous. And
Wesley Clark, you know, not currently in a government job as far as
I knew at that time, but retired General Wesley Clark was out there saying,
you know what, these conspiracy theorists are dangerous like terrorists. They are
the same, you know, They're like low level terrorists, and they need
to be dealt with. And the weird thing was we had former prime ministers
from the United Kingdom agreeing with them publicly in this weird sort of debate that
went on. And I know it was twenty fourteen because it was not long
from when this show really got rolling live, So it's a crazy I don't
even know if that still exists on the internet. Clyde Lewis actually went on
that night on his show and started playing Captain Picard, if you remember in
the One Star Trek episode where Picard just turns around and finally does what the
audience had wanted for the past couple of years and says to Wesley, crusher,
shut off Wesley. And he keeps replaying that while Clark is making this
outlandish statement that basically says, if you were thinking against and he elaborated on
this, this wasn't like one sentence. If you're thinking against the government narrative,
if you were against the official story, you are dangerous like terrorists and
need to be dealt with exactly this way. And while he's making these statements,
Clyde Lewis keeps interjecting Patrick Stewart going shut up Wesley, shut off Wesley,
I was cracking up at that, but taking very serious note of the
idea that somebody was supposed to be respected military leader, somebody's supposed to be
a patriot who would absolutely be representative of those that wish to defend the United
States, and all it stands for is out there advocating for maybe we should
round up and shut up people like me, you know, And I kind
of went, whoa, hang on here, because what happened to that thing
called freedom of speech and etc. Etc. And I realize there's limitations and
I'm not here to have that to be but I'm just saying that you can
devolve into that when it comes down to it. And again, I think
the responsibility for the fact that people were not solidly educated is because out of
hand, all avenues of academic legitimacy were partitioned off from people who were doing
legitimate work for decades and they were told, look, we don't want to
hear this. You know, there were certain people that you know, had
academic jobs that were college professors and teachers and things like that. They would
get told repeatedly, don't teach this stuff in the classroom. We read your
book, you know, stuff like that. And to me, they have
nobody but themselves to blame for never bothering to help give any sort of constructive
guidance to legitimate material that was being generated outside of their business model, outside
of their particular subsect of society. If it didn't come from our academic hallways,
it's nothing. You know, I believe it's the Ivory Tower of people.
Call it the Ivory Tower approach. It's not legitimate. You know,
Well, aren't you worried about people's rights? Well I would be, but
those people aren't actually people, you know, that sort of attitude, and
that's what That's how I feel about it. So you know, when the
academics complain that people are taking real information seriously, well neither did you for
decades and decades. So look back at your own house before you start telling
us how to put ours in order. But I do agree that all of
us need to put check marks on whatever it is we're advocating here, because
we need to be responsible and careful about it. Anyways, I've almost chewed
up all the time I was gonna have with Mike Swanson and didn't even get
to Carmine's article here. But I want to give Carmine a chance to do
that. Mike, what do you think should we let you go and then
I'll do kind of a second part here with Carmine and really really go through
his article, or do you want to hang around a little bit? What
do you think your first plan sounds good? We'll keep you catching up again
soon. Excellent? Am I to expect you in two weeks from now?
I'll be here. Yeah, I'll be here in two weeks. Or do
you want to come back next week? Uh, I'll be here in two
weeks. That sounds good. Excellent. Well, I got this great rotation
now because Larry is now doing Wednesdays, so we got lak at Hancock on
Wednesdays, Mike Swanson on Thursdays, and both of them going every other one
here on the Ocelli effect. But I'm sorry we didn't get to all the
stuff. Is there anything you want to drop here, by the way about
Carmine's article, or because I also want to touch on the Rob Reiner thing,
do you want to do that on your way out the door? Maybe?
Oh, we're good, I'll be here in two weeks. I was
I was actually gonna say, if you don't mind me joining we can do
the Rhiner stuff next time and then just focus on the article for a little
while. It's just so it's not sure because if we go through everything,
it's gonna and then that way you can contribute the stuff we were discussing earlier
about military intelligence. Ah, perfect, how does that sound? That sounds
like a play it next time you're on the Ocelli Effect will be a dissecting
or at least partially well maybe you want to call it. It could be
a myth seventeen. Maybe not dissect well, I don't know. Maybe maybe
it will turn into that. It could be something that is created in an
impromptu or ad hoc faction fashion. Excuse me here, on the Ocelli Effect,
we might create JFK Myths Episode seventeen in two weeks when Mike Swanson rejoins
us. If not, we're definitely gonna well, so basically, just hold
fifteen of the seventeen references. We'll be bringing those back there you go.
So if we're not, if we're not dissecting Reiner's podcast, maybe we'll just
be abusing a corpse because it is definitely dead on arrival and it is not
useful to anybody unless you want to bury it somewhere. That's up to you,
you the listener. But yeah, we'll cover the Rob Reiner thing in
two weeks with Mike Swatson and Carmine Sabastano. But in the meantime, we're
gonna take a break here on the OTLI effect and get straight to Carmine's article
about that evidence destruction and some of the things that maybe those officials who are
the powers that should or should not be depending on who you be. Guess
what we're gonna be talking about some of their activity and what it actually means
as we continue on this Thursday Night stick around. We'll be right back with
carmin Savastano. But Mike, thanks for joining us, and I look forward
to doing that terrible stuff we're gonna have to do in two weeks. What
do you say, Oh, it's gonna be fun. It's definitely gonna have
fun with it. And in the meantime be in the no go to Wall
Street Window dot Com not only a proud sponsor of this show, but well
I don't know if they're proud, but they are sponsors of the show,
and uh, I do appreciate them and all the works by Mike Swanson again
The War State and Why the Vietnam War, which is the first in a
series of three books related to that conflict, all authored by Michael Swanson.
Stick Around the Ocelly if continues revelation through conversation, dot Com Radio Chili dot
Com, Wallstream, Window dot Goal, Sewer the stock market, Wallstream,
Window, dott Perhaps you're invested deeply, Perhaps you're not in deep enough.
Maybe you're thinking about getting started wall Street, Windows, dot com dot Michael
Swanson, the brilliant author of The War State, understood these trends professionally for
many years, and now he gives you the benefit of his knowledge. Wallstreamindow
go there, now go there, now go there Now. The War State
by Michael Swanson explains the great national transformation that took place and put the Kennedy
presidency in the context of the times, and reveals never before published information about
the Cuban missile crisis. President Kennedy would not have been assassinated if he had
been president two hundred years ago. His assassination took place in the context of
the Cold War and the rise of the national security state. Before World War
II, the United States was a continental republic in the decade that followed it
became an imperial superpower. Generals such as Curtis LeMay not only wanted to invade
Cuba, but knew that there were short range missiles on the island armed with
nuclear warheads that they could not destroy because they were on mobile launchers. Their
invasion could have led to a Third World War, and they wanted to go
to war anyway. The War State by Michael Swanson. Why and we'll show
you what President Kennedy was up against. For more information the War State dot
Com. Go ahead, call it about the day of assassination right, Well,
what do you want to know? Dy Baker's wild claim? Oswald girlfriends
he knew Ruby and very handswer weapons. Really, I imagine I could claim
I have four wheels. It doesn't make me a wagon. But okay,
Oswald on the building and I'm trying to prevent the murder of John Kennedy.
Come on, now, has a real effort on the day of hay assassination
claim. Go to Amazon dot com enter Judith Baker in her own words.
