CIA Documents
The CIA was involved in a "benign cover-up" of the JFK Assassination. That involvement was even admitted to by then CIA Chief John McCone. That cover-up extended to alteration of assassination photographs and films, especially the famous Zapruder film. This section describes the CIA's involvement using its own documents, plus a couple of other relevant contributions.
-----
CIA Director John McCone and the "Benign Cover-up"
CIA historian David Robarge reported on 1963's CIA Director John McCone's involvement in a "benign cover-up" intended to keep the Warren Commission focused on "what the Agency believed at the time was the 'best truth'--that Lee Harvey Oswald, for as yet undetermined motives, had acted alone in killing John Kennedy." This was reported in the October 4, 2015 issue of Politico.
CIA historian David Robarge reported on 1963's CIA Director John McCone's involvement in a "benign cover-up" intended to keep the Warren Commission focused on "what the Agency believed at the time was the 'best truth'--that Lee Harvey Oswald, for as yet undetermined motives, had acted alone in killing John Kennedy." This was reported in the October 4, 2015 issue of Politico.
Excerpt from the October 04, 2015 Politico article
The original Robarge article that inspired the Politico article can be found in the CIA's "Reading Room" website. The details of the cover-up are left out, and the reason behind it is pure speculation (provided mainly by JFK assassination researcher Max Holland). The exact reason for the "benign cover-up" is never given.
The original Robarge report on which the Politico article was based. From https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB493/docs/intell_ebb_026.PDF
Again, the reason behind the Agency's "control of information" given to the Warren Commission, is the Agency's clumsy attempts to assassinate Fidel Castro ("Operation Mongoose"), but that explanation is pure speculation. Assassination attempts are hardly "benign." I contend that the CIA's "benign cover-up" extended to the altering of films and photographs related to the assassination in order to cover up the Secret Service accidents and mistakes. Proof of Zapruder film alteration can be found elsewhere on this website at https://www.a-benign-conspiracy.com/zapruder-film-alteration.html.
But would the CIA help the Secret Service to cover up those accidents and mistakes? Part of the Secret Service's success depends on the illusion of protection, just as much as the actual protection, as a deterrent to prevent threats. The Secret Service probably did not have the wherewithal to alter films and photographs like the CIA did, but they could certainly collect all the films and photographs that the could, and turn them over to the CIA. Would the spy agency cooperate in such a cover-up? I believe that they did. For one thing, there is evidence of a cooperative agreement between the two agencies.
But would the CIA help the Secret Service to cover up those accidents and mistakes? Part of the Secret Service's success depends on the illusion of protection, just as much as the actual protection, as a deterrent to prevent threats. The Secret Service probably did not have the wherewithal to alter films and photographs like the CIA did, but they could certainly collect all the films and photographs that the could, and turn them over to the CIA. Would the spy agency cooperate in such a cover-up? I believe that they did. For one thing, there is evidence of a cooperative agreement between the two agencies.
-----
Agreement Between CIA and Secret Service
Even though there was no CIA agent "detailed at the moment to the Secret Service" when this particular memo was written in 1975, this memo proves that there was such an agreement in 1971, and implies that previous agreements were in force before 1971. This memo states that there is a standing agreement ("This authority...remains in force unless revoked by the President") that the CIA would "assist" the Secret Service on such occasions as the "death of a President." Of course, the only President whose death could trigger such assistance would have been Kennedy's.
Even though there was no CIA agent "detailed at the moment to the Secret Service" when this particular memo was written in 1975, this memo proves that there was such an agreement in 1971, and implies that previous agreements were in force before 1971. This memo states that there is a standing agreement ("This authority...remains in force unless revoked by the President") that the CIA would "assist" the Secret Service on such occasions as the "death of a President." Of course, the only President whose death could trigger such assistance would have been Kennedy's.
Evidence of a Cooperative "Agreement Between CIA and Secret Service." From https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/CIA-RDP78-00300R000100090165-1.pdf
So what might the CIA be willing to do for the Secret Service? One aspect of their cooperation might be to alter photographs and films that might prove embarrassing to the Secret Service. Did they have the ability to do that? The next memo shows that they most certainly did.
-----
CIA Ability and Willingness to Alter Images
Greg Burnham posted this CIA document on the Education Forum site, regarding a request to "retouch" the Mexico City image that was supposed to have been of Oswald:
Greg Burnham posted this CIA document on the Education Forum site, regarding a request to "retouch" the Mexico City image that was supposed to have been of Oswald:
Image posted by Greg Burnham at Greg Burnham post at https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/31885-nobody-would-have-altered-any-photographic-or-film-evidence-right/ Burnham Saved it to his computer "some time ago" and believes it originally came from Ralph Thomas's online book "JFK: A Question of Conspiracy."
