The Winnipeg Airport Incident
Three Views – Paris Flammonde, Peter Whitmey and John Bevilaqua
from The Kennedy Conspiracy, Meredith Press, New York, 1969, pages 29–32
The Winnipeg Free Press reported that an FBI man, Merryl Nelson, had checked out a story told by a local businessman whose name was withheld for “security reasons” until November 1967. At that timeMaclean’s, a leading Canadian magazine, ran a more complete coverage of the fascinating incident.
The informant, an obviously sincere and sensible Mennonite, and father of four, named Richard Giesbrecht, related a conversation he overheard on February 13, 1964, in the Horizon Room, a cocktail lounge in the sweepingly modern Winnipeg International Airport. The nature of the conversation led the thirty-five-year-old businessman, who was at the flight terminal to meet a client, to quickly conclude the two participants had knowledge regarding the assassination of the President. The more he listened, the more he became certain of his suspicions.
He described one of the men as having “the oddest hair and eyebrows I’d ever seen. The eyebrows were wide and sort of streaky. The hair was very shiny and it started quite far back on his head.” Giesbrecht thought this one of the pair resembled Stan Laurel “when he gets that look as if he’s going to cry,” and he recalls he wore heavy-rimmed glasses. Giesbrecht now says this man was David W. Ferrie.
Ferrie’s companion was described as being, like the pilot, in his middle or late forties, with reddish blond hair and a badly pockmarked neck and jaw. He wore a hearing aid and spoke with a possibly “Latin” accent.
The witness remembered that the men wore casual clothes; light tweed suits and loafer-type shoes. He thought both were homosexuals.
Ferrie indicated he was concerned over how much Oswald had told his wife about the plot to kill Kennedy. Additionally, they discussed a man named Isaacs, his relationship with Oswald, and how curious it was that he would have gotten himself involved with a “psycho” like Oswald.
Isaacs seemed to have allowed himself to be caught on television film near the President when Kennedy arrived in Dallas, and, at the time the conversation was taking place, was under the surveillance of a man named Hoffman, or Hochman, who was to “relieve” him and destroy a 1958 model automobile in Isaacs’ possession.
Richard Giesbrecht heard Ferrie say that “we have more money at our disposal now than at any other time.”
The conversation moved to another area and the two began speaking of a meeting to take place at the Townhouse Motor Hotel in Kansas City, Missouri, on March 18. They mentioned that the rendezvous would be registered under the name of a textile firm. It was noted that no meeting had been held since November, 1963.
Ferrie mentioned that an “aunt” (or “auntie”?—gay patois for an older homosexual) would be flying in from California. A name which Giesbrecht thought sounded like “Romeniuk” was mentioned several times; Ferrie inquired about some paper, or merchandise, coming out of Nevada and the other man replied that things had gotten too risky and that the house, or shop, at a place called Mercury had been closed down, but that a “good shipment” had reached Caracas from Newport.
It was also agreed that the Warren Commission would not stop its investigation, even if it did decide Oswald was guilty.
Giesbrecht began to realize that the conversation behind him had dwindled into an innocuous exchange. He became a little “jittery or excited,” and decided to leave and contact the police. As he prepared for his departure, he heard Ferrie remark that he had flown a plane like one standing a short distance beyond the window of the cocktail lounge.
As Giesbrecht quietly slipped from his booth, he became conscious that an entirely new—to him, anyway—element had been introduced into the situation. He was being coldly eyed by a third man who, he now sensed, had been watching him for some time from another table. This ominous individual was about thirty-five, fair-haired, flushed-cheeked, with a slightly deformed nose. He stood about six feet tall, weighed about two hundred pounds, and may have been left-handed. The man from Winnipeg thought that this hand might have been tattooed or scarred.
The overhearer was trailed from the Horizon Room and found the big man standing between him and the stairs leading up to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police office on the next (ground) floor of the airport. Getting to a telephone, he began relating the situation to an RCMP corporal at the downtown headquarters. However, as he saw that the man was rapidly approaching him, he hung up and raced off. Finally, a couple of floors and many doors later he found he had successfully eluded the man, or been abandoned by him. He telephoned his lawyer who contacted the United States Consulate which in turn brought in the FBI.
Giesbrecht was quoted in the Maclean’sarticle as being rather confused by the Bureau’s behavior.
“This looks like the break we’ve been waiting for,” he said FBI agent Merryl Nelson had told him. Then, a few months later, he recalled that he was informed that he should forget about the entire episode as it was “too big,” and “we can’t protect you in Canada.”
On February 23, 1967, while visiting a friend in a hospital, Giesbrecht saw a photograph of David Ferrie in a newspaper. The face pictured struck him as familiar; then he remembered it as that of one of the men he had overheard in the airport.
The Winnipeg Free Press broke his story and one of Jim Garrison’s aides got in touch with him. At last he had found an official who actually wanted to pursue his evidence. Telephone calls were exchanged, including conversations between Giesbrecht and Garrison.
In September, according to Maclean’s, he tentatively agreed to testify at Clay Shaw’s forthcoming trial.
Garrison accepts Ferrie, who was easily recognizable because of his red wig and false eyebrows, as one of the Winnipeg men. It has been suggested that another of the men many have been Maj. L. M. Bloomfield, a former OSS officer, now living in Montreal. Bloomfield was among the members of the board of directors of the CIA-sponsored Centro Mondiale Commerciale in Rome—an organization which also had Clay Shaw on its board.
The author felt that this new development was of sufficient importance to warrant a personal inquiry and Giesbrecht was called, in Winnipeg, from New York. He agreed to answer a few questions. That conversation, between the witness and the author, went as follows:
Q. Is there any doubt in your mind that the conversation you overheard [at the Winnipeg Airport] referred to the conspiracy relating to the assassination of the President?
A. Oh, yes. Most definitely [it was].
Q. There is no doubt in your mind?
A. No, none at all.
Q. From the photographs you have seen of David Ferrie, how certain are you that he was one of the two men talking?
A. Well, I’ll put it this way. It was a photo three years after—that I’d seen this man—three years after—without even seeing a story on it, that immediately this stuck out. And I had identified this man three years previous, but not knowing it was a man by the name of Ferrie, you know.
Q. When was the first time you ever saw a photograph of Ferrie?
A. About five or six months ago.
Q. Therefore there would have been a three-year lapse between seeing the man and the photograph?
A. Right, right.
Q. Yet, on the basis of that, what would you say your certainty that it was Ferrie was? Fifty percent? Eighty percent?
A. I would say a hundred percent.
Although declining to comment on whether he had been recently contacted by the FBI or any other United States government intelligence agency, he did recall that he had been initially told that this “was the break they’d probably been looking for.” However, although remarking that he thought the FBI “had done a good job, maybe; the only thing [being] that it is not in the open … what their actual investigation is, I don’t know.”
Giesbrecht had originally mentioned that among the things overheard was a word which sounded like “Romeniuk.” As eastern European undertones had suggested themselves in other aspects of the various investigations, the author inquired whether the word might have been Romanian,” but he did not know. Similarly, shadowy clergy of some branches of the Old Catholic Church in this country had repeatedly appeared in the background. Asked whether any mention had been made of the Old Catholic Church, or related religious bodies, he replied: “No comment.”
The author sought more information regarding the mysterious Winnipeg Airport conversationalists. Giesbrecht continued:
A. I don’t know the size of them. I didn’t see either one of the two standing up. The color of the hair? The one that I thought was Ruby [sic; Ferrie?] would have been a very light brown or red, and the other fellow, he would be blondish, grayish, you know, blond-gray, between red and blond, turning gray.
Q. Right. Do you have any idea who the man was, other than Ferrie?
A. At that time, or now?
A. Well, I again would say “no comment” there.
Q. Right. But you have no doubt about the one man being Ferrie?
A. No, no doubt in my mind.
Q. So, in summation, we may say that in your mind there is no question that it was Ferrie, you have no comment at this time on who the second man might have been, you have no comment on whether you have been contacted by any intelligence agencies recently.
The Winnipeg Airport Incident Revisited
by Peter R. Whitmey
From The Fourth Decade, March, 1999. Posted with the permission of Peter Whitmey.
Ever since I first became aware of the “Winnipeg Airport Incident” while readingCoup D’Etat in America twelve years ago, (providing a brief and somewhat misleading reference, but which led me to other sources), I have attempted to collect as many of the primary and secondary documents as possible. After writing my first article on the subject (“The Man Who Heard Too Much,” Nov. 1990, TTD), based on secondary material as well as numerous interviews, I was pleased to learn from researcher Bill Adams that he had been able to obtain some relevant material from the “Boxley file” through AARC. Included was “Commission No. 645” — the six-page detailed report provided to the Warren Commission by the FBI (dated March 6, 1964), which had been prepared by the Minneapolis office, based on an interview with Winnipeg resident Richard Giesbrecht, conducted by SA Merle Nelson from the FBI’s Grand Forks, ND office.
