There's been another curious John F. Kennedy Assassination documents release, and this one caught my eye because of something that it said about what the U.S. government agencies were not going to do. Here's the story:
I'm a sucker for documents like this, just like I'm a sucker for big artillery, big gemstones, bearer bonds, and large denomination financial instruments. So just stamp a document "Top Secret" or "Secret" and leave it in my box, and I'll read it. In the JFK case there is, of course, a large amount of relationships and connections between artillery, gems, bearer bonds and other large denomination financial instruments, and most regular readers of this website and of my books know what those relationships and connections are.
In this case, the document is addressed to the Director of the FBI, which at that time would be, of course, the notoriously corrupt J. Edgar Hoover. And if one reads the end of the document carefully, it's a typical fishing expedition from the CIA to the FBI to find out if the FBI has in its files anything concerning the subjects of the document, a Swedish American named Adolph Jay Albrecht, who while on a visit to Sweden in April of 1963, visited a former girlfriend, Charlotte Aberg, who informed him that an acquaintance of hers named Karl-Erik Ridderstrale said that President Kennedy would be assassinated while on a trip to his people. Ridderstrale allegedly said this while drunk in her presence on November 15, exactly a week before the assassination actually occurred.
There are two things I cannot get out of my head here. The first is the fact known to most John Kennedy assassination researchers that there were many people with foreknowledge of the event: their names are well known: Rose Charamie, Joseph Milteer, a "George Bush"(!). But how and why would someone in Sweden know, even if, as the document alleges, he was a supporter of Castro? That would imply a Cuban intelligence-to-Swedish intelligence-to-Swedish nobility pipeline, an unlikely conduit by any estimation.
What is also unusual here is that, beyond this inquiry to the FBI, there is no evidence - at least not forthcoming so far - that this potential source of information was investigated any further.
But there is, as I mentioned, a second thing that is very disturbing, and this thing prompts my high octane speculation today. In addition to noting who the document is addressed to (J. Edgar Hoover), note who the document is from: the "Deputy Director of Plans", who at the time of the generation of the document (apparently December of 1964) was none other than Richard Helms.
Yes, that Richard Helms.
And whenever I see the name of Richard Helms connected to anything relating to the Clowns In America or covert operations of any sort, my antennae immediately start pulsing with suspicion and my suspicion meter's needle immediately goes into the purple zone, for Helms epitomizes a kind of man-who-lost-his-soul, not in the simplistic one-dimensional sense of a Bai Den Dzho, but more in the sense of a hall of mirrors. It may be in there somewhere, but it's lost in a labyrinth of lies, deceptions, false reflections and so on.
His possible presence as the generator of this document throws open all sorts of possibilities, which makes a follow-up on this release all but essential. Among those possibilities are these (1) that the document is entirely false, and generated merely to divert the FBI's attention from something the Clowns, or Helms himself, did not want found, a very unlikely possibility, because the FBI would have quickly exposed any attempt at deflection (Hoover's FBI was as corrupt as the current one, but it was still competent); (2) that the document was intended to "prod" the FBI into an investigation of the Swedish American (Albrecht) at the beginning of the chain of connections in the allegation, for the legal reason that the Clowns were not authorized by law to conduct espionage on American soil or against Americans. Given Helms' character and subsequent activities and attitudes, this is a stretch for my imagination; or (3) the document is a disguised alert to the FBI (and Hoover) to "watch out" for this one along the lines of "here's a loose end we need to watch."
There are of course, lots of other possibilities, and that, really, is the point. It needs to be investigated and run down. It's not every day one has a memo from Richard Helms' office, to J. Edgar Hoover's office, about the foreknowledge of a presidential assassination by a foreign national in "neutral" Sweden.
I've concluded that, whatever his other faults and crimes, while J. Edgar was certainly compromised on the investigation but he was not "in" on the assassination of JFK.
For example. there's an FBI memo where Hoover has heard that someone is going around New Orleans passing themselves off with the same name as an FBI informant--Lee Oswald--and he wants someone to check into it. This was probably an artifact of "Harvey and Lee" running around. If Hoover wasn't even aware of the situation at that level, how deep could he have been?
As for Joseph Farrell, I've also concluded that he's a disinformation agent. Ever notice that he seems to be a widely knowledgeable person with a tremendous amount to say about many subjects from a deeply informed viewpoint, but that it never actually leads anywhere? That's a pretty good formula for constructing a disinformation agent, isn't it?
Declassified JFK Documents Reveal Swedish Man Predicted JFK’s Assassination, 10 Days Beforehand Said ‘Within Two Weeks President Kennedy Would Be Assassinated on a Trip Among His Own People’
I've concluded that, whatever his other faults and crimes, while J. Edgar was certainly compromised on the investigation but he was not "in" on the assassination of JFK.
For example. there's an FBI memo where Hoover has heard that someone is going around New Orleans passing themselves off with the same name as an FBI informant--Lee Oswald--and he wants someone to check into it. This was probably an artifact of "Harvey and Lee" running around. If Hoover wasn't even aware of the situation at that level, how deep could he have been?
As for Joseph Farrell, I've also concluded that he's a disinformation agent. Ever notice that he seems to be a widely knowledgeable person with a tremendous amount to say about many subjects from a deeply informed viewpoint, but that it never actually leads anywhere? That's a pretty good formula for constructing a disinformation agent, isn't it?