You'll get the results for a digital copy of a book where Walt Brown utilizes
her own words and the known evidence in the case to get at well a
different perspective. Let's say you can get Judith Barry Baker in her own words
from the author himself, signed if you request it by contacting doctor Brown at
ki as jfk at aol dot com. It's a fun book and it actually
dissects the many many fantastic It claims Judah's very Baker in her own words In
Denial Secret Wars with air Strikes and Tanks by Larry Hancock. Secret wars became
a staple of US covert operations and are still happening today. Larryhancock's book In
Denial rips the cover off many of them, using new files. It exposes
things about the Bay of Pigs that no one has ever written about before.
It shows why it really failed and why the United States did not learn from
it. It also shows why other countries today are doing secret operations with more
success. This is the book that puts what some want to deny into the
light. In Denial, Secret Wars with air Strikes and Tanks Larryhncock. For
more information, go to Larry hyphen Handcock dot com. Pick up your copy
of In Denial at Amazon dot com in digital or physical point, get ready,
get ready for act? Have you expressed my caller school? Is there
anyone else who happens to get on the air at Lly dot com? You
not necessarily reflected he views dot com or Chuck Kelly and we are not responsible
for any stupidity which might instument revelation through conversations. This is James Corbin at
corner Report dot com. And you're listening to they affected Olly dot com get
sponsored by Wall Street, Window dot com and listeners like you now and now.
Most the most ugegrated voice is all media Chuck O's Shelley h M,
wall Stream Window dottuh go Silver the stock market, wall Stream Window dott.
Perhaps you're invested deeply, Perhaps you're not in deep enough. Maybe you're thinking
about getting started Wall Street, Windows, dot Com, dot com. Michael
Swanson, the brilliant author of the War State, understood these trends professionally for
many years, and now he gives you the benefit of his knowledge. Wall
Street Streamno dot Com, go there, now go there, now go there
now the dot com radio network. Do you like history? Real history that
you were never taught in schools? Why the Vietnam War? Nuclear bombs in
nation building? In Southeast Asia by author Mike Swanson, with new documentation never
seen before that'll open your eyes to events that led up to this. Why
the Vietnam War Nuclear Bombs in Nation Building in Southeast Asia nineteen forty five through
nineteen sixty one. Get your copy today at Amazon dot com. Why the
Vietnam War by author Mike Swanson. O Chilly dot Com expressed by callers school,
is there anyone else who happens to get on the air of jelly dot
com who not necessarily replanted the views of jelly dot com word jumbo chilly And
we are not responsible for any stupidity which you might ensue. Thank you.
M M. Castled from the his griboard a high nation. So oh its
thame And how you try try up you have to be exposed by all time,
by stood all story. Good So lestell YoY I show schools to your
study or m h, I have a guy, I have a god,
so joy I shall joy ranger joye. Yes they say bunty so dogs yepause
we south for basically yo, so you rickyard? Do we speak more than
anything? That's a boy? You go not so revelation through conversation nuclear holocaust.
You know what uranium is, right, think called nuclear weapons and other
things like lots of you know what uranium is right? Bad things things are
done with uranium, including some bad things. Nuclear holocaust. You know what
uranium is, right, I've been free. Nuclear Holocaust, nuclear holocaust.
You know what uranium is right? The think called nuclear weapons and other things
like lots of you know what uranium is right? Bad things things are done
with uranium, including some bad things Nuclear Holocaust, Nuclear holoclear Holocaust, Nuclear
Holocaust, nuclear holocaust, nuclear hollow Chili dot com dot com supplying UFK research
specialized against Ally's ATAC involvement in multiple assassinations, propaganda, and other build of
criminal operations in the twenty to twenty first century. Listener Yeah, now best
aggravated noise and at Kelly and we are back on the Ocel effect. Now.
I know I took a really long break, but don't worry. I'll
cut it out for those of you hearing the podcast. UH had a little
backstage conversation there between Mike, myself and Carmin Sabastano, And indeed we will
be rolling with some JFK Assassination Mids episodes in the coming weeks. That's uh,
that's now. Uh, you know, seventeen I believe penciled in for
part seventeen already, and eighteen is in the planning, uh the same.
And I have this feeling that that will generate the necessity for nineteen twenty twenty
one, just saying, Plus we may have to answer some stuff and next
Myths episode if it turns into a complete Myths episode, which I suspect it
will, uh, we'll be live and we'll do it with maybe a special
guest or maybe just Carmine, myself and Mike and guess what we're gonna have
to take a part, Rob Reiner. Okay, And I promised my wife
I wouldn't use the euphemism that Archie Bunker used for him, because that is
what I exclaimed when I got through the first few episodes. See I can.
I won't say it. I can. I can. So you were
yelling, I know you were yelling at a screen Meathead, Okay, fair
enough, see, but Meathead was a likable meadhead. This is just it
was just the way that Carol Oo kind of dropped it with such contempt.
I know, but you know you want to talk about contempt It really reminds
me of how deserving he was, of the way that they treat him on
South Park, because have you seen that, Oh you have not seen the
Rob Reiner South Park You're kidding? No, no, no, all right.
I will do my best. I should have done this during the break
because it would allow me to make mistakes during the live show. But I
will very gingerly attempt to see if I can find that one find something to
insert here in the audio, just to you know, give people a taste
of it. But synopsis, real fast is that Rob Reiner comes to south
Park and he's decided to go after uh, the the the the the tobacco
industry, and the the jokes that are going on there are hilarious throughout.
I mean, but I hypocritically is about, you know, how he cares
about certain things, but maybe he doesn't care about other things. It is
a remarkable farce that in spirit, in my mind, rings through and makes
perfect sense regarding this jfk Assassiny meathead was just a misguided liberal who was touchy
feely for the you know. But but I'm saying that, you know,
if you want to mock him like the meat head thing, and it was
actually Yeah, the character Yeah, was actually likable and it was a decent
person. Archie was Archie. He's trying to do you know, he's trying
to do the right thing. He's trying to say, Archie, he's stopp
being a you know, racist, He's trying to say, Archie, Look,
black people are people too, and he's trying. But it's the endless
fight of you know, whether it's that or you know, each generation fighting
went the generation that came before, wanting to change the generations that come before
them, not realizing that, you know, they grew up in the time
that they grew up. And you can change people to a certain extent,
but people have to want to change, and most people don't want to change.