I also received some documents (but not all) through a FOIPA application, in several stages, which began arriving a year after writing to the FBI. Included amongst them were teletypes sent to FBI offices in Kansas City, Las Vegas and Dallas, dated March 2 and 3, 1964, giving specific instructions to check out certain “leads,” along with a detailed summary of the Winnipeg Airport Incident. However, when the official six-page report was distributed on March 6, the cover pages attached to it list one new lead for the New York City office to check out in place of the previous Dallas lead. (I discussed partial results of these leads in my second article “The Winnipeg Airport Incidents” — TFD, Nov. 1995.)
With the formation of the Assassination Record Review Board in 1992 and the subsequent creation of the NARA website (“Kennedy Assassination Records Collection”), I was finally able to do my own search for other possible documents related to the Winnipeg Airport Incident. When I first used the database, I entered the name “Richard Giesbrecht,” which resulted in a listing of thirteen documents, all of which I had received through my earlier FOIPA application. However, I soon discovered other relevant summary pages that did not include the name “Giesbrecht”.
One of the most important, given its proximity to the events of Feb. 13, 1964, is a seven-page, hand-written letter from Mr. Giesbrecht’s lawyer, Harry Backlin (who had represented him and his brother in business dealings for several years) to Mr. John H. Morris, the U.S. Consulate General in Winnipeg, dated Feb. 18, 1964. The letter was headed “Absolutely Personal” and began:
“Further to our recent telephone conversation in which I set forth certain personal and confidential information concerning the Oswald case. I am writing this memorandum because I do not wish the information herein contained to get into too many hands. I have your undertaking that this information shall be dealt with in the strictest confidence.”
Backlin pointed out “..Before passing the information on to you, I checked out the man and firmly believe that what he has divulged to me is fact.” (As it turned out, the FBI ended up concluding that Giesbrecht had an overactive imagination.) The remainder of the letter outlines the comments which Mr. Giesbrecht had overheard and noted in writing (he tore up his notes while driving home, but his brother assisted him in rewriting them that evening.)
Here are some excerpts:
“On the afternoon of Feb. 13th my client, a salesman, had an appointment to meet a customer at the new International Airport. My client arrived early and sat in the cocktail lounge to have a drink. After finishing his drink he walked around the new building…then returned to the same table…Immediately behind him were seated two men who were not there previously…he could overhear them talking about the Oswald case. One of the men was wondering ‘how much Oswald really knew’ and ‘how much does she know.’ [This was undoubtedly a reference to Marina, who had testified before the Warren Commission on Feb. 4; her photo was on the cover of the most recent issue of Time.]
A name was mentioned — sounding like ‘Isaacs’ — who was apparently seen on film after the landing.’ [The FBI later wrote ‘Love Field’ next to this comment in the six-page report.]
Further conversation could be heard in bits and pieces, such as…’if Oswald is found guilty the bureau will not stop investigation.’ They talked about ‘merchandise coming from Nevada…too risky in the past months. We’ll have to close shop temporarily.’ My client couldn’t hear everything too clearly about the next matter but it related (to) the subject of ‘mercury’.”
Reference was made in Backlin’s detailed letter to a planned “sales meeting,” the first “since November,” to be held “in a place sounding like Townhouse in Kansas City”. Mention was made of the names “Kellogg” and “Broadway,” which turned out to be the main streets in downtown Wichita, KA, where the Townhouse Motor Hotel was located. It would appear that the proposed meeting was slated for March 18, and a “banquet room” had been reserved for the unidentified group in the name of a “textile firm”.
Backlin’s client (not identified by name in the letter) recalled reference being made to “…the name of a person soundling like ‘Hoffman” or “Hauckman” [Troy Houghton of the Minutemen perhaps?] in conjunction again with this man ‘Isaacs’.” Isaacs was to be relieved and the car destroyed [the FBI report identified it as a 1958 Dodge].
One of the men could clearly be overheard saying ‘ Isaacs, a man with such a good record would get involved with a psyco (sic)…like Oswald.'” This comment would suggest that “Isaacs” had become a liability to the group because of his connection to Oswald, and implies that the two men were primarily concerned with “guilt by association” in the assassination of JFK.
Backlin goes on to describe a third man who was sitting in front of Giesbrecht, “staring at him” while he was taking notes. Giesbrecht got the impression the man was “trying to get the attention of the other two because the conversation switched to an aeroplane standing outside the building”. As Giesbrecht got up and left the cocktail lounge (which also included a restaurant), the “third man got up and followed him.” When Giesbrecht headed for the stairs that led to an RCMP office on the main floor, the “third man” was standing there, so instead he headed for a phone and spoke to a “Mr. Pollack of the RCMP, but hung up when he saw the man start walking towards him.” However, he was able to leave the building “without the man bothering him.”
After leaving the airport, Giesbrecht noticed a friend at a bus stop and picked him up on his way downtown (he was later identified as “David Rock” in the cover pages of the FBI’s report, who is apparently deceased.) Backlin had been “unable to contact this man to confirm that my client spoke to him about ‘something very important’ and what he would do if he had something like that to contend with.” However, Backlin had been able to “confirm that Mr. Pollack spoke to my client and he confirmed the conversation.” He also learned from Giesbrecht that after speaking to his wife, she had suggested that he contact Backlin (Mrs. Giesbrecht is still alive, but has always refused to speak to me about the incident. I had spoken to Mr. Giesbrecht three times in 1987, although he pretended to be a relative, but a year later he asked me not to contact him again. This was likely because of pressure from his wife, who had not wanted her husband to “go public” in the first place.)
Backlin indicated that his client “seems to be able to describe these men with some degree of accuracy. He has never seen them before or since,” although no descriptions are provided in the letter (however, the FBI’s report did include a description of each of the three men, one of whom Giesbrecht identified three years later as being David Ferrie, after his picture appeared on the front page of the Winnipeg Tribune, a day after his death in New Orleans. Giesbrecht also told the FBI that the man speaking to “Ferrie” might have been named “Romaniuk”).
It would appear that Backlin met with his client on Feb. 14, only a day after the incident at the airport, in that he states that he had spoken to Giesbrecht “…a number of times since Friday,” although he had “not had the opportunity of re-examining my client.” However, he emphasized again that he was “…sure that the facts related are not of his imagination.” He also pointed out that his client did not “…wish his name disclosed but will give his story to the proper authorities only if it is made a condition that his name be kept absolutely confidential. He is quite fearful of what may happen and his wife does not want him to become involved too deeply.”
As it turned out, Giesbrecht became frustrated at not being contacted by the Warren Commission after his FBI interview (on Feb. 27 at the Marlborough Hotel in downtown Winnipeg), and contacted the station manager at the Pembina, ND television station in early April (whom the FBI subsequently interviewed.) When a proposed interview fell through, Giesbrecht spoke to a radio station announcer in Winnipeg, who encouraged Giesbrecht to speak to a reporter at the Winnipeg Free Press (Don Newman, now a distinquished television reporter for CBC-Newsworld). His account was a front-page story in the May 2, 1964 issue, although his name was not revealed. A copy was later sent to SA Merle Nelson at the Grand Forks, ND office by RCMP Constable D. P. Wershler, who still lives in Winnipeg.
In the meanwhile, the Minneapolis office of the FBI, who were in charge of the investigation, had sent out teletypes summarizing Nelson’s interview to the Dallas, Kansas City, and Las Vegas offices (as well as Headquarters) on March 2 and 3, 1964, along with three “leads:” 1) Dallas was to check “indices to determine whether the name ‘Isaacs’ has ever appeared in the Oswald or Kennedy investigation; 2) K. C. was to check out the reference to the “Townhouse” and a possible meeting to be held on March 18; 3) Las Vegas was to check the reference to a shop or building in “Mercury, Nevada” that might have closed recently.
As I have previously reported, SA Carl Freeman of the Las Vegas reported back on March 4 that Mercury, Nevada was actually an “atomic testing site” and that there was no evidence of any business or shop closing or planning to close, nor was there any “identifiable information with the last name of ROMANIUK…” in either the AEC’s files or those of the FBI and Sheriff’s offices in Las Vegas.
In my second article “The Winnipeg Airport Incidents,” I had stated that I had no idea whether or not the Kansas City or Wichita offices followed up on the “Townhouse” lead, since I had not received any document in this regard as a result of my FOIPA request. However, by inputting “Townhouse Motor Hotel” during a search of the NARA website, I discovered that there was, indeed, a four-page report, dated April 9, 1964. Initially, the FBI in Kansas City made inquiries with the Townhouse Motor Hotel on Seventh and State Streets in Kansas City, Kansas, as well as the Coates House Hotel on Tenth and Broadway in Kansas City, Missouri to no avail. In addition, the report included the results of a further investigation conducted by the Wichita, Kansas office, after discovering that there was a Townhouse Motel on the corners of Kellogg and Broadway. As in the case of K.C., there was no reservation for a textile group scheduled on or about March 18, nor for anyone by the name “Romaniuk,” according to both the hotel and the Wichita Chamber of Commerce. There was no indication, however, as to whether such a meeting might have been cancelled, prior to March 18, at which time the FBI believed the Townhouse was in Kansas City.
The initial lead related to the name “Isaacs,” directed to the Dallas FBI office, had intriguing results. Back on Dec. 21, 1963, almost two months before Giesbrecht’s allegations surfaced, the Dallas office had sent a teletype to the San Francisco office (44-1639-3139) with the following directions:
“Note pad obtained from Ruby when arrested contained name Chuck Isaacs. Investigation reveals wife of Charles R. Isaacs, ticket agent, American Airlines, formerly assigned Dallas, now assigned San Francisco, made costumes for Ruby’s dancers. San Francisco locate Isaacs and obtain all info. re: associates and activities of Ruby & relationship if any between Ruby & Oswald.”