Note the hand-written "Denied" at the bottom of the memo. Denied by whom is not clear. ASCHAM or the "Commission" (Warren Commission, presumably), or someone else?
The photos in question are these:
The photos in question are these:
Posted by David Josephs on the same Education Forum site: Image posted by Greg Burnham at Greg Burnham post at https://educationforum.ipbhost.com/topic/31885-nobody-would-have-altered-any-photographic-or-film-evidence-right/
Obviously, it's not a picture of Oswald. The "denied" notation might explain why it does not look like Oswald, although the original request for "retouching" the image did request "retouch of face to degree obviously not identifiable with Ruby but also not with actual subject of photo." Marina reportedly identified the image as belonging to Jack Ruby, although I have not yet verified that.
Nevertheless, the image was passed off as supposedly being of Oswald.
And even though the request to "retouch" the photo was apparently "denied" as the hand-written notation seems to indicate (Was it really "denied"? If so, by whom?), this memo does indicate that the capability existed to alter backgrounds and faces. Otherwise, why would the request have been made in the first place?
And such alterations did take place.
For example, one or more of the Phil Willis photographs was "physically altered" because "something showed in them that the Secret Service did not want known,"
Nevertheless, the image was passed off as supposedly being of Oswald.
And even though the request to "retouch" the photo was apparently "denied" as the hand-written notation seems to indicate (Was it really "denied"? If so, by whom?), this memo does indicate that the capability existed to alter backgrounds and faces. Otherwise, why would the request have been made in the first place?
And such alterations did take place.
For example, one or more of the Phil Willis photographs was "physically altered" because "something showed in them that the Secret Service did not want known,"
-----
Linda Willis on her Father's Pictures
Linda Willis gave an interview to Texas Archives in which she stated that "trains" had been edited out of one or two of his pictures, because, she believed, "something showed in them that the Secret Service did not want known." Her interview was interviewed by traffic noises, but can be found on both Youtube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh2123ycgBg), originally in the Texas Archives at
Linda Willis gave an interview to Texas Archives in which she stated that "trains" had been edited out of one or two of his pictures, because, she believed, "something showed in them that the Secret Service did not want known." Her interview was interviewed by traffic noises, but can be found on both Youtube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh2123ycgBg), originally in the Texas Archives at
The original source is in the Texas Archives https://texasarchive.org/2010_02553 (starting at about 17:20). (I used the YouTube version, because I could set the start time, though not the end, whereas I couldn't figure out how to set the start time for the Texas Archive version, which would be about 17:20 or 1040 seconds.)
-----
The CIA's Hawkeye Works Laboratory
In his recounting of the "The Two NPIC Zapruder Film Events: Signposts Pointing to the Film's Alteration" (See https://www.lewrockwell.com/2012/05/douglas-p-horne/the-two-npic-zapruder-film-events-signposts-pointing-to-the-filmsalteration/) Doug Horne relates how at the second event at the National Photographic Interpretation Center involving the (altered) Zapruder film, the courier of the film, one purported Secret Service agent "Bill Smith" told the NPIC staff that he had just come from "Hawkeye Works."
Hawkeye Works was a secret CIA film laboratory affiliated with Kodak and located in Rochester, NY. It was closed in 2011.
This particular film was an un-slit film masquerading as a "camera original." The way that Zapruder's 8mm camera worked, it recorded half of the 16mm film on one side, then recorded the other half of the film on the other side. The film is then slit down the middle in processing, and the two strips spliced together to form one longer one.
The original Zapruder film was known to have been slit in Dallas when it was originally processed.
The fact that the film at the second NPIC was un-slit is one indication that it was an altered product. The fact that it came from the CIA's Hawkeye Works laboratory is another.
In his recounting of the "The Two NPIC Zapruder Film Events: Signposts Pointing to the Film's Alteration" (See https://www.lewrockwell.com/2012/05/douglas-p-horne/the-two-npic-zapruder-film-events-signposts-pointing-to-the-filmsalteration/) Doug Horne relates how at the second event at the National Photographic Interpretation Center involving the (altered) Zapruder film, the courier of the film, one purported Secret Service agent "Bill Smith" told the NPIC staff that he had just come from "Hawkeye Works."
Hawkeye Works was a secret CIA film laboratory affiliated with Kodak and located in Rochester, NY. It was closed in 2011.
This particular film was an un-slit film masquerading as a "camera original." The way that Zapruder's 8mm camera worked, it recorded half of the 16mm film on one side, then recorded the other half of the film on the other side. The film is then slit down the middle in processing, and the two strips spliced together to form one longer one.
The original Zapruder film was known to have been slit in Dallas when it was originally processed.
The fact that the film at the second NPIC was un-slit is one indication that it was an altered product. The fact that it came from the CIA's Hawkeye Works laboratory is another.