They want to be the people that they are. And the here's the
thing. Just because something is you know, remarkably so socially backward during a
certain time period, does it necessarily mean that you need to declare them all
you know on the side of satan, you know what I mean, Like
there was a give and take. There there was something to it, and
there was a dynamic where in your family this person and by the way,
at the end of the day, racist or not, and you know the
fact that he was a pollock, et cetera. You know, all that
stuff. At the end of the day, though, he was still a
member of the Bunker family and you know, actually some remarkable lessons could be
learned from there. However, Oh yeah, the South Park roasting and skewering
of Rob Reiner is amazing. And they put him into this gaggle of celebrities
that does revisit the show later that you know, is all these like crazy
fictional characters basically that and all the celebrities get together because they're angry at south
Park, especially because you know, Tom Cruise being stuck in the closet caused
so much problems. You know, it was it was a big deal in
Mecha streisand of course is the first celebrity that really got y. Yeah,
and they even revisited Meccha streisand during this a following episode. But it's beautiful
to see my goo, my goo. Anybody who saw it in South Park
episode knows what that is. And it's hilarious. Uh. And Rob Reiner
absolutely deserves his skewering. And I really wish he had I don't know,
stuck to something else. Anyway, we'll leave that for the future and mid
seventeen, because let's talk about something that is real. Like I said to
begin with at the very beginning of the show, right we you know,
all the evidence has been destroyed. It's all fake and it's been destroyed,
which, by the way, contradiction there. I mean, if it's all
fake already, why would you destroy what's already all fake? But you know,
I mean kind of like the uh new and improved? Yeah, how
can it be new if it's improved? Is it not? Or is it
improved? So is it all destroyed or is it all fake? Because you
wouldn't do both, you know, none at the time. It's that's that's
one of the one of my arguments has always been against people who like to
say either of those arguments, either of those contentions, is that if it's
all fake, it would require nearly as much time as it to decry to
make the original to make the fake. Yeah. Yeah, So how are
these two you know, separate records being made? And how is nobody noticing
that somebody's creating an entirely fabricated second? Correct? And unless you've decided that
fakery, which by the way, it would require an incredibly you know,
vigilant team of people to keep track of what's fake and what's not because you
have to mix it in. I mean, you know, you can't just
name a brand new puff the Magic Dragon Assassin and add him into the thing,
right, I mean, you got to use the real guy. You
got to have some actual biological and biographical information that relates to the real world
in order for people to find it plausible to begin with. But here's the
bad part again, and I point this out for no matter which order you
want to put it in, if it's all faked, you're not going to
destroy that which you you know, engaged in this huge undertaking to create this
fake record, then you're going to destroy it. No are you going to
destroy stuff and then fake things afterwards. It makes no sense because if you're
eliminating, then you're eliminating. You don't want to add to it. Why
you're litroy it to make sure that it goes away, and that's what not.
Of course, to the ridiculous amount of people say they destroyed everything,
of course they destroy everything. I mean, even if you think about it
that way, there's going to be records of the destruction well, there you
go. And in public, and in public, by the way these two
arguments are represented thusly, there are people that are omitting history and ignoring it,
therefore destroying the evidence that is available right by discounting it, putting it
aside, disqualifying it, it's etc. Removing its gravitas and its reputation from
the table. Right And simultaneously there are people adding to the pile and fabricating
nonsense. These things both go on in the real world simultaneously because there is
no need for coherence when all you want to do is create confusion. Now,
the government is not going to take that tact, But in public,
why is it allowed to continue? And why is it supported by certain people
that wish to encourage us to be anywhere? But at the actual answers,
because both things can work for the sake of absolute confusion at the end of
the day. A lot of interested parties who have come in and then left
after a year or two have exclaimed to me, at one point or another,
listen, I got into this, I started examining it. I realized
a lot of things were gone. There was nothing I could do to get
at things that if maybe I had gotten on the case. You know,
initially in nineteen sixty tree sixty four or sixty five, I could have had
access to people that were still alive, things that were still standing, buildings
that are no longer there. And I say, yeah, you're right,
a lot of evidence, even over time. Time is the great shredder of
evidence. Really, But here's the thing. A lot of that stuff was
destroyed and lost one way or another, either intentionally or just by attrition.
Yes, indeed, but then they staying on top of it, you have
all these different avenues and major confusion, and you got to sort through what's
legitimate, what's not, What is worth my time? What should I follow
through on? I mean, if I spend six months going over something and
then I discover I'm on the trail of a guy who's been dead six months
before, my trail ends kind of useless. And I'm trying to get the
fiction out of there from the conspiracy side, and they throw up their hands
and go, you know what, it's just not solvable. It's just something
that we're not going to be able to solve. Maybe one day somebody will
discover something, but it's not going to be me. And I give up.
They surrender, and indeed, in my mind, the fact that it's
been you know, supported by certain people, not just in official channels and
official positions, but it's been allowed to continue and some people have even figured
out ways to prop it off of it. Indeed, these two you know,
modus operendi are valid because all the confusion and all the dissuading from people
actually doing the legitimate work. First of all, they think I can't do
the legitimate work because the information, the tools are not there. The stuff
I would need to find is not findable any longer for one reason or another,
either the government destroyed it or time took care of it, so I
don't have the option of being able to solve it. And on top of
it, I also now recognize there's a lot of fiction here, not just
from the Warrant Commission, not just from the TV networks, not just from
you know, the historians who say it doesn't matter anyway. But now I'm
double discouraged. Not only don't I have the ability to get at the real
information, but even if I do get at some information, it's probably fabricated
on top of it. So in that way, it's a double barreled approach,
but it's not the coherent, originated idea. It just happens to be
working and has kept us in a state where you have a murder case that
in reality continues to expand as something that needs to be explored and whittled down
not only through deductive reasoning, but inductive reasoning. You never quite get a
break from the continuously expanding universe of possibilities and illegitimate as well as legitimate evidence
that continuously gets dumped into this arena for you to do battle with. So
anyway, all of that having been said, let's get at a reality,
something that can be proven, something that we do know happened regarding evidence,
destruction, the treatment of it. And for that we turned to Carmin Savias
Nano again t poctpaak dot com. That is the website to go to.
And I'm sorry I've been long winded on this one, but again I didn't
plan it out. It just happened to roll this way. It'll be a
shorter podcast than two hours, but I appreciate you going through this with me,
Carmine and indulging me, because this is all very important, and for
that I turn it over to you, sir, where should we begin because
we mentioned the destruction of evidence regarding the Department of Defense before, Where should
we begin with it now? Well, since the last time we discussed the
Defense Intelligence Agency, that I was that I found some documents that you know
we talked about. You know, they were responsible for destroying immense amounts of
evidence that we didn't know about before. And the DA is a subordinate agency
for the those that know that are listening to the Department of Defense, and
that group had admitting to destroying all of its records connected to the President John
F. Kennedy's assassination. So this subordinate group that the DIA wipes all of
its records, perhaps the only one to wipe all of its records and admit
it anyway in a document. So the DEA wipes out its records. And
as we said, we didn't call it the largest destruction of records because we
have imaginations. The DEA wiped out all of its records, but theoretically a
bigger organization like oh, the DoD could also begin to wipe out its records,
and it had many more records than DIA. Right, So we've met
in with your reference number one here, which is the article from the Tea
Pok blog, published on May twenty three. Right, new documents reveal officials
destroyed far more evidence related to the Kennedys fascination then prior believed. Yeah,
and it was. It was a just total purge, which was is unthinkable.
No matter what the subject is, whether it's the assassination of Jfkre,
whether it's the study of you know, Asian American relations, you don't purge
everything now unless there is a specific desire to remove. That's those files forever.
Right now, I'm going to ask the argumentative question here to let you
answer it. I have my own ideas, but why is it a bad
idea to wholesale destroy a set of evidence like this? In your mind?
What would be the top I mean, there are many reasons, you know.
We could begin with, hey, this is historical value, historical value
that's been generated by the government that quite honestly, you know the old argument,
my taxes paid for this and all that. Well, you know you
paid for this stuff, and why is it that they are able to destroy
it? Well, for the good of the country, But tell me some
why is it so bad that they wholesale destroyed an entire set of evidence like
this exactly, and why didn't they target anything else in the same time period.