On Dec. 23, 1963 the San Francisco office sent a teletype to Dallas with the following instructions:
“American Airlines advises Isaacs presently on vacation in the Dallas, Tex., area and will not return until after the first of the year. Dallas interview Isaacs as set out in retel.”
At the bottom of the teletype is a handwritten notation indicating that the instructions had been “covered” and that a teletype had been sent to “…SF, 1/2/64 for interviewing Isaacs & wife.” On a faded copy of the teletype, the two agents involved are listed in the handwriting of one of them, namely Clements and Sayers, with the notation “Cc pulled for DL lead.”
As stated above, the Dallas office contacted the San Francisco office again by teletype on Jan. 2, 1964, advising them of the following results:
“Remytel December twenty-one, sixty-three and urtel December twenty-three, sixty-three concerning interview of Chuck Isaacs and wife. Dallas unable to locate Isaacs. Since Isaacs returning to San Francisco after first of year, San Francisco handle interview of Isaacs and wife re: Ruby and Oswald…JWS.”
On Jan. 6, 1964 the San Francisco office sent “25 copies each of an FD-302 reflecting interviews with Charles R. Isaacs and Mrs. Charles R. Isaacs” to the Dallas office, along with an Airtel, advising Dallas, if not already done so, to “…locate and interview BRECK WALL and JOE PETERSON, producers of shows in the Dallas area, who are acquainted with Ruby. They may possibly be located through JOE REICHMAN, an orchestra leader at the Century Room, Adolphus Hotel, Dallas, Texas.” These names had been derived from the interviews with the Isaacs.
As for the interviews with Mr. and Mrs. Isaacs, it was revealed by both that Ruby had given Mrs. Isaacs a “bogus check” about three years ago for some costume work she had done, and when confronted with the check, Ruby had subsequently paid her in cash. There was no comment as to why Chuck Isaacs’ name, place of employment, and home phone number (as of 1961) were in Ruby’s notebook, which was the initial reason for locating him. When I spoke to Isaacs’ former wife (who lives in San Antonio under a different last name) in 1991, she was sure that it was her name that appeared in Ruby’s notebook (it wasn’t, as displayed in the Warren volumes — Armstrong Exhibit, No. 5309-A.)
It could be that Isaacs was more involved with Ruby than he was willing to admit to either his wife or the FBI. I find it puzzling why the FBI did not find out the reason for Ruby having listed Isaacs in his notebook — a notebook which was referred to by Burt Griffin during his interview with Curtis Laverne Crafard on April 9, 1964 (Crafard has since reverted back to the correct spelling of his name which is “C-R-A-F-O-R-D”). What is even more puzzling is the fact that the Dallas FBI did not reinterview Charles Isaacs (or have the San Francisco office do so.)
Instead, a teletype was sent to the New York office on March 3, 1964, most of which is a summary of Giesbrecht’s allegations, along with instructions for the New York office to reinterview social worker Martin Isaacs, whose name and business address were listed in Oswald’s notebook. He had been interviewed by the FBI on Dec. 17. The Dallas office asked New York to obtain from Isaacs “…his whereabouts on November twenty-two last, and…any information to help resolve identities and conversations in retel.” Copies were sent to the K.C., Las Vegas and Minneapolis offices.
The New York FBI office sent an airtel to Headquarters on Mar. 4, 1964 with copies sent to Dallas, K.C., Las Vegas and Minneapolis re: Richard Giesbrecht, indicating Mr. Isaacs, age 59 and an employee of the Dept. of Welfare for 30 years, had never been to Texas, and was working in his office on Nov. 22, 1963. He was not familiar with the names “Hoffman,” “Hauchtman” or “Romaniuk,” and didn’t recognize the descriptions of the men overheard and/or seen by Giesbrecht. He did not own a car, and knew nothing about a ’58 Dodge or possibly Mercury car. He had never been to either Kansas City or Winnipeg. In regard to his connection to the Oswalds, Isaacs indicated he had been contacted by the U.S. State Dep’t and asked to assist in the relocation of the Oswalds to Texas when they arrived in New York from Russia.
Obviously, the very questions that were put to Martin Isaacs should also have been put to Charles R. Isaacs, especially since he had been an employee of American Airlines at Love Field, and possibly was the person seen on film footage “after the landing”. Even if this was not on Nov. 22, 1963, it might have been earlier when JFK came to Dallas during his campaign for the presidency in 1960 (unless “the landing” refers to something else.)
Bill Turner, a former FBI agent andRamparts reporter, certainly recognized the possible connection between the “Isaacs” reference in Winnipeg and the “Chuck Isaacs” in Ruby’s notebook, as reflected in a memo he sent to Garrison on August 18, 1967. Turner suggested that “…ISAACS had some assignment in the assassination at the Dallas Love Field, but that he got too close to Kennedy, was in the news TV footage of the arrival, and therefore was considered hot by the conspirators and marked for elimination.” Turner thought it would be “…extremely interesting to find out if ISAACS could be the man named in the news article and whether he is still alive and well in Dallas…” Ironically, he was now living in the Bay Area, as was Turner.
In Jan. 1968 Giesbrecht’s story was referred to in the U.S. press for the first time, initially by Turner in his lengthy report for Rampartsabout the Garrison case. However, instead of repeating the content of his earlier memo, Turner switched to the possible identity of “Harold R. Isaacs,” listed in the title of CD 1080, one of numerous classified documents at the National Archives (listed in the appendix of Farewell America, which Turner was distributing to libraries and researchers.)
Prior to Turner’s article, Mary Ferrell had written her own memo to Garrison at the request of Tom Bethell, who had provided her the same classified CD titles (see his book The Electric Windmill). Having become aware of the Winnipeg Airport Incident, Mary discovered a 1961-63 listing in the Dallas directory under the name “Harold R. Isaacs” (and presumably also noticed a listing for “Charles R. Isaacs”) and made the following comment:
“Tom requested that I write what I remembered of the Harold R. Isaacs investigation. When I observed that Gen. Walker was ‘investigated’ in Boston by the F.B.I. on May 21, 1964, the thought occurred to me that Harold R. Isaacs, who was investigated by the F.B.I. in Boston on May 22, 1964, might also be from Dallas…”
At the end of her memo, after making reference to telephone listings under Harold Isaacs’ ex-wife and parents, with partial credit given to “Boxley” (actually William Wood) for locating Isaacs in the Houston area (which Wood later wrote about in a 1975 issue of the National Tattler, Mary made the following oblique statement:
“Please read the clipping from the Winnipeg paper re: the conversation overheard in the airport concerning Oswald and Isaacs and the meeting in Kansas City. There is no connection between Chuck Isaacs (in Ruby’s notebook) and our Harold R. Isaacs. I determined this in June. I can send you my reasoning on that point if you would like, but it is very conclusive.”
It would appear that Turner was persuaded to forget about Charles R. Isaacs, as a result of the efforts of Bethell, Boxley and Ferrell, even though it was a far more solid lead than the one associated with CD 1080 (which turned out to be a reference to Prof. Harold R. Isaacs of M.I.T., who was the target of right-wing journalist Paul Scott, and who had attempted to link the professor to several “Communists,” including Marilyn Murret, Oswald’s globe-trotting cousin from New Orleans, although unaware they were related.)
Shortly after the reference in Ramparts, Giesbrecht was profiled in the Jan. 28, 1968 issue of the National Enquirer, which included an interview with Garrison’s chief investigator, Louis Ivon. He revealed that the D.A.’s office “…was looking in Dallas for Chuck Isaacs and a Paul Hoffman…” After reading the article, a pilot for American Airlines, who had known Chuck Isaacs for several years both in Dallas and Tulsa (where Isaacs grew up), wrote to Garrison to let him know that Isaacs was now living in San Francisco. He described Isaacs as “…personable, alert, intelligent and somewhat of an operator.”
(In my conversation with the former pilot, he used the term “wheeler-dealer,” and was surprised to learn that Isaacs was married while in Dallas; he was also certain that Chuck had moved after the assassination.)
I also learned from my conversation with Isaacs’ second wife (whom I located with the help of a former Dallas neighbour) that her daughter (now deceased) showed theNational Enquirer article to her father, but he had not contacted Garrison himself (nor had he contacted the FBI about his wife’s contact with Ruby and his own possible connection, as suggested by the entry in Ruby’s notebook.)
Given how thoroughly the FBI had checked out various leads related to Giesbrecht’s allegations, it is hard to believe that the Dallas office overlooked Charles R. Isaacs, since his name would have been in their files once Ruby’s notebook was examined. The reference to a 1958 Dodge, which was to be destroyed, could also have connected events in Winnipeg with gunrunning activities in Dallas, involving the transfer of stolen weapons from a Dodge to a Thunderbird, only days before the assassination (as described in Oswald Talked, with links to both Ruby and Oswald.) Although the Thunderbird had been seized and the occupants arrested, the Dodge and its driver (possibly Isaacs himself) managed to flee the scene.
