PROBABLE CAUSE AUSTRALIA

A Continuing Inquiry into the JFK Assassination

Double Issue 11 & 12 - November 1995

Probable Cause Australia is the only Australian magazine dedicated to the JFK assassination.

Editorial

Welcome to the final issue of "Probable Cause" in its current format.

This is indeed a sad occasion, both for our readers and ourselves. But the time has come.

Times change and, with falling subscriptions, Probable Cause can not survive in its current form. But, as we have been stressing to everyone, the Australian Kennedy Assassination Centre will continue to exist.

The design of our new newsletter is yet to be decided, but it will probably only appear once or twice a year, or as news breaks. The possibility of using the Internet for future issues has not been ruled out either!

But enough about the future...let's look at the present.

This issue of Probable Cause is the best we have produced. With ground- breaking articles by our regulars, Walt Brown and David B. Perry, along with a sensational piece on the dismissal of the Whitlam Government in Australia in November, 1975.

This was a very interesting piece to research and write. We have spoken to ex-Prime Ministers and Deputy Prime Ministers to bring this one to you. And, believe it or not, from a person who didn't think the CIA had anything to do with the overhrow of an Australian Government, my eyes have certainly been opened. It goes to prove that the JFK assassination was not a singular act - these people have been doing this sort of thing, to lesser or greater extent, for years.

Enjoy this issue...we certainly enjoyed bringing it to you.

I would like to thank the following people for their help, support and guidance in the last three plus years since the Centre opened and brought an Australian newsletter on JFK to Australians.

First and foremost, I have to thank our most dedicated contributor, Walt Brown, who never once let us down or forgot about his good mates "down under". Walt was with us from issue one and hasn't missed a beat. It was great to meet him in Dallas for the 30th Anniversary (in the Daltex building, no less!) and without a doubt his help, ideas and knowledge kept us afloat.

Thanks Walt, and good luck with all your research and publishing projects!

We will keep you up to date with the latest research published by Walt.

Also, I'd like to thank all the other American researchers who helped us with input and advice, and providing the latest information, including: the Dallas Kennedy Assassination Centre and the late Larry Howard, Robert Johnson, Open Secrets, Andy and Linda from Last Hurrah Bookshop for supporting us, JFK Resource Group, Gary Aguilar, David B. Perry, David Lifton, L. Fletcher Prouty, and Cyril Wecht. And to all the American subscribers and others that I have forgotten, thank you, we couldn't have done it without your support.

Thanks especially to the Australian "crew": Lachie Hulme for the covers of Probable Cause and late Friday night sessions on conspiracy, ghosts and more conspiracy, E. Burton Mercer, Paul Jones, Steve Webb for the scale model of Dealey Plaza he made in just six weeks, Tony Skomina, Adelaide Tapper, Karen Ticker, James Mann, Rod Quinn, the guys at Minotaur Books, Jennifer from Kill City Bookstore, and Craig Brooks. Thanks, all of you, for all your help, research material, ideas, articles, reviews and support. And also thanks to all the others who I have forgotten - there's too many to mention!

But the greatest thanks must go to you - the subscribers to this magazine. There is no doubt that without your help and support we would never have been able to get this magazine off the ground. Our sincerest thanks to you all, especially those who held on to the end and didn't jump ship.

Once again, I stress we will still exist as a research centre. Anything you need, please let us know.

The fight continues - not just to uncover the real truth behind the JFK assassination, but also that of RFK, MLK, Watergate, and the dismissal of the Australian Whitlam government of 1975 (see exclusive inside this issue...).

There is no higher religion than the truth, and the truth is what we shall seek out and find, no matter how long it takes, or who tries to stop us. We will find it, we will succeed.

See you atop that grassy knoll,

- Steve Gerlach.

COUP D'ETAT IN AUSTRALIA
HOW THE CIA DID A DALLAS, 1963,
DOWN UNDER IN 1975!
BY ADELAIDE TAPPER AND STEVE GERLACH

20 years of cover-up
WORLD EXCLUSIVE

Whitlam (left, seated)
and Kerr (right, standing)

"THE WRONG PEOPLE"

Former CIA agent Victor Marchetti explained the US-Australian relationship very well: "Australia is going to be increasingly important to the United States, and so long as Australians keep electing the right people then there'll be a stable relationship between the two countries." (Secret Country, p. 353).

For 23 years before 1972, the Australian people had been electing the "right people," the Liberal-National Country Party Coalition headed for most of that period by Robert Menzies. The Coalition was essentially conservative, and had a foreign policy which was sycophantic, to say the least. Menzies himself actually despised Australia, and would much rather have been the Prime Minister of Britain. He once said, "A sick feeling of repugnance grows in me as I near Australia." He hated his country so much, and loved England enough to beg the British government to conduct their nuclear bomb tests from 1952 to 1958 in the Australian deserts at Maralinga (home of thirteen Aboriginal settlements). Menzies agreed to the testing without even consulting his cabinet. As John Pilger says, "Australia gained the distinction of becoming the only country in the world to have supplied uranium for nuclear bombs which its Prime Minister allowed to be dropped by a foreign power on his own people without adequate warning." (A Secret Country, p. 168).

Later Liberal Prime Ministers turned their sycophancy towards the United States. John Gorton said in 1969 "We will go a-waltzing Matilda with you," and Harold Holt coined the phrase "All the way with LBJ" when sending Australian troops to the Vietnam War. Again, the Liberal government was so desperate to please the Americans that they did all they could to engineer from the South Vietnamese government an invitation to send Australian troops. When the South Vietnamese government was not forthcoming, the Liberal government sent troops and advisers anyway, and mislead Parliament in a similar way that Lyndon Johnson misled Congress with the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

Compared to the Coalition government (made up of the conservative Liberal and National Country parties), the Labor Party which was elected into office in December 1972 on the platform of "It's Time" quickly showed themselves to be the "wrong people" in the eyes of the United States.

In the domestic sphere, Labor Prime Minister Gough Whitlam's first 100 days put Bill Clinton to shame. The Whitlam government ended conscription and ordered the last Australian troops home from Vietnam. It brought in legislation giving equal pay to women, established a national health service free to all, doubled spending on education and abolished university fees, increased wages, pensions and unemployment benefits, ended censorship, reformed divorce laws and set up the Family Law Courts, funded the arts and film industry, assumed federal government responsibility for Aboriginal affairs (health, education, welfare and land rights), scrapped royal patronage, and replaced "God Save the Queen" as the national anthem with "Advance Australia Fair."

Whitlam and several of his ministers, most notably Rex Connor, Minister for Minerals and Energy, and Dr. Jim Cairns, who eventually became Treasurer and Deputy Prime Minister, wanted to pursue a policy of "buying back the farm."

BUYING BACK THE FARM

The 1973 oil crisis pushed the costs of energy to an all-time high, and caused disarray to economies all over the world. Australia suffered with the rest of them, with rising inflation and unemployment.

Yet one of the Whitlam government's platforms was to reclaim Australian ownership of Australia's vast natural resources, such as oil and minerals, and its manufacturing industries. By the late 1960s, foreign control of the mining industry, for example, stood at 60%, while 97% of the automobile industry was foreign-owned. Both Whitlam and Rex Connor had grandiose ideas for developing the necessary infrastructure, and the means to help Australian companies to "buy back the farm." Connor's schemes included a petroleum pipeline across Australia, uranium enrichment plants, updated port facilities, and solar energy development, as well as the establishment of government bodies with the authority to oversee development and investment in key areas, such as oil refineries and mining. Connor estimated that Australia's mineral and energy reserves were worth $5.7 trillion dollars.

However, buying back the farm would not be cheap for a nation in the grip of inflation and economic stagnation. It was determined that the government would need about $4 billion. While Australia had an excellent credit rating with its usual lending banks in the U.S. and England, no established bank would extend Australia an amount even close to a quarter of what it wanted.

The other side to the oil crisis of 1973 was that the OPEC members in the Middle East were rolling in petrodollars. To Whitlam, Rex Connor and Jim Cairns, the Middle East seemed an appealing source of funds, as it would also be yet another step towards gaining independence from Australia's traditional economic partners.

In 1974, Whitlam instructed Connor and Cairns to find a Middle Eastern source for a $4 billion loan.

So began the Loans affairs.

THE LOANS AFFAIRS

Cairns (left), Connor (middle),
Whitlam (right)

Once word got out that the Australian government wanted to obtain such a large loan, both Connor and Cairns were inundated with offers to broker the loan. Most offers were from crackpots. There were two offers, however, which brought about the downfall of both the Ministers involved, and eventually the downfall of the Labor government.

THE CAIRNS LOAN AFFAIR

In March 1975, Treasurer and Deputy Prime Minister Jim Cairns met with George Harris, a Melbourne businessman, who told Cairns that a $4 billion loan was available "with a once- only brokerage fee of 2.5%." To confirm that the offer was genuine, Harris showed Cairns a letter from the New York office of Commerce International. According to an intermediary present at the meeting, Cairns rejected the offer, as the terms of the loan were "unbelievable" and a "fairy tale" and Cairns refused to sign any letters making a commitment to the brokerage fee. He did, however, write for Harris two letters saying that the Australian government was interested in raising a loan.

Two months later, Cairns was asked in Parliament whether he had signed a letter committing the government to a 2.5% brokerage fee. Cairns denied he had signed any such agreement. However, several days later, an incriminating letter with Cairns signature was reproduced in major newspapers around Australia. Cairns did not remember signing the letter, and said so. Nevertheless, he was forced to resign his position for misleading Parliament.

THE KHEMLANI AFFAIR

Minister for Minerals and Energy, Rex Connor, was also commissioned by Whitlam to find a Middle Eastern source for the $4 billion loan. The Khemlani affair began in October 1974 when South Australian Greek emigre Gerry Karidis met up with and old friend of his, Labor Minister Clyde Cameron, at a party in Cameron's electorate. Karidis told Cameron that he knew of some sources for loans if the Australian government was interested. Cameron passed the information on to Cairns and Connor, who then met with Karidis.

Karidis was not certain of the sources of the funds, but a friend of his said that the money could certainly be raised.

The connection between Karidis and Khemlani is circuitous. Khemlani, who was manager of Dalamal and Sons, a London-based commodities firm, was a business associate of Theo Crannendonk, a Dutch arms and commodities trader. Crannendonk in turn knew Thomas Yu, a Hong Kong arms dealer, who in turn knew Karidis' friend, Tibor Shelley.

Khemlani said he first heard that the Australian government was interested in raising a loan while he was visiting his friend Crannendonk. Khemlani was in Crannendonk's office when a telex about the loan came through from Thomas Yu. Khemlani volunteered to broker the loan at very reasonable rates, despite the fact that he had no experience in brokering loans, let alone such a large one.

Khemlani arrived in Australia on November 11, 1974 with Theo Crannendonk, and met with Cameron and Connor. Connor told Khemlani about the government's interest in a $4 billion loan, and gave him a letter of introduction to that effect. On December 13, the Labor Party's Executive Council (which on that day consisted of Connor, Cairns, Whitlam, and Lionel Murphy) authorised Connor to raise the $4 billion 20-year loan "for temporary purposes."

The Executive Council can approve loan-raising activities without consulting the Labor Caucus or Parliament, but only if the loans are for temporary purposes. How Whitlam and his close circle of Ministers could consider a $4 billion loan over 20 years "temporary" is beyond comprehension, and smacks of attempting to keep the matter as secret as possible. Unfortunately, by not consulting the Labor Party Caucus, Whitlam, Connor, Cairns, and Murphy were their own worst enemies. Had they consulted with their colleagues and Parliament, they would not have placed their party and their government in hot water, and would not have entertained the idea of a loan the terms of which meant that the Australian government would have to pay $20 billion in November 1995.

Various attempts were supposedly made by Khemlani to raise the money. But each time he claimed to have come up with the goods, the deals fell through. By late December of 1974, Australian Treasury and other officials became increasingly suspicious that Khemlani was leading the government on. Sir Frederick Wheeler, the permanent head of the Treasury Department convinced Cairns, then Treasurer, that Khemlani was lying to the Australian government about his ability to raise the loan.

On December 21, 1974, Connor telexed Khemlani and terminated their relationship. On January 7, 1975, the Executive Council revoked Connor's authority to search for loan sources.

Nevertheless, Khemlani continued to work on the loan-raising, and on January 28 Connor's loan authority was re-instated, on Khemlani's promise that he was confident that a loan would soon be provided, even up to $8 billion. Connor's authority, however, was reduced to securing a loan for only $2 billion.

But again Khemlani failed. For months Khemlani promised Connor he could raise the money. Connor became obsessed that Khemlani was the man to get results, regardless of the many disappointments. Khemlani let Connor down every time.

On May 20, 1975, Connor's authority was revoked once and for all. But three days later, Khemlani contacted Connor and told him that a loan was within short reach. Connor replied positively, and continued to deal with Khemlani, behind the government's back. Even Whitlam did not know of this. On June 10, Whitlam told a press conference that none of his Ministers any longer had the authority to raise a loan, and no loan was being raised. On July 9, Connor was asked to table in Parliament all documents relating to his loan-raising activities. He neglected to tell Parliament that he was still dealing with Khemlani.

Leaks of the loan deals appeared in various newspapers around the country. Then in October 1975, after nearly a year of promises to drum up a loan, Khemlani turned up in Australia with two suitcases full of the telexes Connor had sent him, including those sent after Connor was ordered not to contact Khemlani again. Khemlani handed the telexes over to the Opposition (who had provided Khemlani with bodyguards on his arrival to Australia), and the incriminating telexes appeared in newspapers around the country.

It is not known why Khemlani would turn on the government as he did, but it is presumed that he was handsomely rewarded for it. The Liberal-Country Party Coalition denied they had paid Khemlani, but there is evidence that the media did buy the telexes off him.

Connor was forced to resign on October 14 for misleading Parliament, just like Jim Cairns five months before him. As Whitlam had also told the Australian people that no more attempts were being made to raise such a large loan, he was also accused of misleading the public. The scandal provided for the Opposition with the "reprehensible circumstances" they needed to block the passage of the Budget though the Senate and force an election.

The scene was set for the dismissal of the Whitlam government.

TOWARDS DISMISSAL

Although the Labor party won the 1972 election, it did not have a majority in the Senate. A majority is only required in the House of Representatives in order to form a government. The Senate is usually seen, and usually behaves, as a rubber-stamp body, approving the Bills introduced in the lower house. Nevertheless, in late 1973, the Coalition led by then Opposition leader, Liberal MP Billy Snedden, blocked the passage of the Budget in the Senate in order to force an election. As a result, both houses of Parliament were dissolved.

As the Labor Government was riding high in popularity, Whitlam called an election for May 1974. His government was elected for the second time in 18 months. It also gained a few more seats in the Senate. Labor and the Coalition each held 29 seats, and two independents held the balance of power.

Then in February 1975, Attorney-General Lionel Murphy was appointed to the High Court, thus leaving his New South Wales seat vacant. Traditionally, when a Minister retired from or died in office, the Premier from his State would replace him with a person from the same Party. However, the New South Wales Liberal Premier broke with tradition and appointed a non-Labor Senator. In May that year, Labor Senator Lance Barnard retired, and the Liberal Party won his seat in the June by-election. Then in June, Labor Senator Bert Milliner died in office. Queensland Premier, Joh Bjelke-Petersen, a staunchly anti-Labor man, also broke with tradition and appointed a non-Labor man to the vacant seat. The government balance in the Senate was lost.

With three Labor seats handed to the Opposition or "independents", it was possible for the Liberal-National Country Party Coalition in Opposition to again block Supply in the Senate. Malcolm Fraser had threatened to do since he wrested the Liberal Party leadership from Snedden in March 1975. On becoming leader of the Opposition, Fraser had announced that he would allow the government to govern, but kept his chances open to block the budget in the Senate and bring down the government, if the Labor Party provided any "reprehensible circumstances" that would force him to do so.

Malcolm Fraser,
Opposition Leader

When the loans scandals broke, Malcolm Fraser saw his chance to bring down the Labor Government. Attempting to raise $4 billion dollars was in itself reprehensible, but for two senior Ministers (Cairns and Connor) to mislead Parliament about their activities, and for the Prime Minister to mislead the public that loan-seeking had ceased, were definitely the "reprehensible circumstances" Fraser was looking for.