So I like, I'm going to try to give a little bit more
background on that with the more of the specifics I mentioned briefly some of the
things that were going on. But I think that what was going on was
in beginning in seventy two, largely you know, with the DIA's massive destruction,
the dd was in some parts or at least some people in the DoD
were systematically destroying JFK evidence because they were starting to understand that with the creation
of certain congressional committees, investigations were going to start again, and they,
for whatever reason, did not want that information to get to Congress. Well,
wouldn't this also have the additional consequence let's call it destroying things that are
outside of like let's just say, okay, let's just say that I agree
that there's no reason to hang on to the JFK assassination records closed. Okay,
Yes, I almost pewd in my mouth and I said it, But
yeah, case closed, it's over with. We don't need to retain this
now. Doesn't that inadvertently unintentionally wind up destroying records that although they're tied to
the assassination, could be of importance to other things of historical value or even
at the time that could have been relevant to things that were ongoing Or am
I imagining that? What is your thought? Well? Yeah, well,
and also imagine demandpower, because it would have taken some amount of time for
so many records to be destroyed by an agency. Oh so, how many
agents are you devoting to this? How much money is being spent upon this?
Would it just be easier to send it to NARA and let them classify
and declassify what they wanted? Why do you need to destroy everything? Well
that you know, I mean, I'll go into more way. I think,
I think that you know, there's varying possibilities, but just to give
I want to try to give the listeners much background, ken, So yeah,
go ahead, Okay. So basically, according to official statements, military
intelligence in the nineteen sixties was aiding law enforcement groups such as the Federal Buerau
of Investigation to infiltrate counter and counter anti war groups and civil rights organizations.
By you know this of course, already Chuck by utilizing the legal surveillance methods
domestically amidst the nineteen sixties, so these actions were likely among the need for
later officials to destroy some materials. But notably, it's not just these illegal
missions that are destroyed, but in certain instances, single investigations files are expressly
targeted without proper explanation. Okay, so what you're saying is that co intail
pro actions like things that people would be uncomfortable with or would be deemed to
be completely illegal and outside have said agencies you know, Charter, etc.
You know, Like, I'm not sure exactly how clear it was, although
when people are searching through your mail, you're utilizing the US Postal Service to
send things, So the fact that they're searching something that is within a government
agency is not that egregious of a violation. But when you're involved in other
things and they're starting to do things that might violate i don't know, individuals
or group's Fourth Amendment rights things like this, Yeah, they might want to
disappear that sort of stuff, especially if people wound up going to prison over
it, or there were other consequences of those actions. People wound up getting
killed over certain things. That actions were taken by individuals who were embedded with
et cetera, et cetera, might be a variety of things. Yeah,
yeah, and all that makes sense. I have no you know, I
would not dispute that that was among the reasoning for destroying certain files. Fair
enough, but it doesn't explain why they just specifically targeted JFK files like we
had. So we have the DIA, we have. So in seventy two,
an order comes from the US Army to begin the district of all files
that pertained to quote, non DoD affiliated persons and organizations among nineteen so or
sorry. In seventy one this occurs. So the order's unspecific requirements were the
premise used to excise materials from the Army that would affect them in the coming
years. At the end of the same decade, when the House Select Committee
and Assassinations requested evidence from the DoD about subjects related to the Kennedy assassination,
it was informed that during nineteen seventy two, quote, largely as a result
of investigation into military intelligence because of those programs we're talking about, the Defense
Department destroyed all the military intelligence files that had about American citizens. That's the
quote from Blake. That's what he was told anyway, which I don't think
is true because obviously I have files to percent and we're discussing later destruction after
seventy two when Blakey thought it ended. Right. Now, here's the thing
about this, like you said, in so some cases you may have legitimate
reasons for destroying these things, or again, why not classify them? Okay,
somebody might say, look, how about don't waste the resources. It
will cost less resources to wholesale destroy all of it and incinerate it, as
opposed to going through it determining what is legitimate to be declassified and not,
you know, what will be the waste of time. Files that I always
like to point to that you know, really don't contain any significant information,
but we're being held by said agency anyway. You know, like the photographs
of exactly which newspapers an individual was receiving during a certain period of time,
things like this or nonsense, where surveillance took place and people watched, you
know, individuals grocery shop stuff like this. You'd say, all right,
look it was an intrusion and invasion whatever. But at the same time,
it's extraneous information that's important to know. One I don't need to know if
the head of the invaders in Memphis, you know, you used to like
to go to a certain corner store to buy bread. It really is not
relevant. Okay, cool, fine, excellent. But when you're talking about
maybe illegitimate targets and violations that these agencies could have undertaken, well, then
you got the CYA approach, right. It's just look, maybe we need
to get rid of this because these were poor decisions made at a time that
were thought to be of necessity based on directives that were given to us through
Helms, Directives that were given to us through Hoover, you know, requests
that were made by various senators that were on certain committees. You know,
Laird himself might have had things that he felt were stumbles, you know,
by the agency that needed to be redacted wholesale, and it was easier to
destroy all of these files. But again the question remains that you asked to
begin with, why the JFK assassination related material wholesale go ahead? Okay,
So what we see happening with DoD is that as where the DIA just purged
everything and other agencies got rid of some. The DoD was targeting specific files
within its holdings as well, so all of its copies of military intelligence that
might have survived or certain things that might have survived the DIA purge were now
being taken out at the DoD level. So, as I said, however,
the endeavor was not part of the army order, the one that Blake
was told about that at least specified DoD related files and those of the military
affiliations should have been retained. Yet such files, according to the DoD were
lost as well, and the claimed date of destruction was not limited to the
year claimed seventy two, but continued into nineteen seventy three. Right now,
at this point, it is important to note that you're not talking about maybe
the personal mission of one particular director or of individuals who were committed to this
for reasons known best to them, maybe that you know, had a personal
desire to eliminate these things and therefore engaged in this activity and had the whole
department devoted to making sure that these things were purged. Because the hierarchy of
the DoD was in flux at this point exactly. So it was in flux.
So this is middle management and lower ranking agents who are really having this,
who are destroying the JFK case files. But even those are for whatever
reasonings, and you know, maybe just on orders, but this is not
a mindless group of people just taking out certain files for no reason. Right.
And also this is a shuffling group of even the administrators, who could
be mental management and everything else, because there was a lot of shake ups
going on in government agencies during the Nation administration, especially at this time period.
Yeah, well that's the thing that so I was one of the parameters
of the army order too, because the army order would be what applies here.
That's what they use as their reasoning for destroying files in seventy three.
So seventy three arrives political shadows, as you said, loomed that were created
by President Richard Nixon's passed illegal demands that the Central Intelligence Agency leaders should obstruct
the FBI's Watergate investigation. That's how the year starts. So agency leadership denies
these commands that were likely part of the reason Nixon fires Agency director Richard Holmes
in January of seventy three. The beginning of January the same month, five
Watergate burglars plead guilty, and the last two suspects, the Howard Hunt and
George Gordon Lidier convicted the final day of that month, and Nixon appoints the
new leader of the DoD that Chuck discussed layered and later a new leader of
the CIA. Nixon had reappointed two more people to lead the DoD in less
than six months after that, as his administration thrashed to stay afloat in the
threatening legal waves that approached. Less than a week into the next month,
Senator Edward Kennedy would introduce a Congressional resolution to form a select committee to investigate
the Nixon administration's campaign activities right now. Simultaneously, again, you talked about
the the you know, shuffling of the heads of these agencies, but there
were others on lower levels that were also being shuffled around. The deputy directors
of this and that and the third thing were also being changed because Nixon was
trying to position people that would be friendly to his causes in various positions of
authority, not just at the top. Or am I wrong about that?