Even though I was able to locate Charles R. Isaacs in 1992 (as well as his son), I did not receive a reply to my letter, and later learned that Mr. Isaacs was diagnosed with Alzheimer’s, shortly after his third wife died, and that he was now in a rest home in Shreveport, La. The FBI might very well be relieved.
Recently, on the way to Minneapolis for a JFK assassination conference, I spent two days in Winnipeg researching this aspect of the case. While there, I was able to watch a ten-minute interview conducted with the late Richard Giesbrecht for a CBC-TV program called “Open Seasons;” the interview took place at the very table where Mr. Giesbrecht allegedly overheard the suspicious conversation, in the Horizon Room at the Winnipeg International Airport.
The interview was broadcast on Dec. 12, 1968, only a month or so before the Shaw trial got underway. This is almost a year since Giesbrecht had been interviewed by the National Enquirer and referred to briefly in William Turner’s Ramparts report. It also took place on the heels of the assassinations of both Martin Luther King and Robert F. Kennedy, and the turbulence at the Chicago Democratic convention. Under the circumstances, Mr. Giesbrecht would have been fully justified to cancel his agreement made with the New Orleans District Attorney, Jim Garrison, to testify at Shaw’s trial (which he had expected to begin in June, 1968.) I was led to believe that Giesbrecht had, in fact, already notified Garrison that he would not be coming to New Orleans, as a result of threats to his family’s welfare. However, when asked about his concern for his own safety during the interview, Giesbrecht indicated that since he had told the RCMP, the FBI and Garrison’s staff everything he knew, he didn’t feel there was any reason why he would be harmed, although he did state at a later point that his days were probably “numbered,” and had “mixed feelings” about having come forward in the first place. He also was familiar with Penn Jones’ study suggesting that there were as many as “32 mysterious deaths” associated with the JFK assassination (which had been discussed in a Canadian magazine the previous fall.) There was no indication that any threat had been made towards his wife or four children, however (one of whom drowned in 1969 in a motel pool in Detroit Lakes, Minn. at the age of nine.)
In addition to reviewing the highlights of his experience at the Winnipeg Airport on Feb. 13, 1964 (with no mention of David Ferrie, oddly enough, by either Giesbrecht or the interviewer), Giesbrecht also provided information suggesting a possible link between JFK’s assassination and that of Martin Luther King eight months earlier. He mentioned that he had been in contact with Arthur Haynes, one of James Earl Ray’s original lawyers, and William Huie, a reporter who was writing a book on MLK’s assassination in conjunction with the defense (who subsequently became convinced that Ray was a lone assassin.) While displaying a large police sketch, Giesbrecht referred to the “third man” who had followed him, when he left the airport lounge, as fitting Ray’s description of a man seen with him in Montreal (presumably Raoul,, although no name is mentioned). Apparently, Ray’s new lawyer (Percy Foreman, not referred to by name) was also aware of this possible connection.
It should be pointed out, however, that the description of the “third man” given by Giesbrecht to the FBI was not consistent in terms of height and weight with the description of “Raoul” given by James Earl Ray, although it is possible that someone else who was seen with Ray was the subject of the discussion. Giesbrecht also pointed out that the incident at the airport and James Earl Ray’s post-assassination movements both involved Canada, and believed there was a connec- tion between the two.
In the course of the interview, Giesbrecht also mentioned that there were at least a dozen classified documents in the archives referring to his allegations, implying that the U.S. government was covering up what they had learned during their investigation of Giesbrecht’s allegations (that number is correct, which he must have obtained from Garrison). One of the classified documents that he referred to specifically was the “Harold Isaacs” report, which I discussed in this report, which had nothing to do with the Winnipeg investigation (and turned out to be a very large red herring). He emphasized again having been warned to keep quiet by the FBI agent who had interviewed him, in the course of contacting the “U.S. media” (specifically being interviewed by the station manager of a KCND-TV in Pembina, North Dakota in early April, 1964; I spoke to the former manager recently, who now lives in Winnipeg.
I also learned that the station had been purchased by Izzy Asper, who is now “C.E.O.” of Canwest Global Communicatons, headquartered in Winnipeg, and one of Canada’s private television networks.) Giesbrecht described having become frustrated at the apparent lack of any follow-up on the part of the FBI after such an immediate initial response, causing him to go public with his story (although he didn’t reveal his name until he was interviewed by Maclean’s magazine for their Nov. 1967 issue.)
Since the Shaw trial did finally get underway in late Jan. 1969 after a long delay (with Shaw’s lawyers trying unsuccessfully to get the U.S. Supreme Court to throw out the charges), obviously Giesbrecht must have had a change of heart following his television interview (he indicated to the interviewer that the case had been “frozen” for some time and wasn’t sure when it would start, if at all). It is possible that the comments made by Giesbrecht in reference to the MLK case had some bearing on his subsequent decision to stay well away from New Orleans (a city which played a significant role in James Earl Ray’s claim of being set up.)
It would be interesting to learn whether Garrison was aware of the CBC-TV interview, and the possible links to the MLK case. In addition, it might be significant to learn who was responsible for the police drawing displayed by Giesbrecht.
– Peter R. Whitmey Abbotsford, B.C June 7, 1
BACKGROUND ON PETER WHITMEY
• Born in Brighton, England, in 1945
• Immigrated to Ontario, Canada, in 1951
• Immigrated to Seattle in 1960 (Dad went to Boeing from AVRO)
• Graduated from Sammamish High School in 1962 (first graduating class)
• Graduated from the University of Washington 1967 with a B.A. in Economics and History (had to get approval from draft board to go extra three quarters…told them in response to question that I was planning to join U.S. Army (a fib)
• Went to England for three months in March, 1967. Attended Expo ’67 upon return and short trip to Oakville (where I previously lived – home of Donovan Bailey)
• Moved to Vancouver and worked briefly as a probation officer and stock
broker; attended Simon Fraser University in 1968 for teacher’s certificate; became high school teacher in 1969; taught until early 1990s at highschool and college level (business education, social studies, English and Math)
• Married in 1970, divorced in 1987, three sons (James – b. 1972, David – b. 1974, and Michael – b. 1977), none of whom will admit to being interested in the JFK assassination, although David came to see “JFK” with me and later an Oliver Stone lecture in Vancouver. James once bought me a book on the subject. Michael periodically reminds me that Kennedy is dead.
• Always followed subject – but not intently – until 1986, when I read BEST EVIDENCE, which blew my mind (although I don’t entirely buy Lifton’s theory). Began writing after sending a short piece on PJM to Michael Eddowes, who “commissioned” me to write a lengthy report on Priscilla for a book he was supposedly working on at age 86. Mailed it to him, but it was returned months later as the address was slightly wrong (someone had tried to open it)…
• Learned about TTD from Paul Hoch and sent it to Jerry, who suggested revising it, which resulted in, “Did Oswald Come Back?” and “Priscilla and Lee – Parts 1,2, and 3.”
• First article published was about the Winnipeg Airport Incident … I have written 21 articles for TTD/TFD, plus several for other publications.
• I have attended seven conferences (Fredonia, NY in 1991 and 1996; Dallas in 1991, Chicago in 1992 and 1993, Sudbury, Ontario in 1993, and Minneapolis in 1999) and one debate (U.W. in Seattle 1994). I have been interviewed by CBC-TV in Winnipeg for local news program via satellite (Nov. 1993), by Calgary radio station (Nov. 1993) by phone, by Abbotsford radio talk show (Nov. 1993), by Chilliwack, BC talk show (1995) and by local cable station twice (1992 and 1993). Was also profiled in local paper in Jan. 1992 and in VANCOUVER SUN in 1998 (poor job resulting in letter to editor by me which they published).
• Interviewed Perry R. Russo in 1990-91 by mailing him a series of questions (three times, which he answered on audio tape with a girlfriend reading my questions); gave presentation on my contact with Perry at 1996 Fredonia conference, featuring excerpt from interview(s); provided copy of tapes to Perry’s brother, who is a professor of engineering in New Orleans, at his request, which he greatly appreciated (he has always believed Perry’s “conspiracy talk” allegations, by the way).
• Interviewed Jean Aase in Minneapolis in May, 1997 (who went to Dallas with Chicago businessman Lawrence Meyers, a good friend of Ruby’s); interview set up in conjunction with author Anthony Summers, but was hampered by presence of Jean’s lawyer, which produced mixed results.
• Ongoing contact with Curtis Craford (aka Larry Crafard), former handyman at Carousel Club, whose interview with W.C. was over 200 pages long and lasted three days; my contact was referred to in TIME article by journalist/author Ron Rosenbaum in Jan. 1992 (republished in JFK: THE BOOK OF THE FILM).
Partial Bibliography of Peter Whitmey
JFK’s real assassins conspired in Winnipeg Airport: theorist
by Lindor Reynolds, Winnipeg Free Press Columnist
Winnipeg Free Press, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada November 22, 2000
John Bevilaqua is a conspiracy theorist, a man determined to unearth the real killer or killers of John F. Kennedy.
The Web site developer not only believes Lee Harvey Oswald was a fall guy, he also believes the key to the conspiracy lies in Winnipeg.