Fraser made sure that he had the backing of the senior bureaucrats, big business, the legal authorities, and the media. He personally phoned the four main press barons, who ensured their support. Then on October 16, Coalition MPs in the Senate, under Fraser's orders, deferred the Budget bills introduced by the Labor party, thus blocking Supply to the government.

Day after day in the Senate, Coalition ministers refused to pass the Budget. Without its passage, the government would run out of money and would not be able to pay civil servants' wages or pensions. The business of government would grind to a halt and cripple the country.

The Opposition insisted that Whitlam call an election for December 1975. Whitlam refused and threatened a half-Senate election - which would cause the Senate to go to the polls - something Fraser did not want, due to the threat that Fraser could lose seats and, therefore, control of the Supply bills. Neither side would back down. The Labor government sought alternatives to the Supply budget, and designed a credit system with various banks to pay pensions and wages. As the days dragged on, public opinion began to sway in favor of the Labor Government. The public blamed the Opposition for the deadlock in the Senate, and for the government's inability to pay wages and pensions. Many Coalition ministers began to waver, and tried to convince Fraser to back down. But Fraser stood firm in the face of public and party opinion, and risked his political career.

Meanwhile, the Governor-General, Sir John Kerr made feeble attempts to broker a peace.

ENTER THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL

The Governor-General is the representative of the Australian Head of State, the Queen or King of England, who is also the Queen or King of Australia. The position is one of appointment -- the Governor-General is not elected by the Australian people, but is appointed by the Prime Minister of the day.

The duties of a Governor-General are ceremonial, though the there are some "reserve powers" which had never been used until November 1975.

The Governor-General
Sir John Kerr

Both John Kerr and Gough Whitlam came from working class families. Both followed careers in law, and wanted to pursue careers in politics. Both started out early in the Labor party. But while Whitlam worked his way slowly to the top, Kerr followed a different path. Even when in the Labor party, Kerr was essentially conservative, and a monarchist. As time passed, he left the Labor Party and at one time wanted to join the Liberal Party, on the condition that if he were elected, he immediately be given a seat on the front bench. Liberal party leader Robert Menzies told him he would have to wait his time like everyone else did, so Kerr abandoned the idea.

Given this background, it is interesting that Whitlam chose to appoint him Governor-General in July 1974. Kerr's appointment was seen as an attempt to appease those who wanted a titled Governor-General as well as those who wanted someone more sympathetic to Labor. Whitlam believed that Kerr as Governor-General would take, as is the norm, "advice from his Prime Minister and from no-one else."

But this was not the case.

THE DISMISSAL - NOVEMBER 11, 1975

The Budget crisis dragged on for a month.

On November 11, Parliament sat as usual, after the morning commemorations for Remembrance Day. Whitlam and Fraser met mid-morning, and Fraser made it clear that he would accept nothing less than a full election. Whitlam then telephoned Kerr to make a 1 p.m. appointment to speak to him about a half-Senate election. Kerr then rang Fraser and made an appointment to see Fraser 10 minutes after his meeting with Whitlam. Fraser arrived early, and to save appearances, Kerr insisted that his car be parked out of sight, so that Whitlam would not see it, and hid Fraser in a back room.

When Whitlam arrived, he was unaware that Fraser was waiting in the wings. Before Whitlam could present Kerr with the letter requesting a half-Senate election, Kerr asked the Prime Minister if he would hold a full election in December. Whitlam said no, but he would be willing to hold a half-Senate election. The Governor-General then used his reserve powers, and terminated Whitlam's commission, at 1:10 p.m.; dismissing the government from office.

Whitlam stormed out and went to the Prime Minister's residence, without informing his Senate ministers of what had occurred.

After Whitlam left, Kerr appointed Malcolm Fraser as caretaker Prime Minster until an election could be held on December 13.

The Senate resumed sitting after lunch, at 2 p.m. The change in government had not been publicly announced, but Fraser had informed Coalition ministers in the Senate. So when Labor Senators re-introduced the Budget Bills 75 minutes after Whitlam was dismissed, the Coalition ministers passed the Budget, thus guaranteeing their new government had Supply.

The Prime Minister, Mr. Gough Whitlam
is dismissed on November 11, 1975

The new Coalition government called for an election on December 13, the last possible day to hold an election before the new year.

Fraser won the election.

KERR'S COUP

Sir John Kerr always insisted that the decision to sack the Whitlam government was his alone, and that he was well within his constitutional rights and duties to do so. He also insisted that he gave Whitlam enough warning about what he might do.

Neither appears to be the case. On November 4th, Kerr consulted with the Governors of New South Wales and Victoria, and received an agreement from both that if advised by Kerr, they would not issue writs for a half-Senate election. He did this behind Whitlam's back.

On November 6, he sought legal advice from Sir Garfield Barwick, the Chief Justice of the High Court. Barwick's written reply was that it was the Governor-General's duty to dismiss the Whitlam government if Kerr was satisfied that the Labor government could not secure supply. The letter further advised that Kerr should give Whitlam the options of resigning or holding a general election. If Whitlam refused to do either, then, Barwick advised, Kerr should sack him.

With Barwick's backing, Kerr knew that dismissing Whitlam would not be considered illegal should the matter go to court.

It is worth noting that Barwick's decision was hardly non-partisan. He is a conservative with no sympathy for the Whitlam government. Garfield was recently interviewed on ABC's Four Corners program, during which he admitted talking with former Liberal Prime Minister Robert Menzies a few days before the Dismissal. There is no doubt that the former PM would have taken the news of Kerr's decision to Fraser. This would explain why Fraser stood unwavering in his commitment to bring down the Labor government while the rest of his party were about to give up.

Kerr's letter dismissing Whitlam said that the deadlock in the Senate had to be resolved as quickly as possible, and that Whitlam had to either resign or call a general election. He said that as Whitlam refused to do either, he was being dismissed, and a caretaker government was being appointed to secure supply and hold an election before the end of the year.

However, there are many inconsistencies between Kerr's letter and his previous actions:
* At no stage did Kerr tell Whitlam that a prompt solution was necessary. And if a quick resolution was on his mind, why did he wait until the 26th day of the deadlock to dismiss Whitlam?
* Kerr never previously indicated that Whitlam had to either call a general election or resign. On the contrary, the opposite impression was given.
* Kerr never indicated that a half-Senate election was not suitable. Even on the 11 November, when Whitlam spoke to Kerr by phone about it, Kerr did not tell Whitlam that he would not accept it.
* Kerr said he was satisfied that there was no chance of a compromise, yet many in the Liberal party believed there would be one.
* Kerr said that a Prime Minister who could not obtain Supply could not govern, yet Supply had not yet been exhausted; the money would not run out for another two to three weeks. Why didn't Kerr wait until Supply had run out?
* Whitlam was never given the option to resign or call a general election. Kerr simply asked him if he would hold a general election. When Whitlam said no, Kerr sacked him. Therefore, Whitlam did not refuse both his options.
* Kerr moved very secretly, and very quickly. This indicates that he did not want to give Whitlam a choice.
* Kerr appointed as caretaker Prime Minister the leader of the minority party, and stood by his decision even after the House of Representatives had passed a vote of no confidence in Fraser.
* It is also interesting to note that Kerr must have known that Fraser would accept the commission as caretaker Prime Minister, with the conditions that he would call a general election and guarantee the passage of the Supply Bills. Does that mean that he spoke to Fraser before dismissing Whitlam? If so, Fraser had prior knowledge about Kerr's decision, and would have stood firm about blocking supply.

That may explain the comments made to the press by Deputy Liberal Party leader, Phillip Lynch just hours before the dismissal: "We believe the present course is sound for reasons which will become apparent to you later."

After the dismissal, two other Liberal ministers said that they had known what Kerr was going to do that morning. (The Unmaking of Gough, p. p. 355). Of course, Fraser and Deputy Opposition leader, Doug Anthony, deny they had prior knowledge of Kerr's decision.

These inconsistencies call into question Kerr's motives, and lead to questions about the timing and the real reasons behind the Dismissal of an democratically elected government.

COUP D'ETAT
WAS THE CIA INVOLVED IN THE
DISMISSAL OF AN AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT?

While the Loans affairs and the Supply crisis exploded onto the front page headlines day after day, another crisis simmered in the background -- the security crisis. As John Menadue, the head of the Prime Minister's Department, says, to understand the events leading to the dismissal, you must "follow the path of the security crisis." (The National Times, November 9-15, 1980).

TROUBLE ON THE HORIZON

The new Labor Government's changes in both domestic and foreign policy earned Whitlam Henry Kissinger's epithet of "one more effete social democrat." Neither Kissinger nor Nixon had any time for Whitlam or left-wing politicians in general.

People at the highest levels were concerned about what Whitlam might do to the long- standing Australian - US relationship. CIA Director until 1975, William Colby, in his book Honorable Men, ranked the Whitlam government as one of the major crises of his career, comparable to the 1973 Yom Kippur (Arab-Israeli) War, when the U.S. had considered using nuclear weapons to help Israel win the war.

Many others in the intelligence community were concerned, including Ted Shackley, head of the East Asia Division of the CIA, who was said to be paranoid about Whitlam; and James Jesus Angleton, head of the CIA's Counter-Intelligence section, who despised the Labor government.

One has to ask why a new government in an allied country would cause such consternation. It seems that in the areas of foreign policy and foreign (and domestic) intelligence and security that Whitlam's Labor government stepped on a few (American) toes.

AMERICAN TOES

Almost immediately after Whitlam came into office, his government's foreign policy initiatives angered the Americans. Among Whitlam's many sins were opening an embassy in Hanoi and allowing Cuba to open a consulate in Sydney.

The question of the Vietnam war was a particularly sticky one between the new Labor government and the Americans. Several Labor politicians had gained popularity in Australia by leading the anti-Vietnam war movement. They outspokenly called Nixon and Kissinger "mass murderers" and "maniacs" for their conduct of the Vietnam War. Dr. Jim Cairns called for public rallies to condemn US bombing in North Vietnam, and also for boycotts of American products. The Australian dockers unions reacted by refusing to unload American ships. While Whitlam was more moderate than Dr. Jim Cairns, Clyde Cameron and Tom Uren (prominent anti-Vietnam War Labor Ministers), he felt he had to say something to the Americans. He wrote what he considered a "moderately worded" letter to Nixon voicing his criticism of the bombing of Hanoi and Haiphong in North Vietnam, on the basis that it would be counterproductive. Nixon, needless to say, was not amused. Some insiders said he was apoplectic with rage and resented the implications that he was immoral and had to be told his duty by an outsider. Kissinger added that Whitlam's "uninformed comments about our Christmas bombing [of North Vietnam] had made him a particular object of Nixon's wrath." (Mother Jones, Feb.-Mar., 1984, p. 15)

Soon after Whitlam took office, the American ambassador to Australia, Walter Rice, was sent to meet with Whitlam in order to politely tell him to mind his own business about Vietnam. Whitlam ambushed Rice, dominated the meeting, and spoke for 45 minutes rebuking the US for its conduct of the Vietnam War. Whitlam told Rice that in a press conference the next day, "It would be difficult to avoid words like 'atrocious' and 'barbarous' " when asked about the bombing.

Whitlam also brought up the issue of the American bases in Australia, and warned Rice that although he did not propose to alter the arrangements regarding the U.S. bases, "to be practical and realistic," Whitlam said, "if there were any attempt, to use familiar jargon, 'to screw us or bounce us' inevitably these arrangements would become a matter of contention." (Minutes of the meeting were reproduced in The Eye, July 1987.)

PINE GAP

**Pine Gap**

The issue of Pine Gap was a touchy one for the Americans.

The Pine Gap installation at Alice Springs is one of several US bases in Australia. Its stated primary function is the collection of data from American satellites over the Soviet Union, China, and Europe, and other CIA sources and transmitters around the world. The base could pick up the Soviet's coded messages about missile launchings, and can also intercept radar, radio, and microwave communications. It was integral for tracking Soviet missiles and missile testing during the Cold War, and making sure that the Soviet Union was adhering to arms control agreements. Pine Gap, as well as the other bases at Nurrungar in South Australia and North-West Cape in Western Australia are extremely important to the U.S. James Jesus Angleton, head of CIA counter-intelligence for 20 years, said Pine Gap's importance was "unlike any similar installation that may be in any other place in the free world, it elevates Australia in terms of strategic matters." (A Secret Country, p. 198). Among the reasons for Pine Gap's importance are the political stability of Australia, the Australian government's tendency towards loyalty to the United States, and the isolation of the location of Pine Gap itself. It is extremely well-placed for its purpose.

Pine Gap is supposed to be a joint facility, staffed equally by Australians and Americans. The information gathered there is also supposed to be shared. However, it had long been suspected by Australians, and by many in the Labor Party, that the Americans did not share all the information with the Australian government, nor was the US forthright about some of the functions of the base.

There were at least three occasions when the Americans did not share vital information about the bases:

1) The transmitters at the North West Cape were used to assist the US in mining Haiphong harbor in 1972. The Whitlam government was opposed to the mining of Vietnamese harbors, and would not have appreciated US facilities on Australian soil being used to assist such an undertaking.
2) The satellites controlled by Pine Gap and Nurrungar were used to pinpoint targets for bombings in Cambodia. Again this was an activity to which the Whitlam government was opposed.
3) Whitlam was furious when he found out after the fact that US bases in Australia were put on a Level 3 alert during the Yom Kippur war. The Australian bases were in danger of attack, yet the Australian Prime Minister was not alerted to this. (Incidentally, Kissinger was angered that Whitlam could be such a pest about such matters.)

There was also speculation that Pine Gap was really run by the CIA. Victor Marchetti, former Chief Executive Assistant to the Deputy Director of the CIA, and one of the drafters of the Pine Gap treaty, confirmed this suspicion: "The CIA runs it, and the CIA denies it," he said (A Secret Country, p. 198).

It was vitally important that the American base at Pine Gap remain in Australia. The U.S. had apparently discussed re-locating the base to Guam, because of the political turmoil in Australia in 1975. The cost of relocating the base was estimated to be over a billion dollars. Besides the costs, Guam was not considered to be nearly as suitable a location as Pine Gap (The National Times, Nov. 17-22, 1975).

Whitlam's conversation with Rice was not the only time he introduced uncertainties about the American bases. When asked in Parliament in April 1974 about Soviet approaches for scientific facilities in Australia (which were rejected), Whitlam suggested that the existing bases treaty with the Americans would not be extended.

The treaty covering Pine Gap was due for renewal in mid-December 1975.

In 1975, the Australian Defense Minister, Bill Morrison, met with CIA Director William Colby. Morrison was blunt with Colby, and said that he couldn't guarantee the future of the US bases if it was found that the CIA was involved in activities the Australian government hadn't been told about. (The Sun, 30 April, 1977)

Yet despite such comments, it seems unlikely that Whitlam would have closed the bases down. Comments like those made to Rice and in Parliament were mostly posturing. Most comments made by Whitlam indicated that he did not mind the bases being in Australia. What he did want was to reform the alliance. He would have preferred that the US keep the Australian government informed about the true functions of the bases, and disclose all information gathered by the bases --not a totally unreasonable request.

SECURITY RISK

Nevertheless, Whitlam's posturing caused alarm. When Ambassador Marshall Green (Walter Rice's replacement) was interviewed years after the Dismissal, it was suggested to him that Whitlam would never have closed the bases. He answered, "You might say that with hindsight, but you don't know how complex things were at the time. The trouble was you never really knew where you stood with him [Whitlam]" (Book of Leaks, p. 90).

Ted Shackley, chief of the East Asia Division at the CIA was furious about Whitlam's threats to the bases. According to Frank Snepp, who served with him, Shackley was "paranoid" about Labor, and regarded it as a security risk.

After Whitlam's threats to the US bases, Shackley in return threatened to cut off the flow of intelligence information to Australia. This was a serious threat, as Australia was a long- standing member of the UKUSA agreement by which Australia, the US, England, Canada and New Zealand shared intelligence information with each other.

In this instance, the newly appointed CIA Station Chief in Australia, John Walker, successfully argued against cutting off the flow of intelligence information to Australia, on the grounds that the Labor government could then have legitimate grounds for shutting down Pine Gap.