Oh? No, no, he is. He is. He and his
advisors are systematically trying to replace people that will go along with helping them develop
the water get investigation to their liking, right, just so that that is
certainly going on Department of Defense, Department of Justice, and so on and
so forth. Would I would say, kind of like the d D,
the d d's leadership, it wasn't the you know, I don't think it
was an order from the top. It was a group within, just like
in the in THEDA. I don't think the d I A uh director ever
said destroy everything. I don't even think he might have been director the first
the first director was still around when it actually happened. I think, as
they say, as military intelligence realized, they were becoming more and more compromised
as investigations loomed. And I also think that you know, you have the
those that are worried about the co intel pro type things, those that are
worried about the illegal surveillance, and those that are worried about the JFK case,
right because I mean, it doesn't necessarily have to be a smoking gun,
of course not, but it could have just been something that was inflammatory
that someone said, you know, middle ranking person, lower ranking person and
said what they would do, or you know, said that they knew somebody
who was connected to it, doesn't even you know, but it was enough
to have people actively searching out these records to destroy them. And so in
seventy three, as I said, with all that going on, Nixon's terms
approaching its end, and March of seventy three, officials believe that despite the
ongoing congressional investigations, or perhaps due to it, additional files had to be
destroyed. Right. The evidence in this specific instance was Lee Harvey Oswald's military
intelligence file, a file that officials prior noted was never provided to the President's
Commission investigation or any other later inquiry. Now, again, I just placed
one more thing for context that I'm going to shut up and let you run
for a minute here, because it's important, I think, to note that
we're talking about the end of Nixon's first term. He's going into his second
term. Yes, he was re elected by a landslide, Okay, And
all of that occurs seventy two. So the election of seventy two is next
begins in seventy three. While that is occurring, though the water gets stuff
is happening, he's negotiating already with people in Congress. Why is this important?
Hold your breath for a sec The deal is that he's negotiating with people
in Congress in the event that we end up getting to an impeachment, which
means he's starting already to put out feelers. See who's gonna vote for,
See who's gonna put it out there, See who's going to broach these subjects
in committees. And alongside of this, parallel with this is what investigations that
are starting to catch traction that are going to turn into what the various investigations
that I've talked about from the House and Senate committees regarding intelligence activities and pseudo
military activities related to Cuba. Yes, in a big way, but again
it's a lot of this stuff. We're gonna wind up talking about the whole
Bay of Pigs thing. Okay, yeah, you know seventy four hersh is
going to hammer them in the press right with family jewels and everything that Colby
basically confirms because Nixon and Ford are rotating leaders of the CIA. Yeah,
so hello, here we go. So what I'm saying is, while all
this is going on for some reason, particularly that herds the JFK stuff,
I'm not saying that that's an answer. What I'm saying is that's very suggestive
that gee, it must have had some reason for priority at this point.
Especially yeah, in the in military circles, which I've always said that,
you know, people like to adopt, you know, like a like a
Frankenstein's bride. People like to and unfortunately they wake up next to their ideas
in the morning, you know, with whatever jaffk idea they think, and
then they realize that it doesn't play out, but they've kind of married themselves
to it. So I've always left it open. I've always said that there's
the potential for a conglomerate plot where you have the mafia, you have the
military, you have someone else, you know, just a few people from
a few places that come together, get it done and go away, or
you know, you have a military flavor or a you know, exile flavor,
whatever type of plot. But in that instance, these military people would
have to keep it small, and they would have to keep it quiet.
And if there were even a slightest talk in these films that somebody might have
been responsible for something, I understand why they did what they did because even
the suggestion, as we know from you know, the perception that people like
yin Or and other people know what they're talking about as far as the assassination
it carries with the public. Well, and there you go and simply the
people that have screen for years, you know, CIA did it. Okay,
very oversimplified and stupid answer. However, when you say that there's an
element there and you say that, you know, I'm kind of rewording what
you just said. But I mean when you take a look at it also
from an operational standpoint, uh, the idea that there needs to be a
military ingredient in this stew there needs to be in my mind, okay,
because you have well, first of all, you got former military people that
are touching this, that are involved with it. You got people that have
interests that are going to gain from it, et cetera, et cetera.
To me, people, yeah, they got to sit in on you know,
as Mike had. You know, people got to sit down on the
planning for the motorcade route. People that you know, we're local, that
were co authoring what would occur with the Dallas police. It makes total sense,
you know, even the triangulation of fire. For those that like that
idea, Now, there is certainly a military aspect that could be ascribed to
it, or at least paramilitary if not, you know, in the instance
of anxiety or fanatics. Right, and even when you turn around you talk
about, okay, the operations that relate to the CIA, you know,
the military, the Cuban exiles, et cetera. There always has to be
a military element. What are you gonna do with the you know, use
you gotta somebody's got to train them. Is it gonna be you know,
Kolbe that's gonna sit there and train them. No? Is it gonna be
Colston who's gonna train him? Well, maybe if he wants to teach them
how to break an enter, But I mean outside of that, you know,
who's gonna sit there and flop around in the mud. I know everybody's
thinking David Ferry, but uh, you know that's different story. The thing
is, there's gonna have to be military people that are gonna be involved with
some aspect of the operation, no matter how you imagine it. So the
fact that you see a wholesale destruction from a d O d ARM related to
the d i A, the Defense Intelligence Agency, which should be the collection
point for guess what all of these military intelligence factions, Well that's pretty interesting,
especially at this time. Why is it something that they need to partake.
You know, they're busy with a lot of stuff here. You know
a lot of things that are keeping them busy outside of you know, their
regular jobs. Yeah, there's extra things happening regarding, like I said,
the shuffling with Nixon, the fact that he's trying to put friendly people in
the right position. He's got people interacting, There's real action going on.
There is the Vietnam War still happening. There is guess what, Cambodia that
bombing all of these things, okay, And whether it's about trying to get
to peace or conducting war or looking out for the next domino where that might
start to teeter. All of this means that you have military intelligence dadd should
all be busy with a lot of current events, not necessarily worried about destroying
the history. But maybe that's just me. Go ahead, Cormy. So
first we should note that all this material legally should have been obviously held for
historical purposes. It should have been given to the requesting investigators. It kills
me that the Commission didn't get it. I mean, the Commission was the
government's side show that was you know, they wanted that to be the end
all be all. We have a blue ribbon winner here, folks. That
the commission wasn't given really makes me think that there's something questionable in these files,
because I mean, you had Alan Dulles for christ, you had an
XCIA had I think he would have went along with the program. So whatever
was in these files must have been fairly controversial. So so I wanted Yeah,
so beyond historical purposes, the file contained derogatory information. This final stipulation
is crucial in my view because Oswald's files were changing from his court martials to
his Russian defection, the alleged role as the presidential assassin were all reasons to
maintain the file if you look in the documents under DoD requirements. So they
destroyed it in lieu of all the requirements they had set for things that shouldn't
be destroyed. So if such guidelines have been followed, the President's Commission,
Pike Committee, Church Committee, HCA, and others would have all possessed the
request of evidence. Yet they were not, and instead related DoD papers offer
that quote DOSSIERAB six five two eight seven six Oswald Lee Harvey was identified for
deletion one March nineteen seventy three, And how is that file not relevant even
to just fully flesh out a biography of Lee rb Oswell, which, by
the way, is one of the documents that is produced over and over again
in these various investigations and you know, collect actions of paper by the government.
Over and over again, they are writing biographies of Lee rb Oswald,
right, I mean, they have to identify who this character is, where
he's been, what he knows, what he has access to. And I'm
thinking that despite the fact that you know, he didn't spend a long time
in the military, he was only twenty four years old when he died.
Even if he spent two years in the military, it's a significant portion of
his life that would need to be covered in those biographies. Or maybe I'm
out of line now, of course that should have been pertained, especially with
the historical significance of what occurred afterwards. Yeah, and that he I mean
he they said, you know, destroy all non related military people. Well
he's related to the military. Check they said, anythink with derogatory information.