It’s a strange story that has tenuous roots in reality, anchored by countless pages of supporting documents and computer files that Bevilaqua, 53, uses to support his passionate argument that “The Winnipeg Airport Incident” points to the real killer or killers. Express an interest in the topic and you will be bequeathed a mountain of faxes, emails and relevant Web sites.
Kennedy was shot dead in Dallas 37 years ago today. Thousands of Kennedy buffs, ranging from serious academic researchers to the sort of people who also want to prove that Elvis lives, have spent time speculating on who killed him and why.
“I guess you could call me a mild obsessive-compulsive,” says the affable Bevilaqua from his Rhode Island office. “I guess for the past nine years I’ve spent about 10 per cent of my waking hours on this.”
His wife tolerates his obsession, he says.
“When she asks me to do the dishes, I’ll say, “Honey, I’m on the trail of the assassins,” he laughs.
“The Winnipeg Airport Incident” is also known as “The Richard Giesbrecht Incident.” It is important to note that neither name appears in the majority of the legions of books published on the Kennedy assassination. It reigns only on the Internet, safe haven for conspiracy theorists of all stripes. But Bevilaqua is positive that an ordinary Winnipeg accountant (sic), accidentally overheard a conversation between the real killers—or at least the men who hired the killers.
On February 13, 1964, Richard Elvin Giesbrecht was having a drink in the Horizon Room at the Winnipeg airport. Giesbrecht, then 35 and the father of four, overheard three men discussing what appeared to be their involvement in Kennedy’s assassination. In his later report to the RCMP and the FBI, Giesbrecht said the men appeared knowledgeable about the murder. He jotted notes while they talked, carefully detailed their appearance and later told officials he felt threatened by the presence of one of the man.
It could have been dismissed as the imagination of a mid afternoon drinker, but wasn’t. Giesbrecht was eventually asked to testify at the New Orleans conspiracy trial of Clay Shaw, a businessman charged with conspiracy to murder Kennedy. In the end, the Winnipeg man’s story was rejected by authorities. His claims received wide media attention.
Giesbrecht died in 1990. Today his widow, Nadia, refuses to talk about her husband’s brush with fame. “My husband has passed away and so has the story.”, she said this week.
Bevilaqua isn’t about to let the story die.
“I think the killing was the work of The Pioneer Fund, a right-wing organization,” he says. “One hundred times, yes, I think they were behind it.”
He believes the three men in the airport bar were Rev. Gerald L. K. Smith, whom he calls “a Nazi sympathizer”; Anastase “Annie” Vonsiatsky, a German-American once sentenced to five years in prison for violation of The Espionage Act; and either Ronald A. Gostick or Patrick J. Walsh, both allegedly extreme right-wingers. They were in Winnipeg, Bevilaqua believes, to attend a meeting of the Canadian Anti-Communist League.
“This story has unfortunately been relegated to a very, very small footnote in history,” he says. “There are a number of us who believe (the) Richard Giesbrecht (Incident) holds the key.”
As for Lee Harvey Oswald, the man who took the official blame for the murder, Bevilaqua says he was likely a trained assassin who was selected to go down for the murder. The conspiracy theorist says that if Oswald pulled the trigger, “he was acting under hypnotic suggestion.”
The Richard Giesbrecht Incident could be truth, fiction or, more likely, some muddy combination. For John Bevilaqua, it’s an historical fact he is determined to prove. It’s been 37 years but he’s still trying.
Back to John Bevilaqua
John Bevilaqua was born as John Horvath in Washington, D.C., in 1947. He is currently living in North Providence, RI, where he works as an independent computer consultant. He describes his work as using “computerized database management and analysis techniques for New England corporations as well as applied to the Kennedy assassination.” (Testimony to ARRB, 18 November 1994, Dallas) He grew up in Miami, FL, where he attended grammar school at St. Michael’s of the Archangel, graduating in 1961, and high school at Christopher Columbus High School, graduating in 1965. In high school he was known as a fine boy, and very smart. He also played on their basketball team. He then enrolled in Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts, from which he graduated in 1969. He was a Harvard classmate of both Al Gore and Tommy Lee Jones.
Bevilaqua’s father was Lawrence Horvath, was born in Hungary, with the surname of his stepfather. He later changed the family’s surname to his biological father’s surname, Bevilaqua, when he learned that his father was still alive. Lawrence was fired from the patent office in Washington during the McCarthy hysteria of the early fifties because of his pro-Communist views. He moved his family to Miami, Florida, where John grew up.
As a result of his father’s experience, John Bevilaqua has become a hater of Fascists and neo-Nazis, which he sees everywhere. He is crusading against them and anyone else whom he considers to be using their techniques. In the mid-1990s he wrote a document entitled “Red Scares, White Power and Blue Death,” which is based on “personal observation and experience in Miami, Florida, with anti-Castro Cuban exiles of Alpha-66 and the 30th of November Movement, as well as the investigations that I have carried out in the ensuing years.”
He typically writes and posts messages under aliases, some related to Naziism. Sometimes he writes under one alias and sends back a congratulatory note under another. A partial list of his aliases includes Michael Kensington (1992), John McLoughlin (1992 to present), Bill Patterson (Oct–Nov 1993), John McArthur (Oct–Nov 1993), Dave Henderson (Nov 1993), Bob Krieble (Nov 1993), Eric Gunderson (Nov–Dec 1993), Kurt Reston (Dec. 18, 1993), Eric Langford (Aug 1994), David R. Mitchell (Aug 1994), David Morgan (December 1994), Jan Mirilovich (1996), James R. Henderson (May 98 to June 99), Tom Jefferson (1997), Igor Beaver (Feb1996), Bill Thomas (April 1996), Richard Elvin Giesbrecht (December 2000), Richard L. Giesbrecht (Nov 2000), and Dr. Hans Eysenck (early 2001). In the early 1990s, he was cut off from the JFK Forum on CompuServe for sending threatening messages to Bill Adams, Dave Stager, and Gordon Winslow. Several times he would reenter under a different alias, only to be cut off again.
He is presently pushing three “causes”: the evils of Fascism/Naziism in the world as a whole, Fascists/Nazis as the agent of JFK’s assassination, and my (K. Rahn’s) allegedly dangerous beliefs about the assassination and allegedly illegal, Nazi-like approach to teaching my URI course on the assassination. (Yes, you read that last part right!) The following sections consider each of these causes in turn.
Naziism in the present world.
John Bevilaqua is waging war on the Far Right, which he refers to variously as Nazis and Fascists. We will use these terms interchangeably. Among the organizations he considers Fascist are the John Birch Society, the Christian Crusade, Alpha-66, the World Anti-Communist League, the American Security Council, the Anti-Communist Liaison Committee of Correspondence, and, most importantly, the Pioneer Fund. Persons he considers Nazi sympathizers and/or participants in the JFK hit include (verbatim) “Dr. Robert J. Morris, Dr. Revilo P. Oliver, Major General Charles A. Willoughby, Rev. Gerald L. K. Smith, Brig. Gen. Bonner Fellers, Ray S. Cline, Wickliffe P. Draper, William H. Draper, Jr., Anastase Vonsiatsky, Edwin A. Walker, Otto F. Otepka, Ronald Gostick, Allen Dulles, John S. Rarick, Patrick Walsh, Andrij Melnyk, Yaroslaw Stetsko, James J. Angleton, Major George Racey Jordan, Senator Barry Goldwater, and Richard Nixon.” Another prominent Nazi is our current president George W. Bush. His father, George H. W. Bush, and Richard Nixon surrounded themselves with Nazi advisors like Robert Haldemann and John Erlichmann. “Nazi brain scientists” (those who control people’s minds) include Dr. Hans J. Eysenck, Wickliffe P. Draper, Dr. Revilo P. Oliver, me, Prof. John McAdams (who heads the political science department at Marquette University and teaches a course in the JFK assassination), and San Francisco eye surgeon and professor Dr. Gary Aguilar.
From the above list, Bevilaqua holds Drs. Robert Morris and Revilo P. Oliver in particular contempt. Here is a direct quote from one of Bevilaqua’s posts: “Robert J. Morris (1917-1997) [was] one of the world’s most truly demented beings who ever walked the earth. He was part of the American Security Council along with Angleton, Cline and Willoughby and was identified by Mae Brussel and Bill Turner as being one of the plotmasters and JFK murder lynchpins. He was also identified by pudgy woosy boy Whittaker Chambers who framed Alger Hiss as being “the real brains and power behind McCarthyism” at the time of Morris’ obituary.” In another post, Bevilaqua went on to note that Robert J. Morris had a long career devoted to conservative causes: Former president of the University of Dallas, in Irving. Chief counsel of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Internal Security from 1951 to 1953 and 1956 to 1958, “a period when the United States was tormented by the specter of Communist infiltration of every level of life.” Had served on a New York State Assembly committee in 1940 that investigated New York’s schools and colleges in an attempt to ferret out Communist activities. The subcommittee’s hearings “corralled diplomats, scholars, businessmen, refugees and schoolteachers. It opened investigations into a possible Communist takeover of Hawaii, the Communist influence along the New York City waterfront, shipments of propaganda detected in New Orleans and creeping Communist control of U.S. military industries. Concerning the late Prof. Revilo P. Oliver, of the University of Illinois, Bevilaqua posted several of his many essays, accompanying by derogatory comments.