THE HATCHET MAN

The appointment of Marshall Green as the US Ambassador to Australia in 1973 indicates how seriously the US took the situation. Green was far and away the most experienced man to be appointed Ambassador to Australia. The post was usually given to amateurs: friends of the President, or campaign contributors. Green, on the other hand, was a career diplomat who had served in many countries important to the U.S.

His appointment was seen by some Labor ministers as a sinister move. Senator Bill Brown called Green a "top US hatchet man" and pointed out that Green's previous postings had been marked by coups and political upheaval in four of the countries in which he had been posted, including Indonesia. He was widely known as "the coupmaster".

Green's stated goals (in order of importance) were 1) to maintain US bases in Australia; 2) to keep the door open to American investment; and 3) to encourage Australian political support to the US when and where it needed it, such as at the United Nations, and over issues such as East Timor, North Korea, and Vietnam.

UNRELIABLE

Green's appointment did little to ease the tensions between Australia and the U.S. government and intelligence community. It was too late.

The security crisis began when Whitlam insisted that his aides did not need to be vetted by ASIO (the Australian Security and Intelligence Organisation, whose function is similar to the FBI). Sir Arthur Tange, permanent head of the Defense Department, and the UKUSA's "main man" in Australia "dutifully" reported this to U.S. intelligence, who saw Whitlam's move as not only irresponsible but dangerous. The next day, a US Embassy official told Richard Hall, author of The Secret State , "Your Prime Minister has just cut off one of his only options." (p. 2). Whitlam backed down immediately, but the impression of unreliability had already been made.

THE MURPHY RAID

The next glitch in the intelligence relationship came as a consequence of what came to be termed "the Murphy raid." In March, 1973, the Attorney General, Lionel Murphy, was preparing security of the upcoming visit from the Yugoslav Prime Minister. It came to Murphy's attention that ASIO was not being forthright about its knowledge of Croatian terrorist groups which might threaten the life of the Yugoslav Prime Minister. He flew down to the ASIO headquarters in Melbourne, where Commonwealth police had already secured the building, and went in search of the relevant information. The media got wind of the "raid", and blew it out of proportion.

**James Jesus Angleton**

The CIA was furious. "We entrusted the highest secrets of counter-intelligence to Australian services and we saw the sanctity of that information being jeopardized by a bull in a China shop," said James Jesus Angleton, head of counter-intelligence at the CIA until 1974. Angleton said the raid "had shown an outrageous lack of confidence," and added, "how could we stand aside without having a crisis in terms of our responsibilities as to whether we would maintain relationships with the Australian intelligence services." The threat of breaking off the intelligence relationship had been a distinct possibility (Denis Freney, The CIA's Australian Connection, 1977, p. 27-28).

Angleton had seemed perplexed by the fact that it was Murphy's prerogative, as an elected representative of the Australian people, and whose jurisdiction covered ASIO, to scrutinize ASIO's activities.

ASIO, ASIS, AND THE CIA

As members of the UKUSA agreement, ASIO and ASIS (the Australian equivalent of the CIA) were very close to the CIA, and have often been accused of being more loyal to the US and British intelligence community than to their own country's government. In the early 1970s, many ASIO and ASIS agents were certainly ideologically closer to the right-wing elements in the CIA than to the Labor government. When Labor came to power, they did little to help the floundering relationship between the Whitlam government and the US, and instead tended to exaggerate the "threat" posed by the Labor party to themselves and to the American intelligence agencies.

The relationship between the Whitlam government and the intelligence services (ASIO, ASIS and the CIA) was further soured by a number of other factors. For example, members of the Labor Party complained that ASIO dedicated too much of their time to following the activities of left-wing groups, and not enough time to right-wing groups. The Croatian terrorist groups were a case in point. ASIO resented having their resources diverted to what they saw as wasteful areas, such as keeping tabs on the small Nazi party.

Another area of tension resulted when Whitlam discovered that ASIS agents were working with the CIA to destabilise Chile and overthrow President Salvador Allende. Whitlam ordered them to leave immediately. He was even more furious when he learned that the ASIS men had still not left Chile months later.

A similar fracas occurred over East Timor, during the lead-up to Indonesia's invasion of its small neighbour. In late October 1975, Whitlam sacked ASIS head William Robertson for not informing him that there was an ASIS contact working in East Timor. This caused great consternation in the US, because the American government wanted the Australians to at the very least ignore Indonesia's actions in taking over East Timor. The concern (though unfounded) was that Whitlam would side with the left-wing Timorese independence movement. Certainly many Labor ministers did favor the Fretelin movement over Indonesia.

The National Intelligence Daily, a top secret CIA briefing document for the eyes of the President, reported that "The Whitlam government seems willing to risk important relationships with Indonesia and the US in order to appease leftist forces within the Labor Party." (Book of Leaks, p.93).

Whitlam also sacked ASIO head Peter Barbour in October 1975, though the reasons are unknown. Both Robertson and Barbour were long-standing and trusted members of the UKUSA community. Both were replaced by men Whitlam thought would be more loyal to him. The replacements were not approved of by the Americans.

Whitlam also set up the Hope Royal Commission in 1975 to look into the domestic intelligence services. This was widely perceived to be a threat to the power and existence of the various intelligence organisations.

The combination of incidences involving the security and intelligence services brought a sense of disquiet to US intelligence, which was reinforced by Whitlam's occasional hints that the treaty concerning US bases in Australia, including Pine Gap, may not be renewed if the US did anything to anger Whitlam.

THE SPY UNCOVERED

The security crisis reached its peak in early November 1975.

In October, various Labor staff members, including those at the Prime Minister's department, began to look into foreign intelligence involvement in Australia, including the US bases.

They received a tip about Richard Stallings, the head of Pine Gap between 1966 and 1968, during the base's construction. Whitlam heard that he was a CIA employee working under the cover of the US Defense Department. In order to authenticate the information, the Prime Minister's Department asked the Foreign Affairs Department for its list of all CIA agents in Australia. Stallings' name was not on it. However, it came to Whitlam's attention that the Australian Defence Department kept a more comprehensive list. Richard Stallings appeared on that list.

Sir Arthur Tange, permanent head of the Defense Department, warned Whitlam that he (Tange) had a duty to inform the CIA that Whitlam knew the identity of one of its deep cover agents. Apparently Whitlam did not object. The CIA now knew what Whitlam was up to.

Kerr (left) and Doug Anthony (right),
CIA connections.

In an almost campaign-style speech to an ALP rally in Alice Springs on November 2nd, 1975, Whitlam made a spur-of-the-moment remark: "Every week, he [Malcolm Fraser] gets more and more desperate in his abuse of me. I have had no association with CIA money in Australia as Mr. Anthony has," he said, referring to National Country Party Leader, Doug Anthony, deputy leader of the Opposition. Anthony and Stallings had been friends for quite some time, after Stallings and his family had rented Anthony's Canberra home.

Whitlam did not actually name Stallings. The next day, an article in the Australian Financial Review took up Whitlam's accusation, and named Richard Stallings as the CIA employee, and Pine Gap as a CIA-run installation.

Anthony was compelled to defend himself. He retorted that he was not aware that his friend Stallings was a CIA man. He demanded that Whitlam provide evidence. In a speech two days later, Whitlam stated that he knew of at least two instances in which the CIA had funded the Opposition parties, but he did not provide any proof.

At this point, the Australian Foreign Affairs and Defence Departments, via the US embassy in Canberra, made it clear to the US State Department and President Ford that they "would welcome formal US government statements denying any CIA financial involvement in Australian political parties." (Mother Jones, p. 44). The US State Department obliged, and categorically denied that Stallings was a CIA employee. The US embassy and the head of the CIA, William Colby, also denied CIA involvement in Australian politics.

Sir Arthur Tange, was extremely concerned about the Stallings matter. Tange had extensive contacts with the intelligence community and realised how angry the Americans were about Whitlam and the press revealing CIA operatives and installations. He made frantic efforts to diffuse the situation. He asked Bill Morrison, the Defence Minister, to speak to Doug Anthony and convince him to drop the matter for the sake of "national security". But it was too late. Anthony wanted to clear his name and refused to drop it. Instead, he put a question on the Parliamentary notice paper for Whitlam to provide proof of his accusations.

Whitlam's answer was scheduled to be read on November 11, the very day Whitlam and his government would be dismissed from office in Australia's only coup d'etat.

"NATIONAL SECURITY"

A draft copy of Whitlam's answer was circulated, and a copy given to Sir Arthur Tange. The answer stated that Whitlam had obtained his information from the Defence Department, which in turn obtained its information from the US Defence Department. Tange tried desperately to get Whitlam to modify his answer. He was concerned that because the US government had categorically denied that Stallings was a CIA employee, Whitlam would be calling members of the US government liars. But Whitlam refused to change his answer, as he believed that not to reveal his sources would be to mislead Parliament. On the day Whitlam was to read his answer in Parliament, Tange told a Whitlam staffer that "This is the gravest risk to the nation's security there has ever been." (The Nation Review, May 7-13, 1976, p.733).

The crisis inspired the now infamous cable from Ted Shackley via ASIO's Washington office to ASIO headquarters in Australia. It is reprinted here in full:

FOLLOWING MESSAGE RECEIVED FROM ASIO LIAISON OFFICER WASHINGTON: BEGINS: ON NOVEMBER 8 SHACKLEY CHIEF EAST ASIA DIVISION CIA REQUESTED ME TO PASS THE FOLLOWING MESSAGE TO DG [DIRECTOR GENERAL].
ON 2 NOVEMBER THE PM OF AUSTRALIA MADE A STATEMENT AT ALICE SPRINGS TO THE EFFECT THAT THE CIA HAD BEEN FUNDING ANTHONY'S NATIONAL COUNTRY PARTY IN AUSTRALIA.
ON 4 NOVEMBER THE US EMBASSY IN AUSTRALIA APPROACHED AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL AND CATEGORICALLY DENIED THAT CIA HAD GIVEN OR PASSED FUNDS TO AN ORGANISATION OR CANDIDATE FOR POLITICAL OFFICE IN AUSTRALIA AND TO THIS EFFECT WAS DELIVERED TO ROLAND AT DFA [DEPARTMENT OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS] CANBERRA ON 5 NOVEMBER.
ON 6 NOVEMBER ASST SECRETARY EDWARDS OF US STATE DEPARTMENT VISITING DCM [DEPUTY CHIEF OF MISSION] AT THE AUSTRALIAN EMBASSY IN WASHINGTON AND PASSED SAME MESSAGE THAT THE CIA HAD NOT FUNDED AN AUSTRALIAN POLITICAL PARTY. IT WAS REQUESTED THAT THIS MESSAGE BE SENT TO CANBERRA. AT THIS STAGE CIA WAS DEALING ONLY WITH THE STALLINGS INCIDENT AND WAS ADOPTING A NO COMMENT ATTITUDE IN THE HOPE THAT THE MATTER WOULD BE GIVEN LITTLE OR NO PUBLICITY. STALLINGS IS A RETIRED CIA EMPLOYEE [Author's emphasis].
ON NOVEMBER 6 THE PRIME MINISTER PUBLICLY REPEATED THE ALLEGATION THAT HE KNEW OF TWO INSTANCES IN WHICH CIA MONEY HAD BEEN USED TO INFLUENCE DOMESTIC AUSTRALIAN POLITICS. SIMULTANEOUSLY PRESS COVERAGE IN AUSTRALIA WAS SUCH THAT A NUMBER OF CIA MEMBERS SERVING IN AUSTRALIA HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED --WALKER UNDER STATE DEPARTMENT COVER AND FITZWATER AND BONIN UNDER DEFENCE COVER. NOW THAT THESE FOUR PERSONS HAVE BEEN PUBLICISED IT IS NOT POSSIBLE FOR THE CIA TO CONTINUE TO DEAL WITH THE MATTER ON A NO COMMENT BASIS. THEY NOW HAVE TO CONFER WITH THE COVER AGENCIES WHICH HAVE BEEN SAYING THAT THE PERSONS CONCERNED ARE IN FACT WHAT THEY SAY THERE ARE, E.G. DEFENCE DEPARTMENT SAYING THAT STALLINGS IS A RETIRED DEFENCE DEPARTMENT EMPLOYEE.
ON NOVEMBER 7 FIFTEEN NEWSPAPER OR WIRE SERVICE REPS CALLED THE PENTAGON SEEKING INFORMATION ON THE ALLEGATIONS MADE IN AUSTRALIA. CIA IS PERPLEXED AT THIS POINT AS TO WHAT ALL THIS MEANS. DOES THIS SIGNIFY SOME CHANGE IN OUR BILATERAL INTELLIGENCE SECURITY RELATED FIELDS? CIA CANNOT SEE HOW THIS DIALOGUE WITH CONTINUED REFERENCE TO CIA CAN DO OTHER THAN BLOW THE LID OFF THOSE INSTALLATIONS WHERE THE PERSONS CONCERNED HAVE BEEN WORKING AND WHICH ARE VITAL TO BOTH OF OUR SERVICES AND COUNTRIES, PARTICULARLY THE INSTALLATIONS AT ALICE SPRINGS.

ON NOVEMBER 7, AT A PRESS CONFERENCE, COLBY WAS ASKED WHETHER THE ALLEGATIONS MADE IN AUSTRALIA WERE TRUE. HE CATEGORICALLY DENIED THEM. CONGRESSMAN OTIS PIKE CHAIRMAN OF THE CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE INQUIRING INTO THE CIA, HAS BEGUN TO MAKE ENQUIRIES ON THE ISSUE AND HAS ASKED WHETHER THE CIA HAS BEEN FUNDING AUSTRALIAN POLITICAL PARTIES. THIS HAS BEEN DENIED BY THE CIA REP IN CANBERRA IN PUTTING THE CIA POSITION TO RELEVANT PERSONS THERE. HOWEVER, CIA FEELS IT NECESSARY TO SPEAK ALSO DIRECTLY TO ASIO BECAUSE OF THE COMPLEXITY OF THE PROBLEM. HAS ASIO HQ BEEN CONTACTED OR INVOLVED? CIA CAN UNDERSTAND A STATEMENT MADE IN POLITICAL DEBATE BUT CONSTANT FURTHER UNRAVELING WORRIES THEM. IS THERE A CHANGE IN THE PRIME MINISTER'S ATTITUDE IN AUSTRALIAN POLICY IN THIS FIELD? THIS MESSAGE SHOULD BE REGARDED AS AN OFFICIAL DEMARCHE ON A SERVICE TO SERVICE LINK. IT IS A FRANK EXPLANATION OF A PROBLEM SEEKING COUNSEL ON THAT PROBLEM. CIA FEELS THAT EVERYTHING POSSIBLE HAS BEEN DONE ON A DIPLOMATIC BASIS AND NOW ON AN INTELLIGENCE LIAISON LINK THEY FEEL THAT IF THIS PROBLEM CANNOT BE SOLVED THEY DO NOT SEE HOW OUR MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL RELATIONSHIPS ARE GOING TO CONTINUE [authors' emphasis]. THE CIA FEELS GRAVE CONCERNS AS TO WHERE THIS TYPE OF PUBLIC DISCUSSION MAY LEAD. THE DG SHOULD BE ASSURED THAT CIA DOES NOT LIGHTLY ADOPT THIS ATTITUDE. YOUR URGENT ADVICE WOULD BE APPRECIATED AS TO THE REPLY WHICH SHOULD BE MADE TO CIA. AMBASSADOR IS FULLY INFORMED OF THIS MESSAGE.

When Shackley was interviewed years later, he said that his cable had authorisation from above. Although he did not name names, the implication was that Kissinger had given the OK. (Book of Leaks, p. 97).

The implications of the message were firstly that the CIA was by-passing the Australian government and virtually demanding that ASIO intervene and pressure the government, and that ASIO has an obligation of loyalty to the CIA to do so. The message was not meant to be passed on to Whitlam. However, the acting head of ASIO was a Whitlam appointee who saw the seriousness of the matter. He handed the cable to Whitlam. The cable was made public several years later.

The cable also made it clear that the CIA had been deceiving Australian government about Richard Stallings and Pine Gap. What else were they deceiving the Australian government about?