Keep he had derogatory information, check and historical significance. So there's no excuse
for why this specifically target his military intelligence file and remove it from the DD's
holdings, as the DEA removed everything else, and so the identifying official was
named Miss Lindell E. Harp. But the document also notes DoD can identify
who or exactly when the files were destroyed, but assume it occurred within sixty
days of being identified. A seemingly additional unintended mass destruction of Army files occurred
when quote sixteen point five million files on Army personnel who served before nineteen sixty
were rendered to ash from a fire at the Army's National Record Center following the
destruction of Oswald's files. Okay, yet, unlike the fire that claimed all
those files without regard some of the DoD had at least two years within its
subordinate, the DEA had been destroying files specifically related to the Kennedy assassination.
Any claim this targeted purge was limited to the nineteen sixties or even up to
nineteen seventy two are now easily set aside as investigations were ongoing, this would
likely increase the need for scrubbing legal record, and the next year the calls
for additional congressional investigations began and materialized by nineteen seventy five. As was my
contention prior and based on repeated, as honest historical actions within the Congressional staff,
I believe officials would keep destroying evidence until the very moment it was no
longer possible without detection. So I think that this continued up until and maybe
even after the Church Committee. I think, I, I, hey,
I'm going to push my I'm going to push my wager a little farther.
In the beginning, some people only thought it happened in the sixties. I
guessed that happened in the seventies, and it did. And I think that
they Why wouldn't they if they thought they could get away with it like the
DEA did, Why wouldn't they keep destroying them as long as they possibly could
before they were caught. I'm going to keep looking too, of course,
I'm going to keep looking at the record to see if we can find additional
targets related to this. But I'm happy that we're proving that military officials were
just as obstructive as any incy officials, but far more successful for a time
in keeping their actions heads. Basically, they were able to dodge the question
for decades, where the CIA and FBI got served up at a platter basically
by the end of the seventies. There you have it. So what else
do we note in these articles? I've given a reference one and I think
I put reference too in the chatroom at Ocelli dot com. And those are
the two most relevant of the references. What else do we need to note
here? Well, I just I think people, you know, take a
look at him, of course, come to your own conclusions. But as
you know, one of the things, and I hope one of the things
that Chuck appreciates about me, is I always bring official documents. So these
are their records. You're going to find here the links to my articles.
But my articles are comprised of official documents and interviews with the people related to
the to what was going on. And I think based on that, it
gives us the clearest conclusion that certainly something was afoot in that period for those
two years at least maybe three and more to attack the JFK case in the
military. Simultaneously, you know, the CIA and FBI had destroyed the things
that were going to destroy for the most part by then, and it was
nothing nearly a significant as the DEA But to me, what's interesting is that
it wasn't just the DA. Luck likely the DA was under orders from someone
in the d D who also had people destroying things within its holdings. Right,
So here we are, we have a we have the the record of
destruction, we have the scope of the destruction. Right, we have the
obvious measures that were supposed to prevent said destruction. We seem to have,
you know, a fairly good paper trail here. Interesting by the way that
Oswald's stuff, you know, if he was taken into the army and these
things were reduced to ash, you know, pre you know, people that
served prior to nineteen sixty that includes Oswald. Yep, you know, just
saying weird where he's included and then not included. I think that it's no
small thing to recognize that contemporaneous with this destruction. There are different investigations emerging
beginning concluding et cetera. All going on, not just the ones where the
House Select Committees involved, the Senate Select Committees are involved, et cetera,
but also the Department of Justice is investigating a bunch of things that could also
touch upon this. There's a lot of agencies that could have requested various documents
that were connected to the case that were in DoD hands. None of them
got it because it was all destroyed and interestingly at separate periods by separate groups,
but ultimately in unison. As far as the end, you know,
the ends that they were trying to achieve, you know, the O and
Ile intelligence had taken it out. I believe during the sixties, the CIA
took out some stuff DUR in the sixties. The FBI took out some stuff
UR in the sixties. But they were separate agencies, not all linked by
the military O and I as opposed to the other two was linked to them.
So and I takes it out than what was it I believe than Oswold's
marine records. Some of his marine records disappear. Then someone just totally purges
everything in the DA while military intelligence is being investigated, and then somebody purchased
things in the d D holdings. So I'm wondering how. I don't think
it could go possibly any higher, because like you said, everything was in
flux. So this is middle management, low management, maybe even a person
or two. It doesn't have to be you know, some group of conspirators,
but just people that specifically want these files to go away for the reasoning
we have not you know, we can't fully conclude it, right, we
can't discern it. But here's an other interesting idea. You know, the
two on one file of Lee Harvey Oswald, right, the personnel file in
the possession of the CIA, which is meant to explain who to hell somebody
is, you know, how useful they are, what their track record is,
et cetera. One would think that a condensed version of records pertaining directly
to him from the do D collection would be included in that two a one
file. Of course, now that's just a dumping ground basically for anything they
had that had the word Oswald. It appears, yeah, just so that
they could tie up researchers. You know. But what I'm saying is legitimately,
and it's most it's just And one wonders why there wasn't a complaint saying,
you know, because look, if I was member of the CIA and
not in the know, and I was instructed to go ahead and collect information
on Lee Harvey Oswald, one of the primary documents in that document collection would
be his military record. Well, certainly he was interesting too, is a
military intelligence file. Well, why did Oswald have a military intelligence file?
He was only I think secret. Yeah, he wasn't even that highly graded
for classified information. So what is so important in his military intelligence history that
requires its destruction? But it contravenes all of the requirements you've set down for
things not to be destroyed, especially a guy who had it was crypto clearance
with UH to be able to do the stuff with the U two. Yeah,
so his clearances would have had to have been relevant. You would think
to the CIA, you know, I mean, look, I know I'm
speculating a bit here. I'm just saying that. Isn't that a fascinating question
in and of itself? Like if I was the CIA guy directed to do
that, had no knowledge of any of this stuff, just I don't know,
I'm collecting crap on a guy named Oswald, I know nothing. I
would complain that I can't get these files. I would say, you know,
hey, guys, you gotta have a copy somewhere for me, right,
Well, especially since the c I in the military running joint operations all
the time. Well, but that's the thing is that that this is complimentary.
This is not adversarial. This is not like we're trying to collect,
you know, the German Army intelligence file on the guy. We're collecting within
our own government agencies, you know, all in the family again, right,
So where are we at with that? Well? Why does nobody even
mention that? Really except what you got that one letter of complaint from a
congressional staffer, Right, isn't that how many people complained that this stuff disappeared?
Anybody? Yeah, it's It's very rare and surprisingly two to me.
I just don't think he knew. I don't think Dulles and some of the
other commissioners knew that they would deprived that file. I just think the military
just didn't give it to theok. Yeah, but see there's the problem because
a guy like Dulles should be in the know enough to know that's missing.
Yeah, that's something's missing. You know. For instance, Okay, you
and I work in an industry, name an industry. Okay, I'll give
you a real world example, just real fast. I used to run gas
stations right in the state of New Jersey. If you were a gas pumper,
you were required by law to have a certificate that said you knew how
to handle gasoline. Okay, I know. It's this weird, esoteric,
strange thing still stands today as far as I know, because by law,
customers are not allowed to pump their own gas in the state of New Jersey.
