Oswald in the doorway: the blog of the Oswald Innocence Campaign, by Ralph Cinque

David Talbot's book, The Devil's Chessboard,  is about Allen Dulles, but it's about much more than that. I would say from having read it that no more than half the pages are directly about Dulles. There is extensive biographical information about other people, besides Dulles. And there is a lot about the times in general. 

But, the part of the book that has received the most attention, the most spotlighting, is the part about Dulles' connection to and involvement in the JFK assassination. And that's the part I'd like to discuss.

First, the disappointing news is that Talbot doesn't provide anything that would likely have gotten Dulles convicted. It's all circumstantial stuff: him knowing and having close association with other people who are also suspected of being involved. I suspect a jury would have treated Dulles no different than they treated Clay Shaw. 

But nevertheless, and in spite of that, it's still impressive. It is to me. And, I don't think we should be surprised that Allen Dulles didn't leave any outright smoking guns. He was, after all, a lawyer, and he was also the "Gentleman Spy" as they called him. So, surely he would know how to cover his tracks.

Let's take the example of William Harvey. Bill Harvey is, of course, remembered for being involved in the Bay of Pigs, and also in plots to kill Castro. It was Bill Harvey who brought in Johnny Roselli to try to kill Castro, and they became very close friends. Bill Harvey liked working with Mafia guys. He was also very big on killing, in general. He was pro-murder when it came to achieving the CIA's objectives anywhere in the world.  

Dulles and Harvey were close. It was Dulles who brought Harvey into the Bay of Pigs operation and the murder-Castro schemes. Apparently, the fat-faced Harvey

was the dirtiest dirty-op guy there ever was. Didn't fit the stereotype, did he? 

Here is a letter that Dulles wrote to Harvey in 1966, apologizing for not being there to visit with him when Harvey came to Washington.

Now, have you ever done that? Written a letter to a guy apologizing for being out of town when he visited? How good of friends would you have have to be to do that? 

So, what happened is that after the Bay of Pigs fiasco, Bill Harvey was sent to Rome to do the CIA's dirty work there. They were concerned about the Italian Communist party doing well in elections, and they wanted to take every measure to prevent that, including murder. So, Harvey was their guy. He became the CIA station chief in Rome. And working under him was a guy named Mark Wyatt. 

Well, Wyatt found out, quite by accident, that Bill Harvey interrupted his good work for the fine people of Italy ('dirty wops', as he called them) to make a sudden trip to Dallas, Texas in November 1963, shortly before the JFK assassination. And when Wyatt asked Harvey what the purpose of the trip was, Harvey answered evasively, "just taking care of business, seeing what is going on". Something like that.  Never did he reveal what he went there for, and one time, he even drew a gun on Wyatt. Harvey was a very volatile guy. And get this: to this day, the CIA has refused to release the travel vouchers on Bill Harvey, and that's despite the fact that the legislation passed in association with the ARRB required them to do it. They just haven't done it, and no one has made them do it. 

Now, if you ask me, the fact that William Harvey, who was stationed in Rome, Italy, and was assigned to try to interfere in Italian elections, etc., suddenly made a trip to Dallas, TX shortly before the JFK assassination, for which he never accounted for or explained, I consider that a smoking gun. I consider that evidence of William Harvey's complicity in the murder of JFK. 

And the reason is very simple: I don't believe in coincidences. Never have; never will. From another part of the world, Bill Harvey flew to the scene of the crime shortly before it happened. and without even providing an alternative reason for going there other than "preparing to kill Kennedy." Apparently, he couldn't think of one. He couldn't think of a good lie. So, he took the 5th. And, I imagine if it had come to trial, he literally would have taken the 5th when asked what his purpose was in going to Dallas. 

I shall continue discussing the specifics of David Talbot's case against Allen Dulles in the murder of JFK.