Another “Nazi” condemned at great length by Bevilaqua is Dr. Hans J. Eysenck, whom he called a “Nazi brain scientist.” Eysenck allegedly helped prepare candidates for roles as murderers for the Nazi government and for the CIA’s MK-ULTRA and Operation Bluebird campaigns. He received funding from Draper and the Pioneer Fund and transferred knowledge to them about his work for Nazis and governments in exile such as the Russian Nationalist organizations of Anastase Vonsiatsky in Harbin, Manchuria. He was the original Manchurian Candidate. Eysenck allegedly watched with great interest as one of the students he trained, Bogdan Stashinsky, personally executed several pro-Nazi colleagues of the Vonsiatsky-affiliated OUN (?), including Dr. Stepan Bandera and Lev Rebet. Stashinsky was forced to participate in the Nazi killings because his parents were Nazi collaborators during WW II and he was afraid this information would be exposed. He penetrated the OUN, learned their habits, and killed them with the Potassium Cyanide Gun known at the “Stashinsky Gun.” Vonsiatsky was extremely upset by these killings, but it took him until 1963 to get revenge. They used the very tool of the NKVD assassins, LHO, from the Minsk Academy of Murder and Mayhem, Class of 1961. Bevilaqua tips his hat to Mae Brussel and Bill Turner, who were the first ones onto Willoughby (Adolph Tscheppe-Weidenbach) and Morris, in Larry Flynt’s “Realist” magazine in 1983. “
How Nazis killed JFK
John Bevilaqua represents “Citizens for Democracy,” an organization that as far as I can tell has only him as a member (like Oswald’s New Orleans branch of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee). He claims that this group is “on the brink of solving the mystery behind the JFK assassination and finding the identity of the members of the highest levels of the ‘cabal.'” He has offered this general explanation:
“JFK was killed by those who suffered from a paranoid over-reaction to the threats from international Communism due to their own mental instability. Or, they were chosen to carry out the murder because the believed so sincerely in the threats he posed. Or they were chosen to lead the murder by the Nazis who were the natural enemies of communism because they were just nuts enough to do it and because they did not possess the normal and natural restraint mechanism that would help them see just how socially unacceptable and illogical their belief systems really were.”
He has also offered this specific explanation:
“Robert J. Morris, America’s Benedict Arnold, was the one who plotted, managed and executed the plot to kill JFK with his sidekick Charles Willoughby using money advanced by Wickliffe P. Draper of Hopedale, Massachusetts, Draper labs, Remington Arms and Rockwell International who was the paradigm for Big Daddy Warbucks by Harold Grey. Draper’s neighbor and partner, Anastase Vonsiatsky, the man who tried to kill FDR joined with Gerald L. K. Smith, the man who killed Huey Long, in running the operational and financial end of the plot, culminating in the meeting in Winnipeg, Canada known as the Winnipeg Airport Incident where the proceeds were divvied up. Smith’s share was used to build and finance, Christ of the Ozarks, in Eureka, Arkansas, and Draper received his payback when Rockwell International bailed out his family’s failing textile loom equipment machinery company a few years before it went totally belly up and busted. All other theories and attempts at explanation are nothing less then sheer folly and complete lunacy. I have spoken and you have been informed for perhaps the first time in your JFK experience. (Just kidding.) Quod Est Demonstratum.”
A shorter version is:
“JFK was killed by those anti-Soviet counter-intelligence Nazi sympathizers at the American Security Council who were part of the Military-Intelligence Complex by the names of: Angleton, Morris, Willoughby and Cline”
As to why the Nazis killed JFK, he has these explanations:
“Fascism killed JFK in order to get free rein against Communism. Their next target is Democracy, since they have already fulfilled their 25 year plan against Communism (1963-1988). Right on schedule, too. The 25 year plan against Democracy (1990-2015) is a bit ahead of schedule as we speak. Democracy should be all done by 2010, I think.”
“The Far Right did it and blamed it on the Far Left to ENCOURAGE more attacks on the Far Left and the ultimate destruction of the Russian monolith. Duhhh? Next Problem.”
As to assassins, Bevilaqua says that Oswald did it as a Manchurian Candidate:
“Oswald was a trained psychopath with a propensity for violence, whose selection for inclusion in a joint NKVD and US project on programmed assassination because of his attributes and propensities made him the perfect choice as patsy in the assassination of JFK. Once word got out about who the patsy was, every US organization had to go into cover-up and denial mode for fear of having the cover blown on their covert and illegal mind-control operations like MK-ULTRA and Bluebird” and that he had been “programmed” by Dr. Hans J. Eysenck.
Using the mock voice of Eysenck, Bevilaqua wrote:\
“I, Dr. Hans J. Eysenck, stole the MK-ULTRA secrets for programmed assassinations when I worked at Operation Bluebird, and hand delivered to these psychos at least a half-dozen programmed assassins, Oswald among them. This is why we inserted Oswald into the fray. Once his name popped up, there was nothing anyone could do for fear of exposing the US Government exposed plan. Why do you think that Corporal Schrand was shot in the armpit? He had his hands behind his neck and was under armed control at the time and we asked Oswald to shoot him on command. Oswald was a programmed assassin and his cover had to be kept intact.”
How does John Bevilaqua know all this about the Nazi killing of JFK? It comes from three pieces of evidence, two conversations overheard by third parties and a set of anagrams in a novel. The first conversation was overheard by his father in November 1963 next door at 3638 NW 15th St., Miami. The conversation concerned a plot to kill JFK. It was actually two conversations, on the 18th and 19th of November, that his father was able to listen to from his backyard. Cubans were speaking in Spanish. The following names were allegedly mentioned: Marita Lorenz, Bosch, Dias Lanz, Pedro, Alex, and Havana Bar. Lawrence reported it to the police by telephone on November 20th. They said that they already knew about it.
The second conversation was overheard after the assassination, on 13 February 1964. As Winnipeg insurance salesman Richard Elvin Giesbrecht was having a drink in the Horizon Room of the Winnipeg airport, he is said to have overheard three men discussing what sounded like the JFK assassination and their involvement in it. When he was noticed, he was chased away. Giesbrecht later testified in Garrison’s New Orleans trial of Clay Shaw, but when he could not offer enough information to allow the authorities to identify any of the persons, the lead was abandoned. Bevilaqua believes that the men were Rev. Gerald L. K. Smith, Anastase Vonsiatsky, and either Ronald A. Gostick or Patrick J. Walsh, present in Winnipeg, according to Bevilaqua, to attend a meeting of the Canadian anti-Communist League. They were in the process of dividing up the spoils (the payment) of the assassination.
The anagrams come from Richard Condon’s 1959 novel “The Manchurian Candidate.” Condon knew about JFK’s killers but could not say how, where, or when so far in advance. He knew the names, however, and hid them in a series of 12 anagrams in order to protect himself. Bevilaqua is now deciphering these puzzles for all to see. They all point to people who knew each other, associated with each other, were all right-wing extremists, had links to the Winnipeg Airport Incident, had links to the John Birch Society, were McCarthyites, were part of the military/industrial complex, had links and reputations are pro-Nazi sympathizers, and so on.
Eleven of the anagrams, with Bevilaqua’s solutions and interpretations, are given below.
• “John Yerkes Iselin” = “John E. is Rey S. Kline.” “John E.” becomes “Johnny” (a nickname for John Y. Iselin), and Rey S. Kline gets turned into Ray S. Cline. “Rey S. Kline” is “very similar” to Ray S. Cline. “Others” think the same thing.
• “Miss Viola Narvilly, opera singer” … is a PERFECT anagram for “Revilo P. Oliver, is an SS Girman aly.” Kevin Alfred Strom claims that this phrase does not appear in the book. He says that the actual phrases included “Miss Viola Narvilly of the great Indianapolis Opera Company” and “it like to have lifted Miss Narvilly out of her own body by her vocal cords” and “Miss Narvilly’s manager tried to throw a punch at the National Chairman” and “not one single television shot had been taken of Miss Narvilly from beginning to end” and “shaking Miss Narvilly’s manager loose.”
• Dr. Yen Lo = “Only Red,” meaning the only Commie among those in the Manchurian Amphitheatre in Manchurian Candidate.
• Etah = “Hate.” One of the most common characteristics of right-wingers and inmates of mental institutions.
• Al Melvin = “1 Evil Man.” This may refer to Robert J. Morris, who is in at least 5 anagrams from Manchurian Candidate, or Revilo P. Oliver, whose most famous quotation was: “I had a beatific vision last night. I woke up after dreaming that all the Jews had been vaporized.” Boston, MA, July 4, 1966 at a John Birch Rally and Conference on “God, Your Country and the Family, or something like that. Oliver was asked to sever his public relationships and ties to the John Birch Society.
• Lord Morris Croftnol = “Lord, Frontal Morris…”, a plaintive plea to some superior being. As in “frontal lobotomy,” one of the best known but more primitive techniques for reducing aggressive or violent behavior.
• “Miss Dover and Mrs. Diamentez” = “Morris is a Demented Man.” (The remaining VZSD can be used any way you like.)