You have Okay, I know that exists in some places still, Okay,
Yeah, Unfortunately we're not one of those states. Literally speaking. There's
only two states in the United States that have that law on the books and
anymore, and it's Oregon in New Jersey. Okay. So here's the thing
about it, though. If I hand it over, you're let's just say,
you're working for me at the gas station. I'm the manager. You're
a gas pumper. Somebody wants your work records with me, right, I
say, yeah, sure, here you go. Here's his W two form,
Here's you know, his job application, he filled out, incident reports,
whatever, whatever I have as a personnel file. I kept personnel files
on people that worked for me at the gas station. Okay, their identification
in it, their tax information, etc. In a file in capitals,
okay, employee files. If I handed that over and it said you were
a gas pumper and somebody was familiar with that business and they found you don't
have a certificate in that file. The answer to me about that missing piece
of paper would be, either he didn't have one, or you have not
included this thing in the file that should be there. So can you find
out if either didn't have one or right, because they would want the complete
file. Yeah, I figure Alan Dolls would be aware that. Now,
again, turning back, you would figure Allen Dolls would be aware that this
guy had to have because they knew that he had been in the military.
They had a whole panel of people there developing his biography, take a look
at the organization. Well, I was just going to say, that's the
interesting thing is Dulles would have thought that he would have a military file.
But what if he had had a military intelligence file? Well, I think
it was. Wasn't it known by the commission that Oswald had some involvement with
the U two. Well, because he worked at the that that is true.
But I don't think that he had clearance and access to where he would
have been considered. I don't think there would have been a reason to open
a military intelligence file on him. But there would be because here's the thing,
Well, I mean in the pointment, Yeah, I guess with proximity
to the YouTube. But you know, the CIA and the military up and
down swore that he knew nothing of the utube too. He was just basically
helping with the you know, radar operations. Yeah, but working at that
base which handled right the U two flights meant that you would recu I guess
it would be a basic opening. Yeah, it could require a basic opening
no matter who worked there, whether it's a secretary or whether it was a
radar operator something, because they might be in proximity to wound up being in
the know about something, so they would have to be cleared, approved or
uh, you know something. At some point they would have to be you
know, sign an NDA something, which it should have all just been basic
paperwork. What did they not want the commission to see? See? But
that's the thing is that, let let's go with that premise. Tell me
that Dulles doesn't know that somebody working in proximity to the U two. See
that's the thing. He never requests it. They don't give it to him.
That's fine, that's the way it works. But it seems strange to
me that a guy like that wouldn't have said, wait a minute, we
need to request his military He was prepping witnesses and other stuff. He was
keeping busy, as you'd like to note, so he was he was not
able to multitask as well as Nixon's people were a few years later. Is
what you're saying, Well, I don't, well, you know, he
was getting into older years, you know, I mean, I'm sure he
could still maybe down a little bit spin a tail and you know, yeah,
yeah, no, product, yeah, I mean, well, and
you talk. I just remember you and while Brown talking about how it should
have been called the Dullest Committee because he was always participating so much. Oh
yeah, no, he's I just think that he was running the show in
that direction more rather than perhaps asking the pertinent question he didn't want to ask
the pertinent questions. Probably Oh yeah. But again, if you're going to
minimize this guy, as you know, a guy who barely served in the
military, I mean, one would think that even a search for this file
to say that you know, it never existed, it couldn't have insisted or
you know, at some point an evaluation would have been done on a guy
to be anywhere in the because again, you're in proximity of something that's top
secret. Generally speaking, they do background on you regardless, if you're going
to be around it a lot, you might run into something. You might
have a coworker, you might do a job with somebody who is in the
know. You see what I'm saying, like just being well, yeah,
no, no, I think that it's totally reasonable to assume that the file
would have been created. But the question is why the destruction, not just
the time of destruction, but it was so long after. If if this
is a nothing file, if this helps prove the government's case, then why
wasn't this handed over years ago or presented to the public. Yeah, well
of course, but but see but there there again, because look again,
I knew a guy who okay, he winds up working for the what do
you call it? The Cooperative agency there where it's it was kind of like
it was one of the things that was really deeply involved with Homeland security and
all that, and it was just the Department of Home Well let's just let's
just go with the Department of Homeland Security. Department of Homeland Security. Right,
you're giving a tours, okay to tourists of like one of the headquarter
buildings, all right, which has military people and civilian people involved. Because
if you're just a tour guide showing people parts of a military base, Yeah,
an intelligence file is generated if you're on a base that has any sort
of secretive stuff on it. Maybe they're building weapons on a particular area,
they're testing stuff, whatever. Even though you're not involved, you're giving tours.
Yeah, like in Virginia Camp Perry where they call it the farm where
they would take CIA agents to train them and yeah, or even like it
would hold people right or Fort Dixon, New Jersey. Again, I'm using
a real world example. I'm not going to mention the name here, but
here's the thing. A guy who's giving tours of that because they have uh
a training area and a firing range on there, which, by the way,
they train military people there. They also allow prison guards and uh civilian
police forces to utilize their facility, et cetera, et cetera. They give
tours to the public of that facility, even if you're nowhere near anything top
secret and you're basically running people around going look, we still have this old
airplane. Look, here's the thing that we have from the days when the
you know, the oh my goodness, the uh what the airship disaster?
There the uh, the blimp Hindenburgh. Okay, the Hindenburg goes. Yeah,
the Hindenburgh that went down in lake in Lakehurst, New Jersey. Okay,
so you're in close proximity to that. We are somewhat affiliated with that.
That's the naval airbase. We're an army base. They do that and
give you know, a forty five minute tour to people and show them all
this stuff. And here's what we photographed from, you know, from here
of the lake Erst Naval Air Base, and and here's the part of New
Jersey we're in. Here's when this base was built. The BS tour,
that person has a background check done on them and therefore generates an intelligence file.
Okay, it's a basic intelligence file that just says, you know,
this guy's not probably dangerous. If he encounters something top secret, you know,
we're not too worried about it, et cetera, et cetera. They
check to see if he's subversive, how his mental stability is. And he's
a tour guide. Yeah, okay, but since his employee, yeah,
underneath and that I understand for military personnel. But once again we're talking about
and I understand it in the I don't disagree with most of them, pretty
much all of what you're saying. I just my question is, is the
timing. My question is is a selection. No, No, And that
there were a lot of things at that time they should have been destroying if
they really wanted to cover themselves, and that that was something somebody focused on
despite all the rules they had set up for it. And it just it's
the non tensical way it was done. And in that it keeps getting later.
Like I said, I think that data is going to keep pushing.
I'm gonna I've gone through almost all of the new releases, I've done most
of the old releases, and I'm going to keep looking occasionally ill you know,
hopefully I can hit across something else to see if there's another military arm
and we're talking to destroy files. Yeah, and we're up to nineteen seventy
five. Now, that's when all the investigations start occurring. This Oswalt's file
goes in seventy three, okay, and that but it goes the month following
the launch of the water investigation. Oh beautiful, But Mike, and then
the fire happens. No, no, of course, and that's another thing.
But look, the only thing I'm doing here really is piling on that.
There should be a question at some point somebody going across these things,
Yeah, should be requesting a file that's already been destroyed, is all I'm
trying to get to. There should be a point at which somebody has to
explain to somebody why it is you destroyed something that should be of like almost
no value that they're just putting on a checklist to add to a biography.