-----
Dealing with Critics of the Warren Report
A CIA "Dispatch" to its assets gave instructions on how to deal with critics of the Warren Report: by praising how "thorough" the investigation was, by saying that further speculative discussion was "without serious foundation" and "plays into the hands of the opposition" (i.e., Communist propaganda), and so on. The assets's "play" should suggest that critics were wedded to theories before the evidence was in, that critics were politically or financially interested in promoting their theories, that they were hasty and inaccurate in their research, or infatuated with their own theories--in other words, ad hominem attacks.
Never mind all the evidence that the Warren Report was faulty or just plain wrong. Never mind all the counter-evidence that led to the theories in the first place. Ad hominem attacks are logical fallacies. But that was really the only strategy they could use, because even if some conspiracy theorists may have jumped to erroneous conclusions, they had some valid reasons for doing so.
A CIA "Dispatch" to its assets gave instructions on how to deal with critics of the Warren Report: by praising how "thorough" the investigation was, by saying that further speculative discussion was "without serious foundation" and "plays into the hands of the opposition" (i.e., Communist propaganda), and so on. The assets's "play" should suggest that critics were wedded to theories before the evidence was in, that critics were politically or financially interested in promoting their theories, that they were hasty and inaccurate in their research, or infatuated with their own theories--in other words, ad hominem attacks.
Never mind all the evidence that the Warren Report was faulty or just plain wrong. Never mind all the counter-evidence that led to the theories in the first place. Ad hominem attacks are logical fallacies. But that was really the only strategy they could use, because even if some conspiracy theorists may have jumped to erroneous conclusions, they had some valid reasons for doing so.
The CIA Dispatch instructing its media assets how to deal with critics of the Warren Report. From https://ia800705.us.archive.org/30/items/COUNTERINGCRITICISMOFTHEWARRENREPORT/COUNTERING%20CRITICISM%20OF%20THE%20WARREN%20REPORT.pdf
-----
CIA and the Media
Investigative reporter Carl Bernstein, the same Carl Bernstein of the Woodward and Bernstein team that unraveled the Watergate scandal for the Washington Post, did an exposé of the CIA's presence in the mainstream media, published in the October 20, 1977 edition of Rolling Stone magazine (reprinted online at https://www.carlbernstein.com/the-cia-and-the-media-rolling-stone-10-20-1977).
Bernstein spent 6 months researching his article, and reported on the prevalence of the CIA's influence in American main stream media. It was a symbiotic relationship. The newspapers and magazines provided cover identities for CIA operatives, and many of the regular newsmen were on the CIA payroll. Bernstein specifically mentions the New York Times, CBS (Columbia Broadcast Services) and ABC (American Broadcast Company), Time and Newsweek and Life magazines, the Washington Post, the Louisville Courier-Journal, the New York Herald Tribune, the Copley Press, Penthouse, San Diego Union, Evening Tribune, the Saturday Evening Post, Scripps-Howard newspapers, Hearst newspapers, Associated Press, United Press International, Mutual Broadcasting System, Reuter's, and Miami Herald were "just a small part of the list" of organizations with CIA ties of various natures and degrees. Exactly what influence the CIA may have had on what was specifically published is not clear.
It is worth noting that Henry Luce, the founder of Time and Life magazines, had a strong link to the CIA in his close friendship with Allen Dulles. Luce's personal emissary to the CIA was C.D. Jackson. Jackson was a Time, Inc. vice-president and the publisher of Life magazine. It was under his direction that the Zapruder film publishing rights were bought from Abraham Zapruder.
Investigative reporter Carl Bernstein, the same Carl Bernstein of the Woodward and Bernstein team that unraveled the Watergate scandal for the Washington Post, did an exposé of the CIA's presence in the mainstream media, published in the October 20, 1977 edition of Rolling Stone magazine (reprinted online at https://www.carlbernstein.com/the-cia-and-the-media-rolling-stone-10-20-1977).
Bernstein spent 6 months researching his article, and reported on the prevalence of the CIA's influence in American main stream media. It was a symbiotic relationship. The newspapers and magazines provided cover identities for CIA operatives, and many of the regular newsmen were on the CIA payroll. Bernstein specifically mentions the New York Times, CBS (Columbia Broadcast Services) and ABC (American Broadcast Company), Time and Newsweek and Life magazines, the Washington Post, the Louisville Courier-Journal, the New York Herald Tribune, the Copley Press, Penthouse, San Diego Union, Evening Tribune, the Saturday Evening Post, Scripps-Howard newspapers, Hearst newspapers, Associated Press, United Press International, Mutual Broadcasting System, Reuter's, and Miami Herald were "just a small part of the list" of organizations with CIA ties of various natures and degrees. Exactly what influence the CIA may have had on what was specifically published is not clear.