• Tungwha = “What gun?”
• Ole Banstoffsen-Washington” (a fictitious person in Manchurian Candidate) = “H.B. Angleton Waffen SS Notsi” or “H.B. Angleton Waffen SS – No Shit.”
• Hugh Bone (another reference to Angleton) = “Hugh B. One” (= Hugh be one (of them), meaning the Reich Wing in America and the Reich Wing internationally.)
• Bennet Arnold Marco = “RM a Benedect Arnold,” whoever RM may be.
Note how weak these anagrams are. Several don’t work, or make nonsensical phrases. They are obviously being pushed past their limit. The two overheard conversations plus the anagrams sum to zero solid evidence. The ornate scenario spun from them by Bevilaqua is pure fabrication. And yet this is what is supposed to hold the key to the JFK assassination.
How to validate his beliefs
John Bevilaqua has told us exactly how to verify that his beliefs are correct:
“What if I told you that Citizens for Democracy was literally on the brink of solving the mystery behind the John F. Kennedy assassination and finding the identity of the members of the highest levels of the cabal? How would you be able to tell whether or not it was really correct? Simple. If I could show you that two other persons had already solved portions of this case years ago and left clues for everyone to follow to the ultimate conspirators would you be convinced then? Possibly. Then what if I showed you that they also reached the very SAME conclusions that I had via a completely independent set of sources and separate methodologies?
Would you be convinced of it then? Are you willing to hear more?
Well, who are they all saying was behind the JFK murder plot?
The plotters were all members of some of the most fascist and repressive organizations in the 50’s and the 60’s: the House Un-American activities Committee (HUAC), Senate Internal Security Subcommittee (SIS), and the Pioneer Fund (TPF) of New York which is still active today with Proposition 187, the Bell Curve and the Steve Forbes presidential campaign. Later some of them ended up either on the World Anti-Communist League (WACL) or on The Council for National Policy (CNP) or The Liberty Lobby (TLL), all of which are still active today in spreading their particular brand of devisiveness and enmity.”
In other words, he is right because two other people partially agreed with him!
Bevilaqua’s plan of action
Notwithstanding the facts that he has no evidence and that his conclusions have not been meaningfully validated in any way, John Bevilaqua has an aggressive plan of action:
“The Pioneer Fund, Birmingham Bombers, the Eastland and DeLa Beckwith Klans, Chaney, Schwerner and Goodman, the Ghosts of Mississippi. One by one we will hunt them all down and convict them. Just you wait and see. The Pioneer Fund and their Eugenics Master Race Agendas shall be neutralized and aborted for the good of all mankind.”
Exterminating the evil and dangerous Ken Rahn
John Bevilaqua, under the alias of John McLoughlin, attended the two Providence conferences on the JFK assassination, the one in 1993 sponsored by Jerry Rose and “The Third Decade,” and the one in 1999 sponsored by the University of Rhode Island and my JFK class. He spoke at each, and he and I became acquaintances. After the second conference, he even volunteered to give copies of his manuscript to my class, but never followed through.
Something happened in the fall of 2000, and he turned on me with a vengeance. Writing as “Jim Anderson,” he sent a very strong attacking message to alt.conspiracy.jfk, whose contents show that these feelings had been building up inside him for some time. Here is one of the tamer parts of that message:
Hey now, you are talking about our version of Mr. McCarthy, Kenneth Rann, who actually claims that he can, merely by expelling gas from his ass, rise a distance of 9.99999999 (I forget how many 9’s) centimeters above a chair while in a seated position with 2 strong, but totally naked, URI football players pressing down on his shoulders, thus proving beyond the shadow of a doubt that the “head snap” could have been produced by gasses coming out of the cranial cavity from bullet number 5 which was a frontal shot thus mimicking the frontal lobotomy that Herr Doktor Rann underwent just to prove, and I quote:
“Vee Ghermans cum frum ze strong breeding stock, and ah soooo schmaaht, zat ve can akchuly undergo Total Frontal Lobotomy and still come up ticking. Vee haff so many exzess brrain zells zat vee can effun donate sum to charatees and still vin ze Nobel Prizes. Yah vohl. You can not effun see zee scarse, because zey vent in behind my eyeballs. Zay popped out the eyeball and poked around for a while and I can still do JFK research. Take a lookie here.”
Bevilaqua was apparently set off by earlier comments I had made publicly in support of the theory behind the “jet effect,” the idea that the mass of blood and tissue expelled forward from JFK’s exploding head would have contributed to his rearward motion seen so dramatically in the Zapruder film. He combined this with my German surname and decided to mock rather than deal with the argument itself.
After falling silent for a time, he surfaced again in mid-April 2001 with a vengeance. This time he was writing as Dr. Hans J. Eysenck, “Nazi brain scientist.” Added to list of outrages was the fact that the students in my JFK classes generally agreed with my approach to the assassination, something that Bevilaqua preferred to attribute to brainwashing on my part. Here is part of a message he sent to alt.conspiracy.jfk, in response to a thread on a different topic:
“You know what a shame it is when so called certified and accredited (???) professeurs actually have the audacity, under the guise of academic respectability, to profess baldfaced lies and untruths in front of these poor young kids who are paying about $100,000 to listen to falsehoods. When we were in school we used to hiss in unison if we felt we were being lied to with prevarications, mistruths or falsehoods. I witnessed a handful of students, nice kids otherwise, who had been subjected to an entire semester of distortions and brainwashing at the URI laboratory of Herr Doktor Khan. They babbled the “right” jargon on cue, used politically correct techniques of analysis and “critical thinking,” which means they criticized anything that smacked of conspiracy theory, cited party line and party dogma on command, and in general just “followed orders” from above in order to get a good grade from the grade master. INTELLECTUAL DISHONESTY is a very strong term, but I mean this in the strongest sense. Academic Freedom does not have any room for Intellectual Dishonesty.
To bend and twist young impressionable minds when one has already revealed a pattern of the destruction of the minds of youths who have put their faith in you is an intellectual atrocity akin to mind rape and mind bending. Anyone guilty of these intellectual atrocities and affronts against humanity should be castigated, reviled, belittled and exposed. And I plan to do just that.”
What merited this announced plan to “castigate, revile, belittle, and expose”?
Apparently the combination of my last name, my speaking out about unsupported “conspiracies,” my JFK class, and my support for the laws of physics.
Here is part of another post to alt.conspiracy.jfk from that same period of mid-Aril 2001. I am now Nazi scientist Dr. Runwith Khan, and the stakes are being raised to Nazi brain science and mind control:
“Just consider an entire classroom of kids watching Khan essentially using Nazi Brain Science in proving that, let’s say, The World is Flat, and the entire class watches in awe and rapture, agreeing with him, writing papers on the topic, and then applauding his efforts without smirking or laughing at his efforts. THAT is Nazi Brain Science at its very best.
Sort of like hypnotized Korean POWs in Manchurian Candidate where Khan is playing the role of Dr. Yen Lo to his audience and his students think they are part of a meeting of a New Jersey Horticulture Club.
Khan even looks and sounds a little like Yen Lo, don’t you think? …with that sing-song little pseudo-scientific cadence he has which is intended only to confuse his students into a trance like state so they will be more susceptible to his lies and falsehoods. I am serious folks. This is mind control and altered state consciousness at its very best.”
If you think it couldn’t get any worse, you are wrong. A week later, Bevilaqua again raised the stakes in a post to alt.conspiracy.jfk, part of which reads:
“If you find and MIT, Draper Labs type he will probably support the Nuke em and Puke em, Military Industrial Complex School of Thought and be…get this….a non-believer in conspiracies in the JFK hit. My suggestion is: DO NOT SUPPORT HIM
DO NOT DEFEND HIM
Call him on everything.
These goals were contained in another message to a poster who commented on so much meanness in one person:
“The meanness comes only from those who deliberately hide or distort the truth. I want to be purged from his website and from his feeble mind forever. I will continue to call him publicly on any forgeries, distortions, or outright lies he publishes or posts, too. Until the end of time. It is a free country.”
Not even the University of Rhode Island could escape his aim. Here are two paragraphs from another message to alt.conspiracy.jfk:
“His students think they are actually part of a class on logic and critical thinking when in fact they are part of a class on anything but. They are part of a class on mind control and thought control as part of the Alton W. Jones campus project at a misleading New England University
I am serious folks. This is mind control and altered state consciousness at its very best. Check out what Alton W. Jones did at Columbia University in the 1960’s and the 1970’s regarding the use of Cold War Psycholigical Warfare techniques to convince people that the Cold War was a good thing for the country.”
It is appropriate to close this biography of John Bevilaqua by recalling the huge contrast between stimuli and reactions. His huge, complex Nazi scenario for the killing of JFK was a response to two conversations partially overheard by third parties, plus twelve anagrams, mostly imperfect, in a book written years before the assassination. His campaign against me (preceded and followed by similar but less intense actions against others) was apparently stimulated by my criticism of undocumented “conspiracies,” my university course on the assassination, and my support for the laws of physics. The responses are entirely disproportionate to the stimuli.