Why it is that a general sort of pedestrian thing. If the guy was
pushing a broom at atsugi. Okay, there should still be a file,
is all I'm saying. And what you're telling me is, yeah, seventy
five years, usually twelve, depending it depends on the agencies. But according
to these agencies, I think the settings they had put for this specific type
of military intelligence file was twenty five years, and at the time, that
would have pushed it into the eighties. Yeah, right, So they would
have had to hold it until after the agency right nineteen eighty eight, which,
by the way, there's still a nebulous investigation that occurs in nineteen eighty
eight that nobody can really put their entire finger on. That's supposedly run by
the DOJ, and all we have is that various people were interviewed and interacted
with individuals from the Department of Justice in nineteen eighty eight. Regarding the JFK
assassination the weirdest thing that I can never quite and and nobody's been able to
answer that question. I mean, I've had somebody try to answer it,
but they're they're they're full of themselves, and they make an inaccurate statement that
there was this investigation, and it's like, okay, well show me the
proof of said investigation. They can't show me that there was a directive launched
and that there was a effort, Like you know, there's no memos,
there's no memorialization of this. There's nothing that we can go get, is
all I'm saying. For this investigation in eighty eight, which again matches twenty
five years after the assassination. It was launched at the end of eighty eight,
from what I can tell, And there's some interesting you might have been
the public, the you know, revival and the public that could have could
you know, theoretically, I have no idea about it till you brought it
up. Yeah, theoretically, But theoretically, you would think that at some
point there is like a batch of files that basically says, here's are nineteen
eighty eight especially want to call? And we depended so heavily on paper.
Yeah, so something is weird there. But anyway back to this particular thing,
you have this agency which should not have destroyed it under all the rules
that they set forth, shouldn't have destroyed this stuff? And did you have
a whole lot of investigations being denied this information via that destruction from the Warrant
Commission all the way through to those committees in the seventies. You have political
turmoil, you have unrest in official circles. You have investigative agencies that could
have been looking at this, and committees that should have been looking at this
not being handed this stuff. And again I don't see a lot of questions
being asked, you know, where is the why don't I have the DoD
file? Even in the days when people were complaining about the CIA not releasing
anything, nobody said, hey, where's the DEA files? Where's it?
I'd like to see his military intelligence records please, you know, and even
the people to talk about as military they you know, I think maybe John
Newman has mentioned this maybe somewhere, but vaguely. I'm thinking it was in
Oswald and the CIA the book, but outside of that, and really not
talking about how all this stuff was wholesale destroyed. That's new. But the
idea that there's stuff missing from the two oh one, the idea that there's
a whole lot of things that you think would have been logically generated that simply
weren't or don't exist any longer. It's interesting, and I wonder if it
leads to greater other destructions, simply because again, nobody asked for the files.
I don't know. It's an open question and one that you're going to
keep working on. I guess anything we should say here in closing, Carmen,
because I've kind of taken you away over time, and I'm sorry about
that. Oh that's fine. I No, I think we've said everything needs
to be said. You know, I would tell people, you know,
do your best their keep looking if you can find the time. You know,
it is worth as I hope to have shown you when I pay my
visits here to the Ohl effect that it is. It is worth it.
You can't find gems. Occasionally there's a lot of dross and nonsense go through,
but there are good files out that there is information still to be developed,
and we have to put it together piece by piece. It's not going
to be an instance smoking gun situation. I know that's how some people want
it to be, but it'll never be like that. No cases ever like
that. It has to be it's the cold work and the long hours get
us closer to an answer exactly. And in two weeks what we will do
is rejoin the series JFK Assassination Myths with number seventeen. We're going to see
if we got enough meat on that bone to run a mids episode, and
I'm pretty sure we do. Mike Swatson will return, Carmin Sabastano will return
in two weeks to do that with me. Maybe we'll add a special guest.
I really want to. I discussed it with Carmine off air. We'll
see if we can do that and really just kick that Myths series into play
because people have been asking for it and I'll be more than happy to get
it out there. Plus, by the way, I've re released a couple
of them on the podcast Speed recently, so you noticed I didn't do a
few live shows this week. My throat was really bad, still kind of
bad, but working on it, and hopefully I'll be fine tomorrow night when
I go live again. But in two weeks we'll continue the JFK Myth series.
And for those of you that are signed up that are members at Ocelli
dot com who have been significant contributors to O'Kelly dot com and the ocell Effect,
guess what. The archive emails have started to go out. But if
you have not gotten on the list, you have not confirmed with me via
email that you want those sent to you, and you've been a supporter,
you know what you need to email me, And if you want to become
a supporter, you can sign up at O'Kelly dot com. There's ways to
do it. By the month ten bucks a month, you'll end up with
twelve months worth of these email to get you a decade's worth of podcast not
just the ones that I did, but the ones I produced and a lot
of bonus material including all of the MITS episodes up to this point, and
from twenty thirteen to twenty twenty three. You'll get all of that stuff over
the course of the year. You can do it at ten bucks a month,
or if you want to get on the supporter walllet ochelli dot com.
You can do that and make one bulk payment Boom, You're covered for the
year. Plus you have access to all that extra material and stuff that's only
available to members at ochelli dot com. You don't like signing up through my
website, there's a Patreon option if you sign up on Patreon for me and
become a patron, or hell, if you just make an arrangement with me
via email and a donation. It's not always money. Sometimes people have done
other things for me. You'll be on that list as well. And though
I do much appreciate any financial donation that comes to me, helps me to
keep things going. And we do have a couple of big bills coming up
in the next couple of months. And indeed, I'm planning on returning to
Dallas, so it looks like I'm being asked to MC the Lancer conference again.
So trying to fund everything, trying to get ready to go to Dallas
and do all that stuff once again and maybe hang out with some of you
in Dallas. If you can make it, be more than happy too.
I won't have as many goodies to give away, but I'll do my best,
and as per usual, I'm doing the best I can on these shows.
So hopefully you've enjoyed it. Hopefully you've gotten some good information from Mike
Swanson and Carlin Sabastano Tonight again tpaak dot com. That is Carmine's website,
Two Princes and a King that stands for the concise examination of three assassinations from
the nineteen sixties JFK RFK. There's your two princes and doctor Martin Luther King
Junior being the king in that title, but there's a lot more than just
that at the website. Carmine's also the author of another book, which we
may have arguments about at in a future show, but we will discuss it
at some point, but look forward to the myths in two weeks. I
look forward to more appearances with Carmine, and I'm certainly glad that any of
you have decided to listen to me, support the show or anything else,
even if you make a one time donation at Ocelli dot com. It is
all counting and all important, as inflation and everything else makes this harder and
harder to do, so just want all of you to know that I appreciate
you. Also thanks to Mike Swanson, who was not only a sponsored this
show, but appeared earlier and appears more often than any other guest in the
archive that you'll be able to get if you sign up at Ocelli dot com.
Mike Swanson, of course be in the no go to Wallstreet window dot
com. It's about a hell of a lot more than Wall Street geopolitics,
other current events, moneyes inded is covered there, but a whole lot of
stuff, including tonight's topic and the article that Carmine wrote regarding the destruction of
evidence by the DA. Anyway, no matter who you are, where you
are, when you are, I want you to remember that I am merely
o'helly, and all of you are indeed the effect. You're structor Shelley.
You know it's structure of Shelley. You are about doing mark upon the great
you say. The eyes of the world are upon you. The hopes and
prayers of liberty loving people everywhere march with you in company with our praise,
allies and brothers in arms. On the other front, your task will not
see an easy one. Your enemy is well trained, well equipped, and
battle heartened, he will fight that man demand. The tide has turned.
The free men of the world are marching together to vignoring good luck, and
let us all be seeking to plessing of almighty Gods upon this great and noble
Undertaking your fast