It is worth noting that Henry Luce, the founder of Time and Life magazines, had a strong link to the CIA in his close friendship with Allen Dulles. Luce's personal emissary to the CIA was C.D. Jackson. Jackson was a Time, Inc. vice-president and the publisher of Life magazine. It was under his direction that the Zapruder film publishing rights were bought from Abraham Zapruder.
-----
CIA in Other Places
I found a personal connection to the CIA in an institution where I used to work, which came as a great surprise to me when I learned it. The National Technical Institute for the Deaf, where I used to work, is one of the colleges of the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT). I left NTID for a better job, and on a holiday break returned to visit old friends who still worked there, The entire institution was abuzz with the scandal of the CIA's involvement with the leadership of RIT. Not only President Rose, but also a number of other senior staff were reportedly on the CIA's payroll.
The RIT magazine Reporter (September 9, 2021) outlines the scandal and provides links to various related articles from the Democrat and Chronicle newspaper: https://reporter.rit.edu/6460/orientation-2021/cap-and-dagger/#:~:text=Another%20article%20covered%20an%20alleged,over%20educational%20programs%20at%20RIT.
Here is one of the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle articles about the scandal:
I found a personal connection to the CIA in an institution where I used to work, which came as a great surprise to me when I learned it. The National Technical Institute for the Deaf, where I used to work, is one of the colleges of the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT). I left NTID for a better job, and on a holiday break returned to visit old friends who still worked there, The entire institution was abuzz with the scandal of the CIA's involvement with the leadership of RIT. Not only President Rose, but also a number of other senior staff were reportedly on the CIA's payroll.
The RIT magazine Reporter (September 9, 2021) outlines the scandal and provides links to various related articles from the Democrat and Chronicle newspaper: https://reporter.rit.edu/6460/orientation-2021/cap-and-dagger/#:~:text=Another%20article%20covered%20an%20alleged,over%20educational%20programs%20at%20RIT.
Here is one of the Rochester Democrat and Chronicle articles about the scandal:
image from https://democratandchronicle.newspapers.com/article/democrat-and-chronicle/76474188/
RIT has other connections to the JFK assassination. For one, it is the institution that "certified" the Oswald "Backyard" photographs to be "authentic." Knowing as we do now the CIA connections that the Institute had at the time, it brings into question whether or not we can actually trust that "certification." See "REPORT TO THE HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE ON ASSASSINATIONS U.S. CONGRESS--HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES THE OSWALD BACKYARD PHOTOGRAPHS" (found at https://www.davidhazy.org/andpph/text-oswald-HSCA-report.html).
The other connection that RIT has with the Kennedy assassination lies with a man named Quentin Schwinn, who was a senior photography student nearing graduation. Schwinn was approached by a CIA recruiter apparently affiliated with the campus, who knew of his interest in the JFK assassination and used that interest to entice him to join the spy agency. The recruiter showed Schwinn one or more autopsy photographs, and promised that all would be revealed if Schwinn agreed to join the Agency. Schwinn did not agree. And later, he commissioned an artist to reproduce what he saw. This is the drawing that Schwinn commissioned:
The other connection that RIT has with the Kennedy assassination lies with a man named Quentin Schwinn, who was a senior photography student nearing graduation. Schwinn was approached by a CIA recruiter apparently affiliated with the campus, who knew of his interest in the JFK assassination and used that interest to entice him to join the spy agency. The recruiter showed Schwinn one or more autopsy photographs, and promised that all would be revealed if Schwinn agreed to join the Agency. Schwinn did not agree. And later, he commissioned an artist to reproduce what he saw. This is the drawing that Schwinn commissioned:
Image taken from https://drive.google.com/file/d/1w-LbMlxL-vVfgHfe3HcMK0d-wnxDUuEq/view?pli=1
Note the small wound above the right eye, just at the hairline, as well as the small throat wound that in no way resembles the gaping gash seen in the purported autopsy photographs. Note also that there is no damage to the face, and no apparent blow-out at the upper-right part of the front of the head. The Parkland doctors were consistent that the large head wound was at the back of the head, not the front. This drawing matches what they saw, aside from the wound near the hairline. The fact that most of the Parkland staff didn't see this small forehead/temple wound can be explained by its being hidden by Kennedy's thick head of hair. Dr. Charles Crenshaw, however, did see this wound, and went public with what he saw on the April 3, 1992 episode of the 20/20 show. It also matches the autopsy photographs that White House photographer Robert Knudsen described to his family when he explained that hair had been "drawn in" to autopsy photos.
The forehead/temple wound location also matches the account of young Alan Smith as printed in the Chicago Tribune. Smith's account shows that he was positioned almost directly below the shooter's window, about 15 feet away from the President, when he saw Kennedy shot in the "forehead."
The forehead/temple wound location also matches the account of young Alan Smith as printed in the Chicago Tribune. Smith's account shows that he was positioned almost directly below the shooter's window, about 15 feet away from the President, when he saw Kennedy shot in the "forehead."