The cable also implied that the CIA would threaten to cut off the flow of intelligence information to the Australian services, and perhaps take even more strenuous action. As Shackley's cable indicated, there were several other CIA men working under cover in Australia. Their identities had not been revealed by Whitlam, but by the media. Nevertheless, there was no way for Shackley and the CIA to know how much Whitlam knew, and how much he would reveal to the public, especially about Pine Gap, but also about other CIA activities in Australia. Shackley may have already known that Whitlam had begun to look into CIA matters in Australia.

By revealing what he knew already, Whitlam had telegraphed his intentions. He had to be stopped.

Whitlam did not have the opportunity to present the proof he had about CIA involvement in Australian politics to Parliament on November 11. He was dismissed by Governor-General Sir John Kerr at 1:10 p.m. that day.

What may be nearly as unfortunate as the Dismissal of an elected government is the timing of Whitlam's revelations about the CIA and Anthony. Labor Minister Clyde Cameron, wrote in his diaries, "Once his allegations hit the headlines, the sources dried up immediately." (The Cameron Diaries, p. 499). Whitlam had moved too soon.

CIA IN CRISIS
Even in November 1975, speculation about CIA involvement in the Dismissal was rife. Since that day, speculation has not dampened.

Yet from the time allegations about Richard Stallings and Pine Gap hit the papers, the CIA and the American government denied any involvement in Australia.

This is understandable, considering that while the events of the dismissal unfolded, several Congressional committees were investigating the CIA's activities all over the world. The CIA were facing pressures never before encountered. On November 2, 1975, the same day Whitlam made his accusations about the National Country Party being funded by the CIA, Henry Kissinger fired CIA director William Colby for being too honest with Congress. The CIA was in trouble.

If Whitlam had stood up in Parliament on November 11 and revealed that Pine Gap was a CIA-run installation and that the CIA were funding political parties in Australia, the US Congress may have initiated an investigation into CIA activities in Australia. It is bad enough to undermine a third world government, but to undermine an ally is worse. The CIA would have been condemned and swiftly re-organised or worse, possibly shut down completely.

Therefore they continued to deny any involvement in the political events in Australia, and hoped the matter would fade away.

STRAIGHT FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH
Despite CIA denials, a picture has formed of their dirty tricks in Australia. And much of the evidence comes straight from the mouths of CIA employees.

Former CIA deputy director of intelligence, Ray Cline, denies that there was any "formal" CIA covert action program against the Whitlam government during Cline's time in office (Cline left the CIA in 1973). "I'm sure we never had a political action program, although some people around the office were beginning to think we should." He explains that the US and Australia had a very healthy relationship in the area of intelligence exchange. "But when the Whitlam government came to power, there was a period or turbulence to do with Alice Springs [Pine Gap]." He went on to say, "the whole Whitlam episode was very painful. He had a very hostile attitude."

Cline denied direct CIA interference, but outlined a scenario he saw as acceptable US intelligence behavior. "You couldn't possibly throw in a covert action program to a country like Australia, but the CIA would go so far as to provide information to people who would bring it to the surface in Australia..." for example a Whitlam error "which they were willing to pump into the system so it might be to his damage." Such actions do not, in Cline's opinion, amount to a "political operation."

The method as outlined by Cline would be for the CIA to supply damaging information which the Australian security services would use against the government, presumably via other people, such as the media and the Opposition parties. This scenario fits well with what others have said. A US diplomat stationed in Australia at the time, tells how CIA station chief in Australia, John Walker would "blow in the ear" of National Country Party members, and not long afterwards, the Whitlam government would be asked embarrassing questions in Parliament (The National Times, March 21-27, 1982).

Former Deputy Prime Minister Jim Cairns concurred that the methods used by the CIA would be as simple as that. When asked if he thought the CIA were capable of interfering with Australian politics, Cairns told the authors, "The CIA is capable, no doubt." By interfering, Cairns means gossip, influencing people by words. He also said it was not a "conspiracy" as such, but that these people are like that anyway. That is, the CIA would seek out like-minded people: "They think the same way, act the same way -- it's not a conspiracy as such, just the way they think and act. And it's still going on today."

The loans affairs are perfect examples where "gossip" could have been used to good effect - - and was.

WAS CAIRNS SET-UP?

Whitlam (left)
and Cairns (right)

The evidence that Cairns was set up is compelling. The motives may have been not only to discredit and damage the Whitlam government, but also to get him out of the way. Cairns was already one of the most popular Labor ministers for his leadership of the anti-Vietnam war movement. His popularity rose over Christmas 1974, when as Acting Prime Minister he flew to Darwin to view the destruction caused by Hurricane Tracy. As Deputy Prime Minister, he would be the next in line to take on the leadership of the Labor Party. But as he was even more left-wing and anti-American than Whitlam, the prospect of Cairns being the next Prime Minister frightened the CIA. Even early on attempts were made to discredit Cairns. For example, ASIO leaked their dossier on him to the Bulletin (June 1974). It indicated that ASIO's main concern about Cairn's was the "terrorist" potential of his part in the anti-Vietnam war protests.

Far more startling are the facts concerning George Harris and the loans affair. The letter Harris showed Cairns was from Commerce International, an arms dealing company based in Belgium, and with widespread links with the CIA. Commerce International is a highly classified topic at the CIA.

It does not seem completely clear how the Opposition obtained knowledge of the letter with Cairns signature on it. However, Harris was seen with Phillip Lynch, Deputy Leader of the Liberal Party, a few days before Cairns was asked in Parliament about the letter. If Harris was legitimate, why would he leak the information to the Opposition?

Further evidence of a set-up was provided by Leslie Nagy, an intermediary at the meeting between Cairns and Harris. According to Nagy, Cairns had left the meeting, refusing to sign his name to a letter making a commitment to a brokerage fee. Yet minutes later, to Nagy's surprise, Harris produced a letter with Cairns' signature agreeing to the 2.5% brokerage fee. While Harris denies that he set Cairns up, Cairns still does not acknowledge that he signed the incriminating letter.

Lastly, the CIA themselves provided an interesting hint that there was some sleight-of-hand in the loans affair. The National Intelligence Daily, the CIA's intelligence gathering arm's top secret briefing document for the President reported on July 3, 1975 that Dr. Cairns had been sacked, "even though some of the evidence had been fabricated." An ASIO officer writing for the Bulletin in June 1976 concurred. He said he believed that "some of the documents which helped discredit the Labor Government in the last year in office were forgeries planted by the CIA."

CREEPY KHEMLANI
Khemlani was a suspicious character from the word go. Why Connor chose to deal through him in the first place, and why he continued to deal with him, is a mystery.

Khemlani's behavior during the 11 months of the loans affair was certainly peculiar. The heads of the Treasury Department and the Reserve Bank had various lengthy discussions about him. They asked the very pertinent question of why Khemlani had volunteered in the first place, and why he continued to say he could get the $4 billion loan. After all, Khemlani spent a great deal of time, and presumably a great deal of money, yet the Australian government had never promised him anything in return and had never paid him a cent. In fact, the arrangement was that Khemlani was to be paid by whomever provided the loan, rather than by the Australian government. So where was Khemlani getting his money? Why was he so patient, and why did he continue to search for the money when he was promised nothing in return?

Khemlani

Khemlani's connections, and his activities after the Dismissal shed some light on the loans affair.

Khemlani heard about the Australian loan from Thomas Yu, a Hong Kong businessman. Both Yu and Khemlani's friend Theo Crannendonk had entered into a joint venture with Commerce International's Gerhard Whiffen, CI's Singapore representative, in a proposal to ship arms to the CIA backed rebels in Angola. The joint venture also included Chris Brading and Don Booth. Booth was a former CIA employee. Brading was a pilot for Air America, a CIA airline which operated extensively during the Vietnam war all over South East Asia.

It is highly possible that Yu sent Khemlani to Australia to conduct dirty tricks for the CIA.

Interestingly, the CIA says it does not have any files on Khemlani. However, they told journalists Brian Toohey and Marian Wilkinson that the NSA did have information on Khemlani. The National Security Agency (NSA) is the US intelligence organisation which intercepts communications overseas to pass on to other intelligence agencies. It is not surprising that they would have intelligence on Khemlani, as he was firing off telexes all over the Middle East. The NSA was very active in monitoring communications in the area, especially in the mid 1970s.

Several years after the loans affair, Khemlani was still up to his old tricks, defrauding people of their money. In 1980, Khemlani financially ruined an American businessman by the name of Charles Murphy. He left behind in Murphy's home suitcases full of documents detailing many of his activities over the last couple of years, including his connection with the Nugan Hand Bank of Sydney.

In 1978, Khemlani entered into a relationship with the Nugan Hand Bank's Cayman Island's branch. The Nugan Hand Bank was based in Sydney from 1970. It collapsed in 1980 when one of its co-founders, Frank Nugan, was found dead in his car, with ex-CIA chief William Colby's business card in his pocket. Nugan Hand Bank has since been found to have extensive links to arms and drug dealing, and the CIA. Its list of employees reads like a who's who of the CIA and US military circles. The other co-founder of Nugan Hand, Michael Hand, disappeared after the bank's collapse. Hand was employed by the CIA for covert operations in South East Asia during the Vietnam War. Other Nugan Hand managers included General Edwin Black (Commander of US forces in Thailand), Rear-Admiral Earl Yates (former Chief of Staff for Policy and Plans of the US Pacific Command and a counter- insurgency specialist), Patry Loomis (CIA employee), and William Colby, head of the CIA.

It is not known if Khemlani's ties with Nugan Hand predated their relationship in 1978. But in September of that year, he contacted them with a proposal to have Nugan Hand act as a trustee for several of Khemlani's projects.

The papers held by Murphy also show that after his loan-raising activities with Australia, he went on to pull similar stunts in several third world countries, including Haiti, Sierra Leone, and Ghana.

In 1979, Khemlani was arrested by the FBI for stealing $1 million worth of bonds from the Citizens National Bank in Chicago. He was given a suspended 3 year sentence for turning state's evidence and fingering the Mafia people he was working for. US authorities informed ASIO of Khemlani's arrest. Why they told ASIO is not known, as there were no Australian warrants out for his arrest.

Other evidence corroborates Khemlani's possible CIA connections:
* Former CIA employee Ralph McGehee came out with his own tell-all book on the CIA, Deadly Deceits, following the example to Victor Marchetti and Phillip Agee, who in the early 1970s released their own books about the CIA's nefarious activities. McGehee says that the CIA played a major part in the downfall of Connor and Cairns by releasing forged documents. The documents were tabled in Parliament to discredit and damage the Whitlam government. The documents provided by Khemlani were among the forgeries.

* On November 11, 1975, Whitlam received a letter, along with a draft of a telex, which shows the CIA involvement with Khemlani. The draft was found in a hotel room in Hawaii, and was posted anonymously to Whitlam.
The draft reads:
DRAFT COPY ONLY

1. DO NOT TRANSMIT VIA PHONE OR LETTER. ENCIPHER BEFORE TRANSMITTING BY TELEX CONTACT 'LM' AT 536 6009 FOR ASSISTANCE

. REFERENCE YOUR CORRESPONDENCE ON 11 OCT, 1975.

ON 16 OCT., MR. T. KHEMLANI WILL BE DEPARTING FOR SINGAPORE TO ARRANGE MATTERS IN CASE GOVERNMENT CAPITULATION SEEMS NEAR.

IF NOT MR. KHEMLANI WILL RETURN TO AUSTRALIA ON OR ABOUT 26 OCT 75 TO CREATE FURTHER CHAOS.

NEWSPAPERS' EDITORIALS MUST CONTINUE TO PUT PRESSURE ON THE LABOR GOVERNMENT IF CAPITULATION IS TO SUCCEED.

IF NECESSARY OFFER....

IF CAPITULATION DOES NOT SUCCEED BY 14 NOVEMBER 75, SUPPORT FROM OVERSEAS WILL CEASE UNTIL MID 76. (Author's emphasis).

The draft telex appeared in the Sun newspaper in May 1977. The reporter said that the CIA denied they had anyone with the initials 'LM' working in Hawaii.

But when a National Times newspaper reporter rang the number given in the draft, they were connected to CIA headquarters in Hawaii.

WAS NUGAN HAND INVOLVED?
In 1981, a CIA contract employee, Joseph Flynn, claimed that he had been paid to forge some documents relating to the loans affair, and also to bug Whitlam's hotel room. The person who paid him was Michael Hand, co-founder of the Nugan Hand Bank. (The National Times, Jan. 4-10, 1981).

THE BOYCE TRIAL
In 1977, more confirmation and details about the CIA's involvement in Australian politics emerged when Christopher Boyce and Andrew Dalton Lee were arrested in the United States for selling secrets to the Soviet Union.

Boyce started work in 1974 with TRW Incorporated, a Californian aerospace company which did contract work for the CIA. Boyce's job was as a cipher clerk in the "black vault", a code room where top-secret messages from American bases and satellites were received and deciphered. Among the bases sending messages via TRW was Pine Gap.

Christopher Boyce,
hero and traitor

Boyce and Lee were both disillusioned by the state of America. One day, whilst discussing the Watergate scandal and the CIA inspired coup in Chile, Boyce said to Lee, "You think that's bad? You should hear what the CIA is doing to the Australians." He then told Lee about the deceptions practiced by the US on the Australian government.

Boyce and Lee decided that the best way to change things was to sell the secrets Boyce learned in the black vault to the Soviets. Boyce would photograph documents, and Lee sold them to the Soviet embassy in Mexico City. While Boyce's motivation was his idealism, Lee, a drug-addict, was in it for the money.

They were caught in 1977. Lee was arrested for loitering outside the Soviet embassy in Mexico City, and was brought back to the United States to face trial.

At his trial, part of Boyce's defence was that he was opposed to American and CIA activities overseas, particularly in Australia. Boyce told of his initial briefing at TRW, when he was informed that most of the communication received in the black vault came from Pine Gap, and that despite an agreement between the US and Australian governments to share the information obtained at Pine Gap, the US was not honoring the agreement. "Certain information" was being with-held from Australia.

Boyce also told that Pine Gap was being used to monitor international telephone calls and telexes to and from Australia, especially those of a political and business nature. In addition, he said he had come across cables from the Canberra bureau chief to Langley inferring that the CIA had worked to subvert Australian unions, especially in the transport industry, and had funded the Opposition parties during Whitlam's term. The CIA had been very concerned about an airport strike which would have delayed transportation of new equipment to Pine Gap. According to Boyce, the cable he saw said "don't worry about that, send the stuff, we'll take care of the strike the way we always do." (Sunday Press, 23 May, 1982). He also told reporter William Pinwill that the CIA had a deep distrust for the Whitlam government, and had a great interest in the "monetary crisis" of 1975.

The fact that communications between Pine Gap and the US were handled by a private company was also news to Australia (The Sun, 27 May, 1977)

Boyce's lawyers had wanted to introduce evidence supporting Boyce's claims about CIA activity in Australia. However, the judge complied with a CIA request not to allow it, because of concerns about revealing secret government information.

Both Lee and Boyce were found guilty of selling secrets to the Soviets. Lee was immediately given a life sentence. However, Boyce was sent for 90 days of psychiatric evaluation, which indicated that he might get a light sentence, probably if he kept quiet about the allegations concerning Australia. Boyce made it clear he was "outraged" about the treatment of Australia, and was subsequently given a 40 year sentence. He is kept in solitary confinement.

In 1980, Boyce escaped from prison, and led the Federal Marshalls on an 18-month chase before he was caught again. The total sentence he now has to serve is 68 years. The circumstances surrounding his escape are very suspicious.

OTHERS SPEAK
RICHARD STALLINGS
Despite repeated denials that Stallings was a CIA employee, Ted Shackley admitted Stallings' affiliations in his cable to ASIO on the 8th of November, 1975.

Stallings went into early retirement in 1975 after suffering an injury in a car crash.

