Posts: 955
Threads:276
Joined: May 2016
Reputation:
35
Stance Critic
CIA's Coverup
George Joannides is all the proof needed that the CIA had a need to coverup the facts in the assassination of JFK. Joannides was called out of retirement by the CIA to act as the CIA's liason with the HSCA.
There was an excellent reason for this action by the CIA - Joannides knew "where the bodies were buried"... he was heavily involved in the Anti-Castro movement. Joannides directed and financed Directio Revolucionario Estudantil (DRE), translated as the Student Revolutionary Directorate, that consisted of a group of Cuban exiles whose officers had contact with Oswald in the months before the assassination.
Yet Joannides hid these very pertinent facts from the HSCA.
Believers have no refutation for these facts. Nor can they explain how these facts can be related to their favorite scenario - where simply a lone nut assassinates the President.
Posts: 955
Threads:276
Joined: May 2016
Reputation:
35
Stance Critic
RE: CIA's Coverup
Anyone notice that our forum's resident believer had nothing to say?
Which, of course, merely supported my statement that they have no refutation for the incriminating methodology of the CIA when it came to the HSCA.
Posts: 450
Threads:11
Joined: May 2016
Reputation:
0
Stance WCR Supporter
RE: CIA's Coverup
The CIA is not transparent Ben, but they sure as hell were not behind the assassination. Oswald did that all by his lonesome.....sure the CIA must havehas tabs on Ozzie - he wasin the USSR for God's sake.
Posts: 450
Threads:11
Joined: May 2016
Reputation:
0
Stance WCR Supporter
RE: CIA's Coverup
As I stated clearly Ben, it is my perogative to address any questions you ask or points you make - or NOT.
If I do not answer a question it does not mean I cannot. It simply means I don't care to or don't have the inclination or time to.
I have stated that I will aim to spend maybe half an hour per week reading posts here and maybe asnwering some.
There is no point "debating" with you - no one will change your mind on the case and you ar elargely incapable of meaningful debate anyway as you have demonstrated palpably with your ridiculous post calling me a liar when I simply linked you to a comment made by Mac K that indicated Dr Perry was the source of info that JFK had died of a head wound.
Whether he was or not is not a matter of my opinion, it could have been another doctor - who cares. It was obvious it was a gunshot wound to the head.
Anyway I think I have had my 30 minutes for this week. Looking forward to the next bunch of howlers....well sort of. Pip Pip Ben.