Bevilaqua’s “Final Solution” to the JFK assassination
Testimony to the Assassination Records Review Board (November 18, 1994, Dallas, Texas)
Bevilaqua’s version of the Winnipeg Airport Incident (Winnipeg Free Press, 22 November 2000)
Peter Whitmey’s more-careful version of the Winnipeg Airport Incident (The Fourth Decade, March 1999)
Testimony of John Bevilaqua to the ARRB
Dallas, Texas — November 18, 1994 Hearing
MR. MARWELL: Is Mr. DeBenedictis here?
MR. MARWELL: Dr. Aguilar?
VOICE: He will be right back.
MR. MARWELL: Why don’t we ask Mr. John McLaughlin.
CHAIRMAN TUNHEIM: Welcome, Mr. McLaughlin.
MR. McLAUGHLIN: Thank you.
First of all, I would like to straighten out the record. I used John McLaughlin as my pseudonym, as my author’s pseudonym. My real name is John Bevilaqua.
A quick synopsis or a background, I am a graduate of Harvard University, I was classmates, ironically, of both Al Gore and Tommy Lee Jones, and I grew up in the City of Miami, Florida. My only other connection to the assassination investigation is, I also enjoy Lee Harvey Oswald’s favorite drink, Dr. Pepper.
MR. MARWELL: Could we just have the spelling of your name?
MR. McLAUGHLIN: Sure. It is B-e-v-i-l-a-q-u-a, and I am currently an independent computer consultant, and I use computerized database management and analysis techniques for New England corporations as well as applied to the Kennedy assassination.
The material I have developed, and I only have three copies of but I would like to circulate it now, it is a document I developed with the help of a lead that Mary Farrell gave me. Mary Farrell has reviewed this document which is titled, Red Scares, White Power and Blue Death, and called it possibly the most interesting and significant piece of material that she has read in the past several years.
It is based on both personal observation and experience in Miami, Florida, with anti-Castro Cuban exiles of Alpha-66 and the 30th of November Movement, as well as the investigations that I have carried out in the ensuing years.
A summary of what I believe to be the two most significant intelligence connections as a result of all my research center around both the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee of Senator Thomas Dodd and Senator James Eastland, and the House UnAmerican Activities chaired until his death in the early ’60s by representative Francis E. Walter of Pennsylvania and Richard Arrans, who was the Chief Counsel, and in particular I am focusing also on the former Chief Counsel of Joe McCarthy’s SISC as well as, I believe, Senator Dodd’s SISC, Robert Morris, who is still alive today in Pennsylvania.
Mr. Morris shared a summer home in Miami with me on Northwest 15th Street, as well as also on Northwest 15th Street at 3638 Northwest 15th Street was a safehouse for Alpha-66 and the 30th of November Movement. On November 16th of 1963, my father overheard several conversations in Spanish. He happens to have a Master’s Degree in Spanish. He translated those conversations and reported to the City of Miami Police, Intelligence Division, the fact that the Cubans in our neighborhood were talking about going to Dallas and doing something to President Kennedy.
I wrote an article under the name of Michael Kensington which appeared in The Third Decade in November of 1992, I believe, which has been reviewed and researched by both Jerry Rose, Gordon Winslow and other people for its veracity, and they have both concluded that it is a basically accurate and correct account of what occurred.
At the same time, the Miami Police Intelligence Division was examining and investigating the reports about Joseph A. Milteer, which everybody is probably fairly familiar with, and they put my father’s report in the same category. And I believe either the Joe Milteer incident or my father’s report resulted in the infamous Airtel of November 17th, 1963, sent out by the FBI describing imminent plans of, I quote, “an extremist revolutionary group” who are planning to take action against Kennedy in Dallas. Perhaps they didn’t even mention Dallas, but sometime between the 17th and some unnamed date.
I don’t know if your power or authority extends to agencies like the City of Miami Police Intelligence Division, but I have had absolutely no luck in recovering any of the lead up information either related to the Joe Milteer incident or to my father’s incident regarding the two reports of pending assassination plots that originated from South Florida between November 9th, which was the Milteer incident, and November 16th or 17th, which was my father’s reported incident.
Following the leads from Alpha-66 into the World Anti-Communist League, I first investigated both the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee and HUAC. In particular the two incidents that I would request additional documentation or release of relates to Peter Dale Scott’s reference, and to Senator Thomas J. Dodd’s direct request to Oswald to purchase the Mannlicher-Carcano from Kline’s Sporting Goods in Chicago. I believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was quite possibly an agent of the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee and he was doing the bidding of Dodd and Eastland and Morris.
I am sorry, I am drying out, and it is a difficult thing to do.
Secondarily, to the incidents surrounding the Clinton, Louisiana, visit of Lee Harvey Oswald on an allegedly exploratory mission regarding voter registration and the difficulty or the ease with which an outsider could register to vote compared to that of a local Louisiana resident who was a member of a minority also was requested and Dodd and further helped implicate Lee Harvey Oswald on his own. It was almost self-implication as was the Kline Sporting Goods.
On the HUAC side and related to a lead that was given to me by Mary Farrell, and it is up to her, I think, to decide whether or not she wants to disclose who it was that gave her this piece of information, this gentleman who was a soldier of fortune, a not well-known soldier of fortune in South Florida indicated to her that the most significant leads that had to be explored involved Thomas F. Ellis, who is currently on the Council of National Policy, he is alive and apparently very well. He is on the Council of National Policy with Oliver J. North, Nelson Bucker Hunt, and Alton Oxner, Jr., who is the son of Dr. Alton Oxner, who was part of INCA in New Orleans.
I have also looked at why Richard Arrans was fired from HUAC, and I have found that the reason Richard Arrans was fired was because he worked for an organization called the Draper Committees and the Draper Genetics Committees, which is part of the Pioneer Fund. The thing that concerns me about the Pioneer Fund is that even today, I have traced them back to 1924, even today they are in California with Proposition 187, sponsoring it, they are the main sponsors and financial backers of Prop. 187, which is the anti-immigration issue.
They have sponsored William Shockley’s research into the genetic inferiority of minorities as well as Arthur Jensen’s research into the inheritable composition of intelligence as opposed to the environmental, which they say does not exist. They backed Richard Arnstein and the Bell Curve. They were involved, in 1937, they went over to Germany and helped Hitler and Goebbels write the laws against the prevention of hereditarily ill-progeny, which essentially became the holocaust justification laws.
They were involved with involuntary sterilization programs in Virginia. They were involved with the original anti-immigration legislation in 1924 which also was designed to keep Central European minorities, particularly targeted groups, from entering this country.
If you move further and follow them as they develop into the World Anti-Communist League through the Alpha-66 connections, and all of a sudden you find that four of the past presidents of the World Anti-Communist League all have significant ties by researchers into the assassination.
Ray S. Kline was in Taiwan between 1958 and 1962, he is still alive and working at Georgetown University Center for International Studies, he was there when Oswald was there at the Peng Tong Marine Base. I would like to find out what, if anything, the CIA is willing to release regarding the alleged mind control experiments that went on in Taiwan.
Yarzlo Stetsco was another President of the World Anti-Communist League, he was Sposti Reiken’s immediate superior and his immediate boss in the anti-Bolshevik nations.
John Singlob and Roger Pearson were also involved and very directly related to not only activities in the Pioneer Fund but also activities at the World Anti-Communist League.
Another word on Thomas F. Ellis, he first gained his fame and recognition as campaign chairman for the 1972 Jesse Helms Senatorial Campaign, and he has been involved quite directly in both Carolina politics as well as U.S. politics.
I would also like to find out if there is anything that can be done regarding quasi-private agencies. I don’t know if your jurisdiction also extends into this area of things like the American Security Council and the Liberty Lobby, and Council for National Policy, unfortunately which are primarily private agencies, but have full-time active employees of the government also involved.
I believe that is as complete and as short a summary as I could possibly make of a 70-page document, and I just want to thank you for giving me the opportunity to appear before you and say something.
CHAIRMAN TUNHEIM: Thank you, Mr. Bevilaqua.
DR. NELSON: Have you made an attempt to get any documents from HUAC or the Senate Internal Committee?
MR. McLAUGHLIN: I haven’t yet submitted any actual FOIAs. I have submitted a FOIA —
DR. NELSON: They are not subject to FOIA.
MR. McLAUGHLIN: They are not.
DR. NELSON: But you can get some of the documents.
MR. McLAUGHLIN: And how could you do that?
DR. NELSON: Well some of the records are in the National Archives. Most of them, you have to appeal to the various congressional committees, or the Secretary of the Senate. But I just wondered if you had made an attempt to do that?
MR. McLAUGHLIN: No, I haven’t yet. I requested military record of Wyecliff P. Draper who was the head the Draper Committees and then head of the Pioneer Fund before he died, and he was in Army Intelligence. In World War II he fought on our side, and in World War I he fought on the British side, for whatever reason. But it is a new enough lead and an interesting enough lead that we haven’t yet had the chance to do a lot of formal documentation.
CHAIRMAN TUNHEIM: Thank you very much.
MR. MARWELL: Is your father still living?
MR. McLAUGHLIN: Yes, he is. And I am sure, he can’t travel, but I am sure if someone would like to discuss it with him, I am sure he would be able to cooperate.
CHAIRMAN TUNHEIM: Thank you.
Back to John Bevilaqua