However, during his tenure as head of Pine Gap, Stallings complained bitterly about CIA activities in Australia. According to Victor Marchetti, who knew Stallings well, Stallings was "copping a lot of static from the clandestine guys operating out of Canberra. Stallings didn't approve of the stuff at the time; he figured his information-gathering operation at Pine Gap was being put at risk by the station chief's men, who were interfering in Australia's political parties and labor unions." (Mother Jones, p. 20)

JAMES JESUS ANGLETON
In June 1977, during the furor caused by the Boyce trial, Angleton was interviewed on ABC radio's Broadband program, after complaints from ABC's top brass that the ABC had run too many programs slamming the CIA. For "balance", they asked Angleton to come on and give the Agency's point-of-view. Angleton had "retired" in 1974, but had devoted several years to attempting to restore the CIA's battered image. Angleton discussed many aspects of the "security crisis" which was the Whitlam government (in his opinion), including Murphy's raid on ASIO, Pine Gap, and whether the CIA funded political parties in Australia. When asked "If there was any funding by the CIA in Australian politics or unions, would it have had to come through your office in the time that you were there?" Angleton answered somewhat cryptically, "I will put it this way very bluntly -- no one in the agency would ever believe that I would subscribe to any activity that was not co-ordinated with the chief of the Australian internal security." (Freney, The CIA's Australian Connection, p. 29) . He did not deny CIA funding, nor would he clarify his statement. He simply inferred that if the CIA were involved in Australian politics and unions, ASIO would know about it.

VICTOR MARCHETTI
In an interview with the Sydney Sun, the former CIA agent related what Richard Stallings had told him. He said that Stallings had told him that the CIA station chief in Canberra had channeled money directly to the conservative political parties (Liberals and the National Country Party). Marchetti said that money was used to undermine the Labor Party, since at least 1967. He also said that there were about six to eight "upfront" CIA agents in Canberra, and up to 30 clandestine operatives throughout Australia.

ANONYMOUS SOURCE
Robert Lindsay, who wrote two books about the Boyce trial, interviewed a CIA agent who wished to remain anonymous. The agent confirmed Boyce's allegations, but said that the CIA involvement in Australia was more complicated than Boyce realised. The agent said that CIA money was given to the Coalition and would probably have been sent through ASIO (Flight of the Falcon).

WHITLAM'S EVIDENCE
When the authors contacted former Prime Minister Gough Whitlam, he politely declined to answer questions regarding CIA involvement in Australian politics. He did however, suggest that we read what he had said and written in the past.

While Whitlam was not able on November 11, 1975, to give his evidence to Parliament regarding the CIA and Richard Stallings, he did raise the matter in Parliament on May 4, 1977, because of the allegations of CIA activity brought up by the Boyce trial and by Victor Marchetti, a former CIA employee. Whitlam began by saying, "There is increasing and profoundly disturbing evidence that foreign espionage and intelligence activities are being practiced in Australia on a wide scale."

"Well might we say..."
Whitlam's famous speech on the steps
of Parliament after being sacked

He went to speak about the Boyce trial, and said that he had suggested to Prime Minister Fraser that he bring the matter to the attention to Justice Hope (who was still conducting the Hope Royal Commission into intelligence organisations in Australia).

Whitlam then spoke about the cable sent to ASIO headquarters by Ted Shackley. He commented that "In plain terms, the cable revealed that the CIA had deceived the Australian Government and was still seeking to continue its deception. It confirmed that Mr. Stallings had been employed by the CIA. The cable made it clear that the CIA was making what was described, in the jargon of the trade, as an 'official demarche on a service to service link' -- in other words, without informing the elected Government of Australia. Implicit in the CIA's approach to ASIO for information on events in Australia was an understanding that the Australian organisation had obligations of loyalty to the CIA itself before its obligations to the Australian Government. The tone and content of the CIA message were offensive; its implications were sinister. Here was a foreign intelligence service telling Australia's domestic security service to keep information from the Australian Government."

Whitlam also read out the statement he had prepared in response to Doug Anthony's question on notice for 11 November, 1975: "I did not disclose that Mr. Stallings was a CIA agent. The Right Honorable gentleman [Anthony] did that. I was informed that Mr. Stallings worked for the CIA, not by the head of the Australian Foreign Affairs Department, or the United States State Department, but by the head of another of our Departments which in turn was informed by a Department in the United States other than the State Department."

Whitlam then said, "The coup on 11 November prevented that answer being given." (Hansard, May 4, 1977)

Whitlam also briefly discusses (for less than two pages) CIA involvement in the "security crisis" in his book, The Whitlam Government, 1972-1975. He comments that the newspaper stories disclosing the identity of Stallings and other CIA agents "greatly agitated" both Australian and US security services. "The CIA sent a cable to ASIO which must have been founded on the assumption that ASIO would put its links with the CIA ahead of its obligations to the Australian Government." He went on to say, "The episode lent colour to allegations that the CIA had been eavesdropping on me and my Ministers and had influenced the Governor-General, Sir John Kerr, to sack us."

However, Whitlam seems unwilling to say more than that. As he said in Parliament in 1977, "The difficulty which any head of government faces in responding to these matters -- or any former head of government...is that he is bound by obligations of secrecy in the national interest. He cannot disclose what he knows. I readily acknowledge my own obligation. " (Hansard, 4 May, 1977, p. 1522). He will not reveal the confidences given to him by, or information about, the American installations in Australia.

While Whitlam seems to accept that at the very least Australia should investigate whether the CIA has interfered with Australian politics, he is not so sure of Sir John Kerr's role in relation to the security crisis.

In The Whitlam Government, he says, "It is a fact that any country with the technical resources of the US can eavesdrop on anyone in the world if it feels the effort worthwhile....It is not a fact, however, that Kerr, fascinated as he had long been with intelligence matters, needed any encouragement from the CIA." (pp. 51-52)

"OUR MAN KERR"
Among Christopher Boyce's allegations is that the CIA chief at TRW had referred to Australia's Governor-General as "Our man Kerr."

One of the most contentious questions about the dismissal was whether Kerr acted on his own in dismissing Whitlam, or whether he was working to further someone else's goals. The question has come up in relation to the Liberal-National Party Coalition, and to the CIA and the intelligence community.

Kerr consulted with High Court Chief Justice Sir Garfield Barwick before making the decision about the Senate deadlock. Garfield was a former Liberal minister.

Perhaps more serious than that are the allegations that Kerr was informed of the CIA and the intelligence community's concerns about Whitlam.

Kerr had a long association with the intelligence community, particularly military intelligence. During World War Two, he worked for the Directorate of Research and Civil Affairs, part of military intelligence. Whilst in Washington, he was seconded to the Office of Strategic Services (the OSS, precursor to the CIA). Kerr continued to work in intelligence after the war in the School of Civil Affairs (later renamed the School of Pacific Administration).

Stepping out...
Anthony, Kerr and Fraser take control

Later he became involved with the Association for Cultural Freedom, which is said to be closely affiliated with the activities of the CIA and US State Department. He was also the founding president of the Law Association for Asia and the Western Pacific (LawAsia). Kerr went to the US to obtain funds for LawAsia from the Asia Foundation. The Asia Foundation was discovered in 1967 to be backed by the CIA. According to CIA man Victor Marchetti, the Asia Foundation "often served as a cover for clandestine operations [and] its main purpose was to promote the spread of ideas which were anti-communist and pro-American." (CIA and the Cult of Intelligence, p. 178-79) Despite this (or because of it?), Kerr again went to the Asia Foundation to obtain funds for LawAsia.

It is not known if Whitlam was aware of Kerr's association with the intelligence community when he appointed him Governor-General. As Governor-General, Kerr was said to take an unusual interest in foreign policy and intelligence matters.

So much so that, according to Brian Toohey, on November 8, the day that ASIO received Ted Shackley's cable calling Whitlam a security threat, "a senior Australian defence official" was sent to brief Kerr "about allegations from the CIA that the then Prime Minister, Mr. Whitlam, was jeopardizing the security bases in Australia." (Financial Review, April 1977). The official is believed to be Dr. John Law Farrands, chief scientist at the Defence Department. He was probably sent by Tange. Farrands, Tange, Kerr all denied that Kerr was briefed about the CIA's concerns. Whether Kerr was influenced by the CIA's concerns is not known. But his timing of the dismissal is curious.

PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY
As can be expected, there is no "smoking gun" which links the CIA to the demise of the Whitlam government. There is no substantial evidence that there was a carefully orchestrated plot against Whitlam. Nevertheless, there is a large body of evidence pointing to the CIA. As the Governor of Victoria, and a former judge, Richard McGarvie says, "sometimes the most reliable evidence is circumstantial evidence."

Subtle means were used to bring down the Labor government. All that was necessary was for the CIA to find like-minded people, and whisper in their ears information which could be used to discredit and destabilise their mutual enemy.

The evidence pointing to the CIA's dirty dealings includes:
* Why did Sir John Kerr sack Whitlam on the same day that Whitlam was to provide proof to Parliament that the former head of Pine Gap was a CIA agent, thus proving that the US had been misleading Australia about the bases?
* Whitlam was dismissed just weeks before the crucial Pine Gap contract was to be reviewed.
* The CIA knew, and informed the US President, that documents used to discredit Jim Cairns were probably forgeries. How did they know? Did they provide them?
* Questionable loans brokers with links to Commerce International, itself heavily linked to the CIA.
* A draft cable, allegedly from the CIA, admitting that Khemlani was in Australia to cause chaos.
* The Christopher Boyce allegations.
* The words of several CIA employees.
* The deep concern expressed by Ted Shackley's cable that Whitlam would reveal all about Pine Gap and the CIA in Australia.

All solid evidence of CIA involvement - albeit circumstantial.

The only piece of the puzzle missing is a solitary fact, even small, that points the finger at the CIA knowing and participating not only after the event, but before and during.

COUP DE GRACE
The CIA and the US government have repeatedly denied CIA activity in Australia.

In July 1977, President Carter sent Assistant Secretary of State for Asia and the South Pacific, Warren Christopher, out of his way to meet Gough Whitlam at Sydney airport.

Christopher delivered the following message from Carter: "The US State Department will never again interfere in the domestic political process of Australia." (The Whitlam Government, p. 53--emphasis added).

Never again...

The Pine Gap treaty still stands.

The Reserve Powers of the Governor-General to dismiss a democratically elected Government have not been revoked.

The CIA continues operations in Australia.

The events of November 1975 can be repeated.

Postscript
On December 26, 1995 The Australian newspaper ran a front page story, using newly unclassified documents dated July 1, 1974, dealing with President Nixon ordering a full review of the relationship with the Australian Whitlam Government in the "political-security area".

Nixon, through Henry Kissinger, set out six areas to be investigated, all dealing with the supposed security threat to the U.S. military bases from the Whitlam government.

Of most importance is that one of the six areas in this now-released memo has been blacked out for security reasons.

This document is of vital importance to understanding that the Whitlam government was indeed seen as a threat by those in power in Washington. The memo was addressed to the acting Secretary of State, Secretary of Defense, the Director of the CIA and also sent to the Joint Chiefs of Staff!

The censored area, taking up four lines of text, now seems to be the "smoking gun" in the case. After twenty years the American Government still deems these few lines of so vital importance that they are withheld from us completely. What the censored order says is open to conjecture. Could it be an order to contact friends or agents within the government or opposition parties? Could it be an order to unstabilize the Whitlam Government?

Or could it be an order to re-activate Sir John Kerr as an agent for the CIA?

We will not know until the document is unclassified completely.

The document is available here.

We have the key in the lock, one more twist and the door will be wide open.

"Maintain the Rage"
Whitlam addresses thousands of
supporters who surrounded Parliament
House after his sacking

* * * * *

Kennedy & Whitlam - The Parallels

KENNEDY
WHITLAM

Populist Image: "Camelot" "It's Time"

Thawed realations with: Russia, Cuba Russia, China, Vietnam

Reformist Policy Base: Civil Rights
Help for the poor Social Reforms
National Health Sysytem
Established "Australia First" Policy

On Vietnam: Prepared for withdrawal Ended Conscription, withdrew all troops
Criticised US and Nixon's role in war

Secret Government: CIA / FBI / PENTAGON
Threatened to scatter
CIA to the winds
Fired heads Allan Dulles
and Richard Bissell ASIO / ASIS / CIA
Fired heads of both ASIO and ASIS
Stormed ASIO HQ for documents
Launched inquiry into practices and
liaisons with USA and CIA

Military Industrial Complex: Saw JFK as a threat:
Possibility of withdrawal from Vietnam
Bay of Pigs fiasco
Missile Crisis Whitlam threatened US bases in
Australia with closer scrutiny
and possible closure

Final Acts: Signed NSAM #273
starting the withdrawal
of troops from Vietnam Prepared Speech to Parliament
to expose CIA operatives in Australia
and CIA infiltration of Military Bases
(Speech due on November 11, 1975)

Coup D'Etat: November 22, 1963 November 11, 1975

How?: Killed in Crossfire in Dallas
Most probably by 3 men. Government Dismissed
by Governor General Sir John Kerr.
Whitlam Government destroyed
undemocratically by 1 man.

To the editors and readers of Probable Cause:
an open letter by Walt Brown
It is with a deep sense of sadness that I compose my thoughts for the final issue of this always excellent journal that devoted itself to insightful articles that both brought us in touch with, and closer to the reality of the JFK assassination (and related events) and did so in a way that left the reader entertained and looking eagerly forward to the next issue.

Naturally, the ultimate hope was that Probable Cause would "stop the presses" when the ultimate truth(s) in the JFK assassination and other political anomalies covered within its pages were all brought to light. Alas, this was not to be, but in its all-too-brief lifespan, Probable Cause raised some powerful issues that the movers and shakers in the corridors of power in America could never have dealt with in any meaningful way.

I will always count it among my highest personal accomplishments that I was allowed to contribute to every issue of Probable Cause. It was an honor to be a part of something so vital. Like many of the other journals, Probable Cause did not always have all the answers, but they were unmatched in having all the valid questions. Had the Warren Commission been possessed of Probable Cause's sense of insight and curiosity, perhaps things would have been different. Perhaps, perhaps ......

I have tried always to say as much as possible while maintaining an economy or words, and I shall not violate that principle here. Nor will I put to paper all the maudlin thoughts I have as the final issue approaches. Nevertheless, I would be seriously remiss if I failed to thank the readers of this journal on a personal level. As a 16 year old on the day President Kennedy was killed, I lost more than a President; I lost my surrogate father, a man 48 days younger than my own father. Since then, I have worked to bring that November 1963 tragedy to closure. It is against the background of those thoughts that I extend my deepest gratitude to the editors and readers of Probable Cause, many of whom are not American, for caring about what happened thirty-two years ago in Dallas. To all of you to whom President Kennedy meant so much, please accept my deepest thanks.

If I can help any of your research in any way, please contact me at PO Box 174, Hillsdale, NJ USA; if your question(s) are beyond my ken, I will tell you so. Thanks also for the mail you have sent to this date. Lastly, researcher Jan Stevens and I are going to launch The JFK/Deep Politics Quarterly, scheduled to publish its first issue on October 28. We hope that it will complement the existing quality journals, and certainly one of our first notices will be the loss of Probable Cause. (Please feel free to contribute articles or to subscribe...)

To Probable Cause: your efforts can never be overstated; your successes can never be counted. Only your loss can be measured. God be with ye, Steve, and may the road always rise up to meet you and may the wind always be at your back. I look forward to seeing you sometime soon--I count you and the members of the staff that I met as true friends. From the US--thanks!!

Walt Brown, Ph.D.

The Warren Commission/The Warren Omission by Walt Brown, Ph.D.
[This is taken from the "White Lies" section of Treachery in Dallas; that which does not appear in "Treachery" is material that will expand the concept in an upcoming book, "The Warren Omission."]

The Warren Commission, or, more properly, "The President's Commission on the Assassination of John F. Kennedy," was created by Executive Order 11130 on November 29,1963, in the face of a public outcry following the murder of Lee Oswald by Jack Ruby. That public outcry might well have led to the creation of investigating bodies by the House, Senate, or the state of Texas, and somewhere in that mix, someone might have discovered the truth. The Warren Commission saved Lyndon Johnson, and the conspiracy that killed JFK, from that concern. It was immediately unique in that seven prominent Americans, who were headed by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and who had no time to give to the effort, were asked to solve the murder of the President. They were also unique in that although they were appointed by a Democrat, their political makeup was 5 Republicans and 2 Democrats. Presidential commissions, except those doomed to fail, always contain a working majority from the party in power. Except the Warren Commission.

Although appointed on November 29, 1963, they did not take any testimony until February 3, 1964, nine and a half weeks later. What they did in the meantime can be dealt with in two syllables: nothing. The interval, however, allowed many an evidentiary trail to go cold, although it did not much matter, as the Commission only planned to pursue one path, the one pointing to the sole, unaided guilt of Lee Oswald. After all, their mandate as a Commission was three-fold: find out who killed JFK; find out how JFK's killer, Lee Oswald, was killed in custody; and make future recommendations for Presidential security. The third mandate need not concern us, as it didn't particularly concern the Commission. The language of the first two, however, make it obvious that the "seven honorable men" knew the contents of the future "Warren Report" before they called their first witness, who, as it turned out, happened to be the terrified widow of Lee Oswald. The second and third witnesses would also be named Oswald, Marguerite and Robert, respectively. They were called prior to any substantive witness, so they could never rebut material that leaked (not that Robert Oswald would have .... ), and to what purpose were they called? Neither Robert nor Marguerite had seen Lee for a year, and Marina was shown a rifle and asked if she could identify it. Such a course of action would have been proper procedure if there had been evidence introduced into the record that the rifle she was shown had something to do with the assassination, but since she was the first witness, that was not possible, and it demonstrates a "you go ahead and tell us what we want to hear and then we'll find somebody to match what you told us to the evidence" mentality. And a weak one at that.

The Commission was given power to subpoena witnesses, grant immunity, and deal with perjury. They used the subpoena power poorly, as many witnesses only knew to appear thanks to a call or visit from local Secret Service agents. With respect to immunity, it was never used. In the case of Robert Alan Surrey, and others, it should have been. Surrey, a General Walker lackey, was asked a number of questions regarding the publication of the "Wanted For Treason" leaflets that appeared shortly before JFK's arrival in Dallas. Surrey invoked his Fifth Amendment "I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that it might incriminate me" rights thirty-one times. Thirty- one. And the Commission did nothing. Surrey wasn't a suspect; he was there to answer questions about the state of mind in Dallas in November, 1963. He should have been told he was being given immunity (from a prosecution that he obviously felt more strongly about than did the Warren Commission), and told, "Now, sir, you will answer our questions, or your butt will be parked in a detention cell until you do." But it just wasn't done. Surrey declined to answer and the Warren Commission, charged with finding all the information related to the death of the President, could have cared less.

The Warren Commission treated their perjury rights with an equal degree of avoidance. Of course, they had to, as they could not very well publish a Report based on false statements, so all statements had to be true. The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, although, in fact, much of what is in the 15 volumes of testimony is nothing but rubbish. And there is much perjury. Howard Brennan lied about his position as an eyewitness, and although David Belin caught him at it, it was swept under the rug (see 3H 142). J. Edgar Hoover, Will Fritz (Oswald's gun, when broken down, would fit in a 27" bag and Helen Markham was a very reliable witness), Jesse Curry (Jack Ruby might have known 25 Dallas cops), and several high ranking Dallas cops and FBI experts also committed perjury. DPD reserve officer William Newman was called a d--- l--- (one presumes "damn liar") by Counsel Burt Griffin, and told to return the following evening with the truth. The following evening, Newman was back, but the questions were asked by Leon Hubert and the previous day's "unpleasantness" was not revisited. "Case Closed," so to speak.

The Commission's published record was blatantly dishonest with respect to attendance by Warren Commissioners at the testimony of witnesses. It should be noted that although 488 witnesses gave testimony, only 93 gave testimony with a Commissioner (as opposed to Counsel, a la Specter, Belin, et al) "present." But even then, those who were "present" frequently were not. There are countless instances of a day's testimony from three, four, or five individuals who were often present together (to guarantee the same story was told???), and Chairman Warren would have a few words to say to the first witness, and then depart for his duties at the Supreme Court. The record, however, indicates he was "present" for all five, and he was, but only in the sense that all five were present when he said, "Please stand to be sworn in" to the first witness. He never said--or heard--a word during the testimony of the others listed. Likewise, there are many times when a Commissioner is listed as "present" for the testimony of those three, four, or five, but the record indicates that, for example, the Commissioner arrived during the testimony of witness three and left during witness four, suggesting absence, not presence, for one, two, and five. In still other cases, individuals are cited as present, and there is no indication if, or when, they arrived or left, but what arrests the reader's attention is that a Commissioner is cited as present for a given witness and never asks one question, suggesting either rehearsed boredom, or absence.

No witness gave testimony in front of all seven members of the Warren Commission, the most damning indictment of the failures of that august body.

Where necessary, the record was altered. Amidst the one-day blitz of medical testimony that takes up only 150 pages of the beginning of Volume VI (and it is arguably among the most valuable, yet it gets little space, compared to Volume XII and the front of XIII, devoted to Dallas cops repeating the obvious--that Oswald was killed by Ruby), there appears the testimony of Jean Hill, cited as having been given at the Dallas post office on the same day as the medical testimony at Parkland. Ms. Hill insists her testimony was given at Parkland, and the record bears her out. On that day, and the times are given precisely, Arlen Specter took a six-page deposition from Diana Bowron at 2:06, then met Jean Hill for twenty-two pages at the post office at 2:30, then was back at Parkland Hospital for Dr. Paul Peters at 4 pm. That timing problem, as stated, makes three shots in five seconds seem easy. Specter's 2:06 deposition with Diana Bowron would have taken virtually until 2:30, the time he was supposedly miles away at the downtown post office. Jean Hill's twenty-two pages no doubt consumed a block of time, which would only allow Specter a moment or two, not a several mile ride back to Parkland, for Dr. Peters at 4.

Of course, with Specter, all things were possible. When confronted with the "problem" that the Parkland consensus suggested the throat wound as an entrance, Specter proposed a hypothesis, which said, without quoting the exact drivel, "There was a hole in the front of the throat. Assume the bullet was fired from the rear. Given that set of assumptions, was the hole in the throat an entrance or exit?" There is, of course, only one answer for Specter's speculation, and the doctors cooperated, or at least gave honest answers to Specter's hypothesis. (Hypothesis posed in 3H 362, 373, 4H 113, 122, 127; 5H 70, 168, 171; 6H 5, 14, 38, 42, 49, 66, 102, 110-111, and 143.) Researchers have noted this in the past. Largely unnoticed, however, is the second of Specter's word games. When Ruby was polygraphed, the examiner told Ruby every question that was to be asked prior to asking them, which is standard procedure. One question was "Did Tippit or Oswald ever visit the Carousel?" Specter insisted the question be changed to "Did Tippit and Oswald ever visit the Carousel?" (14H 557) That's a horse of another color altogether. In addition, when a group of psychiatrists presented a consensus that Ruby was out of touch with reality, making his lie-detector exam useless, Specter had another hypothesis ready: "Assume for the moment that Ruby is in touch with reality..." (14H 586) It was so easy to invent the truth.

Beyond that, just what did the Warren Commission actually do? They called 488 witnesses, as noted, but failed to call people like David Ferrie, Guy Banister, Yuri Nosenko, more than 30 people present at the autopsy, and seven of the eight Secret Service agents in JFK's followup car. On the other hand, they did call Bennierita Smith, Viola Peterman, Edward Voebel, Philip Geraci, Vance Blaloek and Alfreadia Riggs, about whom dozens of words have since been written.

The Commission asked 109,930 questions; I counted them, and evaluated them from a perspective of usefulness. The questions were broken down into preliminaries, to the point, not vital, clarification, leading/hearsay, conclusionary, foregone conclusions, and nonsense. I also categorized the person to whom the questions were being asked. Some had knowledge with respect to the killings of JFK, Oswald, or Tippit. The vast majority, however, were character witnesses--people like Ruth or Michael Paine, George Senator, Mr. and Mrs. Igor Voshinin (and, by extension, the entire "Russian emigre community"), and many others.

The results destroy the Commission's claim even to being an investigative body. The character witnesses, 185 of them, were asked 57,224 questions, the largest amount by far. Ninety-three witnesses were asked 16,836 questions about the death of Oswald, an event which truly held little mystery, at least for anyone who owned a television in 1963. Questions regarding the killing of the President were asked to 177 witnesses, and totalled 30,530 questions. But of those 30+ thousand questions, only 2,065 were questions with validity. Thus of the 109,930 questions asked by the Commission investigating the murder of the President, only 2,065 questions, or 1.8% of the total, were valid questions. The other 107+thousand questions fill a shelf full of shiny volumes and prove nothing.

The Commission's focus in that regard is equally troubling. In my opinion, and I offer it only as an opinion, the key focus is medical: the doctors at Parkland and Bethesda. If you recognize and understand the wounds- ballistics-pathology thoroughly, you know the case, and with a far greater degree of accuracy than if you are dealing with two dozen people who subjectively thought they heard shots from several locations. The medical people, however, were given short shriff. The 109,930 questions, when divided by 488 witnesses, yields an average of just over 225 questions per witness. Yet the medical people were only asked an average of 81 questions each. The three autopsy doctors were asked a total of 304 questions (Humes 215, Boswell 14, Finck 75), yet James Martin, an attorney who handled Marina's contracts after the assassination, was asked 979; Ruby's brother and sister were asked 947 and 918, respectively. It mocks the very word "justice."

I've often asked people at conferences whom they would like to "grill" if they could ask folks the right questions, and the answers have understandably covered a wide range of individuals. Yet when I identify the people asked the most questions by the Commission, there is much that is surprising. Bearing in mind that the autopsists combined were asked 304 questions, the top ten totals included Ruth Paine (5,236), Curtis LaVerne Crafard--of all people-- (3,972), George Senator (2,792), Marina Oswald (2,615), Robert Oswald (2,351), George DeMohrenschfidt (1,628), Andrew Armstrong (1,592), John Pic (1,325), Michael Paine (1,019), and Jesse Curry (1,002). It should be born in mind that nine of those names are character witnesses. Two--Robert Oswald and John Pic--had not seen Lee Oswald since the previous Thanksgiving, November 22, 1962, and two others, Curtis L. Crafard and Andrew Armstrong, are clearly related only to Jack Ruby.

Within the survey itself, I was as scrupulously fair as I could be. Ruby's accountant, of all people, was asked if he knew how Ruby got into the basement to shoot Oswald. The question is valid, and was counted as such, but it might as well have been asked to a derelict in Cairo. (And if you are going to ask that question to Ruby's accountant, you might as well ask Ruby himself how to depreciate long term capital gains.)

Equally troubling was the Commission's unwillingness to hear testimony that was given, or be troubled by obvious inconsistencies. In this regard, they raised the concept of "hear no evil" to a higher level art form and became masters of changing the subject, or calling a recess or going off the record-- often in the middle of an answer. Robert Oswald gave a strong indication that he believed his brother was in league with Jack Ruby; the next question did not deal with that allegation, but rather asked if there was friction between Marina and Marguerite Oswald. A Dallas detective was asked if Oswald exhibited bruises during questioning on Friday evening. The detective answered that he was called away from the questioning to take a phone call detailing a conspiracy that killed JFK. The Commission ignored the conspiracy statement and reasked their question about Oswald's bruises. Roy Kellerman testified that the entrance wound in JFK's head was in the hairline in front of the right ear. Clint Hill indicated the rear of JFK's head was removed but was present on the seat of the limo. Both were ignored. Michael Paine was asked if he could locate the site where the photos were taken of Oswald with his rifle. His answer indicated he was shown the famous "backyard photos" on Friday night. The Commission ignored that fact.

Overlooked in the research is the concept of the very name of the Commission. In the upcoming "Warren Omission" I've included a lengthy time- management study which strongly suggests that based on presence at hearings, involvement in questioning, ability to sidetrack events, and taking a leading role in going "off the record," the Commission should not have been named after its nominal chairperson, Earl Warren, but after Allen Dulles, the former head of the CIA whom Kennedy replaced after the failure at the Bay of Pigs. It is hard to imagine a bigger injustice than asking the people of America and the world to accept the findings of the "Dulles Commission," presided over by a former covert operative fired by the man whose death he was charged to investigate thoroughly.

A bigger injustice, however, is possible. Ultimately, the Warren Commission's case boils down to the credibility of three witnesses, without whom their case becomes almost Posnerian. The Warren Commission relied on the testimony of Howard Brennan, Helen Markham, and Mary Bledsoe to convict Lee Oswald in the public mind for the murder of the President.

For years we have worked with what the Warren Commission did. In Treachery in Dallas, as well as the narrowly focused "Warren Omission: A Microstudy of the Methods and Failures of the Warren Commission," I have looked at how they got their results as well as what they did not do. Far more interesting than the Warren Commission is the Warren Omission.

[Walt Brown, Ph.D., is the author of The People v. Lee Harvey Oswald, plus The JFK Assassination Quizbook, as well as Treachery in Dallas, and The Referenced Index Guide to the Warren Commission. He has contributed to every issue of Probable Cause, and has served as Keynote Speaker at ASK in 1994 and COPA Program Chairperson in 1995. He is also working with LMP Systems in Dallas to help produce the CD-Rom which will contain the 26 volumes of the Warren Commission Testimony and Exhibits, due very soon.]

Rosco Who? by David B. Perry
In issue number 9 of Probable Cause, there appeared an article by Ralph D. Thomas entitled The Strange Story of Rosco White - Information, Disinformation or Misinformation. What is intriguing about the piece is that includes all three aspects of the White saga. That is, there is some information, some disinformation and lots of misinformation.

Australia is a long way from the United States both in distance and time so unfiltered details of Kennedy assassination related events are probably hard to come by. I feel it incumbent, because I have researched the White episode for over four years, to provide those of you interested in the story additional details, which for some reason, Thomas neglected to put in his account.

Mr. Thomas previously marketed this article as a chapter in his Missing Links In The JFK Assassination Conspiracy. Missing Links was published as "a collector's edition imprint" by Thomas Investigative Publications, Inc. in 1992. In the three post publication years more has been uncovered and several principals have passed away including Geneva White - February, 1991, Joe West - late 1992 and Larry Howard - January 8, 1994.

I intend to cover many of the points contained in The Strange Story Of Rosco White and provide up to date investigative results. I have submitted copies of some of the documents mentioned to both Steve Gerlach and Mr. Thomas. If the reader wishes to view or obtain duplicates of this material Steve is the closer and less expensive conduit.

"A photograph has been published by assassination researchers for years of a group of Marines in Japan in front of a tent. Oswald is in the photograph and so is a person who looks just like Rosco White. According to the White family, it's Rosco."

The photograph has not been published by assassination researchers. The rights to the photograph belong to former Marine John Marckx. Marckx permitted Edward Epstein to use the photograph in his book Legend - The Secret World of Lee Harvey Oswald. It also appeared in Time magazine of November 28, 1988 on page 36 and Life of February 21, 1964 on page 75.

Marckx did not take the photograph in Japan but on the northern end of the Philippine archipelago. Oswald's radar unit was involved in a practice exercise, Operation Strongback.

The photograph does not show a group of Marines in front of a tent. The group is sitting in an open clearing waiting to board the USS Terrell County.

The only members of the White family who have identified the Marine in the background as White are Ricky and Geneva. Those that fail to see any resemblance, because the bill of a baseball type cap covers the face of the Marine in question, include his sister - Linda Wells, mother - Merle Rogers, as well as Ora Lowery, Mary Tyndall and Benny Toland, respectively Geneva's sisters and brother.

"The only people who read the diary were:
Ricky White
Geneva White (Ricky's mother)
Tricia White (Ricky's wife)
Denise Carter (a family babysitter)"

There is confusion surrounding this claim. In the very next paragraph Thomas states: "According to the JFK Assassination Information Center, Ricky White was the only known person to have read the November 63 accounts although many others can testify to the existence of the diary."

On page 166 of the Texas Monthly article Ricky claimed "The only people who say they have SEEN THE JOURNAL (emphasis mine) are Ricky, his mother, his wife, and a woman named Denise Carter, who read parts of the journal while babysitting with Ricky and Tricia's two children."

Based on the evidence at hand it seems only Ricky and Denise Carter read any of the diary entries.

"Records show that Rosco White obtained employment with the Dallas police... about seven weeks before the assassination, as a clerk and photographer."

The records of the Dallas police department released to the public on January 27, 1992 show White was employed October 7, 1963 as an Apprentice Policeman. There is no record showing he joined the force as a clerk and photographer.

"White's personal file contained no references."

Not true. The Dallas police in their September 25, 1963 employment background check indicate they contacted the following references: J.M Langford of Corvair Corp. of Fort Worth, Texas. White worked there from May 8, 1956 to July 28, 1956. Mr. A.L. Fletcher, Manager of American National Insurance Company of Dallas, Texas. White had been employed as an agent since December 17, 1962. Mr. O.P. Pool, Manager of Farmer's Insurance Company of Dallas, Texas. Roscoe had been employed as a part time agent since August 13, 1963. The record indicated he was also employed by Roadway Express Company of Dallas.

The report includes a notation which corroborates White's military record in that he "...received an honorable hardship discharge due to his wife's health." on December 4, 1962.

"Rosco White was assigned to the identification section."

There is no evidence supporting this statement. His employment record shows he was hired as an apprentice patrolman on October 7, 1963, promoted to probational patrolman on October 7, 1964 and patrolman on January 7, 1965.

(Rev.) "Shaw has stated that Rosco told him he didn't think that the fire was an accident."

Partially true - Reverend Shaw did make this statement at the press conference held at the JFK Center on August 6, 1990. However, he was interviewed on February 20, 1992 for the Dallas CBS affiliate, television station KDFW by investigative reporter Richard Ray. Shaw recanted many of his original assertions claiming "everything I heard came from Geneva."

Shaw claimed Roscoe made several admissions as he lay on his deathbed at Parkland Hospital in Dallas. It appears neither the JFK Center or Shaw realized another victim of the explosion and fire, Richard Adair, was in the bed next to White during the period of hospitalization.

I interviewed Adair on September 12, 1990. He told me nobody had a private visit with Roscoe. Also, Roscoe's sister and mother told me visitors were not allowed in the room alone. Even the immediate family, because of Roscoe's condition, were obliged to enter the room in pairs.

Since I was involved in the KDFW interviews I asked Richard Ray to notify Shaw of the results of my investigation. When Ray did so, Shaw admitted that he "heard everything from Geneva."

Adair told me the fire was indeed accidental. "In the past I had warned Roscoe not to weld near stored cans or containers because we didn't always know what was in them." Court records show welding slag from White's torch fell on the metal top of a can containing a solvent used to clean cement trucks. When the slag burned through the cover an explosion ensued.

(Rev.) "Shaw has stated that Rosco told him that he saw a man running from the fire."

True - but there are no sinister implications. The explosion occurred in a vehicle repair bay of a converted Texaco gasoline station. White and Adair were fabricating a replacement part for a Clark fork lift in the bay closest to the office. The running man was the representative from Clark Fork Lifts, Inc. who fled the office after the explosion.

"Rosco told him (Rev. Shaw) that he was troubled as he had lead a double life, had killed people in the past and that he felt that his family was in danger."

Another, statement Shaw rescinded claiming "everything I heard came from Geneva."

"The day of Rosco White's funeral a man who's name has only been given as 'Bill X' by the White family, delivered a package of photographs."

True as far as it goes. Many of us wondered why Ricky, Geneva and the JFK Center would keep the name of a corroborating witness under wraps. We soon discovered that the Assassination Archives and Research Center in Washington, D.C., the parent of the JFK Assassination Information Center in Dallas, was concerned the Roscoe White story was a hoax.

The AARC had a private investigator interview "Bill X." He is in reality a man named Philip Jordan. Jordan was interviewed by the AARC's investigator on July 29, 1990. Jordan revealed "Ricky White is likeable and obsessed with proving his father killed J.F.K. and that he make a movie or book and money on the story."

"In 1975, Geneva White's house was burglarized and the package containing the photographs was taken."

Not true - By the mid-seventies Geneva had remarried and was living in Paris, Texas. Fellow researcher, Gary Mack, found the Paris, Texas police department have no record of any burglary, robbery or attack at her home in 1975. They have records of burglaries in February, 1974 and January, 1976. The 1974 report mentions a "strong arm robbery" and theft of jewelry. Neither report mentions the theft of photographs.

"According to a letter Geneva obtained from the Senate Committee, the men (burglars) were to have been tried in Dallas, Texas."

If such a letter exists I'd like to see it. The March 19, 1976 issue of New Times reports, "Some months ago, the widow surrendered the pictures to a pair of would-be con artists. Schweiker's staff was tipped to the case by a Texas law enforcement official and managed to track the con men --and the pictures-- down."

In this case the con-artists would have been tried for a crime that never seems to have taken place. The police have no record of any such 1975 event.

"John Stockwell, a former CIA task force chief, looked at the cables and stated he thought there was a 90 to 95% probability that they were genuine."

Just so the record is clear, it is true that John Stockwell is a former CIA task force chief but he was station chief in Angola, Africa.

During 1992 John and I frequently corresponded about the White case. At the time, he was working on a manuscript for a book with the intention of disclosing what was going on "Inside the Ricky/Geneva/Roscoe White Story." Stockwell's comment about the cables was based upon the fact that although he "observed that they were NOT formal Naval Intelligence or CIA cables, NOT the work of career case officers...[he] had seen comparable documents in the correspondence between...mercenary operatives."

After non destructive tests of the cables by The Northern Arizona Forensic Laboratory showed the documents to be "the enabling products of a hoax", John revealed he had been skeptical. He confided his feeling, however, that if he walked out on the project he "might never have been able to see the documents."

John was not alone in his skepticism about the authenticity of these controversial "cables." So to was John's associate, Admiral Bob Inman former head of the CIA, as well as the BBC film crew on site to document the press conference. More importantly Bernard "Bud" Fensterwald Jr. the President of the AARC, who at the time had a half financial interest in the JFK Center, expressed not only doubts about the cables but the entire story!

"Gary Shaw, director of the JFK Assassination Research Center in Dallas stated that Ricky White was given both a polygraph test and PSE test and passed both."

Well maybe. PSE's are not, as yet, admissible in United States' courts. The polygraph examination was conducted by The Integrity Center of Dallas. The company was selected by J. Gary Shaw based upon a review of the business pages of the local telephone book.

On November 26, 1990, I called The Integrity Center and spoke with the examiner, Billy Wingo. He commented, "Joe West had about twenty questions, but some were duplicates. We threw out the duplicates and re-phrased some, so the questions were set up correctly for the polygraph. In the end there were only fifteen questions. Joe West and I put them together."

I provided two ex-law enforcement officers experienced with the administration of polygraph examinations, copies of the exam. Both concluded the questions were poorly framed. "It's as if the next question was never asked. Instead of asking Ricky if the FBI took the diary, they asked if he knew where the diary was. We can't consider this a competent exam. It's totally unacceptable."

On February 14, 1991, I again contacted The Integrity Center to ask Billy Wingo some additional questions. I was curtly told, "Wingo no longer works here."

Some of us working with Oliver Stone's staff later discovered, that during discussions between the JFK Center and Stone's producer, Alex Ho, the Center admitted that Ricky had in fact failed the test.

"Geneva White went to work for Jack Ruby as a hostess for a few weeks just before the assassination."

Mr. Thomas probably secured this information from the Center's press kit. On page three of the synopsis we find "GENEVA WHITE, Roscoe's wife, was employed by JACK RUBY at his Carousel Club for several weeks in September 1963." '

Not true. I've interviewed her two sisters and brother. All three indicate the first they ever heard she worked for Ruby was when Ricky mentioned it in early 1990. All three discounted Ricky's claim and felt he was trying to make money from a story which, with respect to their brother in law, Roscoe, was untrue.

Their recollections are confirmed by White's September 25, 1963 Dallas police pre-employment background check. "The applicant's wife has been working as a waitress at the Cattleman's Restaurant in Preston Center. In August, 1963 while at work, she fell and received a head injury. She has not been able to work since then, but stated she thought she would be able to go back to work soon."

"A photograph of herself (Geneva White) with Jack Ruby was published in a 1988 edition of Time Magazine."

True but with some modifications. Neither Ricky White nor the JFK Assassination Information Center revealed the photograph was from Time magazine. The Center's press kit issued August 6, 1990 states only that "Roscoe photographed Geneva and Ruby together."

Since Roscoe took the photograph many investigators including this writer asked to see the original. Neither Ricky, Geneva nor the Center could produce it. At that point I noticed the 8x10 press kit photo was a half-tone. I went to the Dallas Public Library and after four hours of searching discovered the photo in the November 28, 1988 issue of Time.

"According to Geneva, Rosco took the photograph."

If Roscoe took the photograph why did Time magazine give Jimmy Rhodes the credit line? Simply because it was Rhodes and not White who took the picture. Rhodes was Ruby's favorite photographer and he used him extensively. The negative and photographcaptioned "Ruby with stripper" rest not with the Whites or the JFK Center, but in the archives of Life Picture Sales, 1271 Avenue of the Americas, Room 2858, New York, New York 10020.

There is no question the photograph taken by Rhodes is of Geneva and Ruby. Because of Rhodes caption "Ruby with stripper" some of us believe it was a photo Rhodes took during an attempt by Ruby to have an amateur strip night.

A copy of this photograph appears in Texas Monthly but the Rhodes credit line has been removed and replaced by that of The JFK Assassination Information Center! I'm not sure whether this was done intentionally or in error. At any rate, it caused many uninformed researchers to conclude the original was in the possession of either Ricky, Geneva or the JFK Center. To date none of the parties have admitted the error nor have they sought to clarify the mistake.

"Rosco White said that Geneva would have to undergo a series of shock treatments to erase memory from her brain."

There is no proof that Roscoe made that statement therefore it is only hearsay. Geneva White did undergo shock treatments but well before she claimed Ruby forced her to have them. They were not administered so she would lose her memory but for depression. Remember Roscoe was discharged from the Marines on December 4, 1962 because of his wife's health.

I have spoken to at least one doctor (Dr. Daniel Pearson of Dallas) who did treat Geneva. He told me to read up on the subject of shock treatments and their use in the 1960's. As the doctor told me, I found shock treatments affect short term as opposed to long term memory and would not have the desired effect Ricky and Geneva claimed Ruby wanted.

"The group of people who had funded Ricky White had to sue West to get the cables back."

Later in his paper Thomas points out that the Center was not out for profit nor is Ricky an assassination buff. If true mention of a "group of people who had funded Ricky" should set off alarm bells for researchers.

The group, functioning under the name Matsu, consisted of several oil entrepreneurs from Midland, Texas. Headed by Gary Bailey, also from Midland, they were since early 1989 out to sell some version of Ricky's "story." This we know because Matsu was incorporated in the State of Texas on January 25, 1989.

It is true Joe West was sued by Matsu. They wanted the cables returned. Fortunately in the meantime West had contacted People magazine. Kent Demaret, People's Houston, Texas representative managed to get the cables to The Northern Arizona Forensic Laboratory in advance of the suit. The results of the report released on August 17, 1990 were mentioned previously.

As late as September 14, 1994 one of the founders of the JFK Assassination Information Center, J. Gary Shaw claimed he was still unaware of the results of the tests. While being deposed on a different matter he was asked about the authenticity of the cables. His response was "...and I know nothing about the laboratory who did it or the official results."

Thomas points out that many believe that the Center was out to profit from the Kennedy assassination but his "investigation concluded that the center and J. Gary Shaw has never developed any major profits..."

Just because the Center "never developed any major profits" doesn't mean they weren't trying.

In a December, 1992 article for the Houston Chronicle, reporter Jerry Urban indicated Alex Ho and the JFK Assassination Information Center had a contract to work on an Oliver Stone project. "...the JFK Center is to receive $80,000 for consulting on a movie about the Nov. 22, 1963, assassination."

If someone wasn't in it for the money then what are we to make of the letter from Larry Howard to, we believe, Oliver Stone? Just before the August, 1990 press conference Larry Howard, Ricky White and their wives flew to Stone's home in California. Local researchers understood Larry and Ricky tried to sell the story for close to $750,000.

"In studying Ricky White you will find that he is not an assassination buff."

Quite the contrary. Enclosed is a copy of the January 25, 1989 Letter of Agreement between Matsu, Andy Austin Burke and the Whites. Ricky was being paid to investigate his father's role in the assassination. Note the line TO CREATE A STORY. Not investigate but create!

Long before Ricky went to the JFK Center he and Andy Burke worked with Matsu and a Dallas writer named Richard Abshire. Abshire using the pen name Dick Anderson prepared a thirty eight page outline of Ricky's version of events. Sometime in July of 1989 Ricky and Burke were flown to New York City to meet with representatives of Viking Publishing Company. The pair were told the story was inconsistent and Viking wanted no part in the project.

Upon his return, Ricky was informed by Matsu they wanted him off the venture. As Ricky told researcher Woody Woodland during a taped interview in late September, 1990, Matsu brought in a literary agent by the name of Charles Neighbors. Neighbors and Burke were going to rewrite the Abshire synopsis. Ricky called Micala Hamilton of Viking Publishing and warned her Matsu was altering the manuscript.

By January, 1990, as reported in Texas Monthly, Matsu's board of directors began to express doubts over the entire Roscoe white story. As I understand it, Matsu is still trying to recoup their lost investments.

"Both (Oswald and White) were stationed in the general area of the famous U-2 spy plane base."

Why does Thomas feel the Atsugi U-2 base famous? We know it was one of at least two primary bases with another located at Adana, Turkey. Francis Gary Powers' equally if not more famous mission originated from a secondary base at Peshawar, Pakistan. More than likely Thomas is enamored with Atsugi only because Oswald served nearby.

Some researchers are not familiar with the U-2 undertaking and Oswald's role with respect to it. This leads to much confusion, some of it contradicted by the historical record. For example, J. Gary Shaw who Thomas considers "one of the most well known, respected and honest researchers in the country." appears perplexed about the U-2 project. As one can see on page thirty four of his JFK Conspiracy of Silence, (co-authored with Dr. Charles Crenshaw) Shaw believes Oswald was "stationed at a top-secret base for the U-2 spy plane operations in the Philippines." On the following page we are informed Powers flew from this same non-existent base instead of Peshawar.

I was provided with a copy of Roscoe White's military record. A duplicate of the records Ricky claimed to have discovered in his father's foot locker in 1982. The military records show both Oswald and White were part of Marine Wing I. However, this Marine wing's operations encompassed extensive territory including Japan, Okinawa, Iwo Jima and Guam. White was part of Marine Observation Squadron-2, Marine Air Group 16. On September 19, 1957 he left Tachkawa, Japan for Kadena Air Base, Okinawa. He-served as an auto vehicle operator. Oswald reported to Marine Air Control Squadron-1, Marine Air Group 11 at Atsugi, Japan on September 13, 1957. He obtained a security clearance and worked on the U-2 project.

Remember Ralph Thomas' claim, probably based upon information provided in the JFK Center's press kit, that Roscoe's military records were found by Ricky in his grandfather's foot locker in 1982? I ascertained the grandfather in question was Geneva White's father. I discussed the discovery of the foot locker with Geneva's sisters and brother. All three denied the episode ever occurred.

In February of 1991 I contacted the National Records Center in St. Louis, Missouri. I found any soldier who wants his records must sign a release. This meant they would have a record of the date Roscoe White requested his records, the very ones Ricky found in the foot locker.

I applied for this data under the Freedom of Information Act. My original request was denied so I appealed to the Adjutant General of the United States. The appeal was approved and in late 1991 I received the list of all individuals requesting Roscoe White's military records along with the date the records were sent.

Only three names appeared. My own based upon my request of February 28, 1991. Next was that of Attorney Jim Lesar. Lesar, a representative of the Assassination Archives and Research Center, requested his set on August 7, 1990 the day after the press conference. But most revealing was the third name. It was not as I expected Roscoe White but Ricky. Ricky White had requested his father's records on December 2, 1988. This raises four questions:
[1] Did Roscoe ever have a copy of his records? And if so
[2] What happened to his original application for these records?
[3] If Ricky found his father's military records in the foot locker why the need to request another set from the Records Center?
[4] Why did Ricky refuse to reveal he ordered a set on December 2, 1988 a little over a month before Matsu was incorporated?

In a somewhat related incident Ricky also wrote the Dallas Police Department, on February 3, 1989. Using the Texas Open Records Act as a basis, he requested copies of his father's personnel file for an upcoming "family reunion."

Coupling the statements of Philip Jordan, Roscoe's sisters in law, and brother in law as well as identifying Ricky's working relationship with Matsu and Andy Burke and his applications for his father's military and police records, I think there is more than sufficient proof to counter Mr. Thomas claim that Ricky is "...not an assassination buff."

I hope this paper has served to clear up some of the misconceptions concerning the Roscoe White episode. I have always indicated I would change my opinion when somebody, anybody provides information that refutes the majority of physical documentation accumulated over the years; by myself, Gary Mack, John Stockwell, Jim Lesar, Richard Ray, the Office of the Texas Attorney General, Harold Weisberg, Oliver Stone and many others.

Ralph Thomas indicates he conducted his "own independent investigation and verification of this account." I'm sorry but I find it impossible to accept the opinions and conclusions of a researcher who can't spell the name of the subject of his investigation, Roscoe White, correctly.

Did this man kill JFK?
The debate continues...

When They Kill A President - Part III by Roger Craig
Our President is lying up there cold beneath his flame
He is calling out for vengeance and to do so in his name.
To keep the peace forever and erase our nation's shame
His dream goes marching on.

This time there were no jobs to be found. However, business in the Justice Court was somewhat improved due to the opening of a sub station in Midlothian by the Highway Patrol. I could not pay the rent or meet the bills but the increase was enough to buy groceries. I had resigned as City Judge so that there would be no conflict of interest between the two positions (City and County Court).

It was at this time that I was notified by District Attorney, Jim Garrison, that he would need me in the upcoming Clay Shaw trial--another wrench in the machinery. The night after I was notified of this I received a telephone call and the voice asked if I was going to go to New Orleans. When I answered, "yes", he just said, "get a one-way ticket" and then hung up. I brushed this off as just another crank. I'd had those calls before. However, the next day I received another call. This time it was a different voice.

This one asked if I were going to New Orleans and when I said, "yes", all he said was, "Remember you have a family" and hung up. I must admit this worried me. After that I would get up during the night and check the family and house--not a very pleasant way to live.

During this turmoil I at last had a prospect of getting back into that illusive pastime called "employment"--it was again Penn Jones to the rescue--and I say this with the greatest respect and admiration! Penn had been corresponding with a friend of his in Boulder, Colorado, regarding helping me find employment out of Texas, which seemed the only thing left. The friend suggested to Penn that I make a trip to Boulder to check into some leads so the Jones family made the arrangements and I was off to Boulder. This was in January 1969.

I arrived in Boulder and was met by members of the Students for a Democratic Society, whose names I will not mention. (J. Edgar Hoover should not have his work made so easy.) They took me from the airport and arranged for my lodging. The next three days I filled out applications at various places, including the Boulder Police Department and Sheriff s Office because those were the positions I was most qualified for and I believed I could be a cop and still have compassion for my fellow men. If they would not accept me that way, I could always quit--after all, I was an expert at being out of work.

After I had exhausted all possibilities, I thanked the people who had been so kind to me and returned to Midlothian, Texas to wait. I had been home about one week when I received word from the Boulder Sheriff's Department that there would be an opening soon and if I wanted the job, it was mine. Satisfied that the out of Texas bit was going to pay off, the Penn Jones, bless them, financed the trip back to Boulder. This time the family went with me. We drove straight through from Midlothian to Boulder. The second day in Boulder we found an apartment or two we might be able to afford until I started getting regular pay checks. I felt good about having a chance at a new start as I went to see Under Sheriff Cunningham.

When I arrived at the Sheriff's Department, Cunningham took me to his office, asked me to sit down and closed the door. It was then that I began to get that feeling I'd had so many times before when I was about to get the purple shaft. Sure enough, I had managed to lose a job before I even started. Mr. Cunningham began to ask me about my background with the Dallas Sheriff's Department (which he already knew from my previous visit) and the reason for my termination. Then he brought out his big gun, "What about Jim Garrison?" Well, knowing I'd been had, I told him I was going to have to testify in the Shaw trial (which I'm sure he already knew).

I'd heard about every excuse there was for not hiring me but he should have handed me this one in a gift-wrapped "surprise" package. "Mr. Craig," he said, (I had been Roger until then) "we've had a little situation here" and he went on--it seemed that one of their jailers had seduced a sixteen-year old girl while she was in their custody--WOW--and with that and my connection with the Garrison probe, the heat would be more than they wanted to handle. He was sorry. So was I-- all the way back to Texas. When we arrived back in Midlothian we were all exhausted and very disappointed. Molly had the flu, Deanna a bad cold and the strain of the past few weeks had taken its toll on me. I was having trouble with my stomach and lungs and was down to 138 pounds. It was February 1, 1969. We had just enough money left from the trip to perhaps rent a house and buy a few groceries. Dale Foshee was pressing me again to move and I had nowhere to go and no prospects of a job. Like a wounded animal, I could only think of returning to familiar surroundings--the place that I had spent most of my adult life.

We drove to Dallas and by some streak of luck sneaked by a property owner and managed to rent a house. Before this poor, misguided soul could change his mind, we gathered up our belongings in Midlothian and moved back to Dallas, where I again applied my trade of Iooking for work.

I spent the following days filling out many applications and some of the interviews were even promising. I was very careful not to mention any part of my involvement in the assassination. However, on February 13, 1969 I was summoned to New Orleans to testify in the Clay Shaw trial. On the 14th when I finally took the stand the defense tried very hard to discredit me by saying that I worked in New Orleans and was, in fact, still working in that city under an assumed name. Failing to discredit me, they accomplished the next best thing, the distorted version appeared in newspapers and wire services throughout the country.

When I returned to Dallas on February 16, 1969 I was to realize the full impact of this distorted news story for when I contacted the job possibilities I had before I testified I found all doors closed. On March 4--after several days of no openings, or being told that I was not qualified, or that they would call me, which they never did--I found a job with Industrial Towel and Uniform Company of Dallas. This was a rental company and they needed men so that all I had to do was pass a polygraph test to prove I was not a thief, which I passed!

NOW I was a Route Salesman. Ponder that awhile--a Judge reduced to picking up dirty laundry. Oh, well, work is work! Still weak and underweight from being sick during January and February, I was determined to make it on my new job.

I left home at 5:45 a.m and arrived at the plant a little after 6:00 a.m, put my route slips in order, loaded my truck and started my deliveries. I got back to the plant about 4:30 p.m, unloaded the dirty linens, turned in my money and charge slips and got back home around 6:30 p.m. This was the season for cold, rainy weather--wouldn't you know? I had been to a doctor who gave me some medication for the chest infection I had developed and the medicine kept me going until March 14--when I, literally, ran out of gas.

On March 18, Molly called Penn and told him that I was not any better. Penn began to make arrangements for me to be admitted to the Veterans Hospital, where he was to meet me. By this time I was out of it and Molly called an ambulance. I had completely passed out by the time it had arrived. I knew that I was going to the V.A. Hospital but when I woke up a short time later I knew I was not at the V.A. Hospital. Those dirty bastards had taken me to Parkland Hospital, which has a reputation for saving people comparable to my employment record for the past two years. I gathered what strength I had, got off the stretcher and staggered down the hall.

Molly had reached Penn, who was waiting at the V.A. Hospital, and he was madder than hell as he hated Parkland Hospital even more than I did. So, I finally wound up at the V.A. Hospital via Penn's car, where I spent the next ten days. I was released from the hospital on March 28, 1969 with instructions not to work out in the weather until my lungs had improved. This, of course, eliminated my job as a route salesman.

I knew an inside job was going to be hard to find from my experience during the past two years. First of all, I knew that when my references were checked Decker would not give me a favorable recommendation--if he even gave one at all. Second, my unstable employment record during the past two years had resulted in a disastrous credit rating. Eight years of experience in various responsible duties at the Sheriff's Office were gone. They had, indeed, done their work well!

After many weeks of search I still had no job and was again behind on the rent. At this point we took two cameras, one 8 millimeter movie and one Minor still, our projector and screen and sold them for enough to rent a cheaper house. We moved into a three room house on Gurley Street which wasn't much but it kept out the rain!

One day I got a wild idea. I would go down to the Federal Building and apply for a government job---those people will hire anybody--well, almost anybody. I passed the civil service test and was told they had a job coming up in the office and I was qualified for it. I was to go back in two days to begin work. Things were certainly looking up. I went over to my father-in-law's and drank all of his beer to celebrate.

The two days passed and I headed for my government job, which was to be handling correspondence from other government agencies--they do a lot of writing to each other. Well, when I arrived I was ushered into one of those cubby hole offices AGAIN, where I was told that they had received a memo telling them the budget was being cut and my job was being eliminated (I hadn't even started).

Oh, well, at least I was losing "more important" jobs now.

On June 1 I answered an ad for an Assistant Manager's job at a liquor store, where the only qualification was that I pass another polygraph test, which I did, proving that I had not yet turned to stealing. The next day I reported for work to find that I was a delivery boy again. My job was restocking private clubs throughout Dallas who bought merchandise from the store. I soon made friends with all the club owners and every time I would make a delivery, they would insist on buying me a drink. I was making $1.87 an hour. I wasn't the highest paid delivery boy in town but after a few stops I was probably the happiest!

In the meantime being out of work from March until June 1, I was again behind on the rent as well as the car payment on my used 1965 Buick. The landlord had asked us to move. I tried to explain my situation and the fact that I was now working and would try to catch up on the rent but he didn't care---I had to go. It was two weeks before I received a pay check. I don't know how we made it but we did. Molly then found a house for us to rent and I paid the first month's rent. I didn't worry about the car payment any longer for two days after I started to work the bank repossessed the car. We then again went back to driving one of Penn's cars.

During the slow periods of the weeks which followed I was always searching the paper and talking to people--trying to find a better paying job with a little security. I was working eleven hours a day, six days a week so it took me some time to locate one and I also had to be careful not to let people know too much about me because the general attitude in Dallas was not to get involved in the assassination. (A little late for Dallas).

On September 18, 1969 I applied at Peakload, Inc., a temporary employment service, who was looking for a dispatcher. The job consisted of taking orders from companies which needed temporary help for a few days, selecting the men from the hall who were best suited to the customer's needs, then seeing that they were delivered by our driver and picked up promptly after work. Al Nagel, the office manager, was from Minnesota and knew little of the events in Dallas and nothing of the people involved in the assassination so I slipped by and was hired. Now I was doing something which I enjoyed and the pay was $500.00 a month with time and one-half for over 48 hours. The next few weeks went by swiftly. I was working six days a week and making enough money to pay the rent, buy groceries and clothes for the kids.

On November 10, 1969 1 was taken to the V.A. Hospital again. This time with neuritis, which the doctors said was caused by a vitamin deficiency over a long period of time, and bronchial pneumonia. This time I was not too concerned because Al Nagel liked my work and I was sure that I had a future with Peakload regardless of this temporary set back.

Well, after twenty-four days of what seemed like endless injections of vitamins, penicillin and streptomycin (one hundred and twenty-eight in all) I was sent home on December 4, 1969. The next day I called AI Nagel to tell him that I would return to work in a couple of days--when I got my strength back. Al informed me that I no longer had the job---that I had been replaced.

My final check from Peakload paid the rent for a month and bought a few groceries but Christmas was coming and I had managed somehow not to let the kids down--up until now. While I was in the hospital Penn Jones brought a letter he had received from Madeline Goddard. She had, apparently, read much on the assassination and sent her best wishes and support to us. Also in the letter was the answer to this Christmas. Madeline had enclosed a check for $100.00.

She did not realize it, I'm sure, but that kept us from throwing my hands up in the air and giving up. The next few weeks were a repetition of earlier days--no jobs, no money, no prospects (there must be a song in there somewhere). Our only means of eating those days was Madeline Goddard' s generosity; God bless Madeline and her generous heart.

Penn Jones had a few acres of land in Boyce, Texas, a short distance from Midlothian and he had persuaded us to move into the smaller of two houses on this land. We decided to go so that I could recuperate and regroup my thoughts. By this time, January 24, 1970, I was very depressed and ready to throw in the towel.

Penn and his son, Penn III, moved our belongings into the small three-room house and I must say that the fresh air and freedom from Dallas and its citizens was a welcome change. After a few days I felt better and began exploring our new surroundings. Penn had seventy-eight head of cattle on the place and I was feeding twenty bales of hay to them every morning. As my strength came back I also tackled various small, clean up jobs around the farm. It was the least I could do--the rent was free and Penn paid the light and water bills. We bought what butane we had to buy for heat and cooking. How about this--in 1948 I ran away from home at age 12 and spent the next four years working on farms and ranches in the west and northwest---now twenty-two years later I was back on the farm! There were days, however, when the rain and sleet would keep me inside, only venturing out when I had to (mostly to feed the cows).

The highlight of each day was when the mail man came as we were now corresponding with Madeline Goddard regularly and always looked forward to her letters. I do not know what we would have done if it hadn't been for this wonderful person. If I live to be a hundred, I couldn't repay her!

Roger, Jr., was sixteen now and living with his grandparents in Dallas. Terry and Deanna were going to school in Waxahachie, seven miles away. They had to walk about three quarters of a mile to the school bus stop so in bad weather we would drive them to school. This was no easy job in the 1955 Ford of Penn's, which had seen better days. I certainly do not mean to sound ungrateful--Penn Jones and his wife were wonderful to us--we will always hold them close.

It was April when the larger house on the land in Boyce became vacant and Penn said that we could move into it. We needed the room and I would be closer to the stock and the feed for them was also in the barn near that house. Living in the bigger house was much easier and it was about this time that Penn decided to try to raise Holstein calves. There were no jobs in this small county and maybe we could make some money on this venture.

Molly, Terry, Deanna and I drove Penn's Travel-All truck to Cleburne, where we picked up the calf Penn had bought on a pilot project. At three days old, the calf was a big baby at 80 pounds or more. Every morning at 7:00 a.m Molly fixed the calf's bottle and we took turns feeding him until he decided that Molly was his mother. Cute--but something she wasn't ready for!

We continued taking care of the cattle for several weeks and during this time two calves were born. We named one, a little bull calf, "Jones" and the other a heifer calf, Deanna named "Susie." They became her only playmates. However, I wasn't making one red cent and the only help we received was from Madeline who, God knows, was carrying the burden of feeding my family.

On May 15 a decision had to be made. It was apparent that the calf project wasn't going to materialize and Penn was talking of selling some of the land and cattle. It looked as though Penn was having financial problems and I did not want to add to them. So, Molly and I talked and decided the best thing for us was to drive to Dallas and make arrangements to stay with someone and for me to try *one more time* (there's that song title). We talked to my mother, who said we could move in with her until I found a job and a place to live.

As we drove back to Boyce we spoke of our apprehension about moving but when we drove into the yard we knew it was the thing to do. The front door of the house was standing wide open. I knew what was gone even before I got out of the car. I was right. The 30-40 Krag rifle (the only one I had managed to hang onto), Terry's 30.30 Winchester, which he had received as a gift, his .410 shotgun, and the .12 gauge automatic shotgun Penn had loaned me were all missing. These were our only means of protection in this place so far in the country with no telephone or close neighbors. Now we had been stripped of that. Coincidence? Maybe. I was very uneasy and the sooner we got out of there, I felt, the better.

It took two days and two sleepless nights to arrange the move but we did it and were back in Dallas and staying with my mother. By this time my physical health was somewhat improved and my mental attitude was back to normal. This was due to the words of encouragement I had received from Madeline and others who had written to us over the past months to let me know that there were people in this country who cared. I was ready for any opposition from the Political Monster which ruled Dallas and even the very lives of those so-called Business and Civic leaders who did not have the guts to stand on their own two feet! As I thought over the past years, I was even amused that I, a man of limited education and no social position in this City of Purity, had struck fear into the hearts of its "great" leaders by just speaking to them on the street!

Although I had not worked steadily since my termination from the Dallas County Sheriffs Department, I did not forget my obligation as an American. Thus, when asked by certain critics of the Warren Report to help, I did what I could. Imagine the turmoil it will cause when and if the Dallas Police read this and find out I have copied and turned over to a certain editor several names, addresses and telephone numbers of people connected with the assassination of John F. Kennedy which were locked in the files of the Dallas Police Intelligence Division. Not to mention the files which were photostated and smuggled out of the Dallas County Mail under Bill Decker's nose (all after I left the Sheriff s Department). Even though I have not made any money in the past few years, I hope I was able to help those who have spent so much time investigating the assassination, who certainly haven't made any money either!

The last week of May, 1970 I got lucky. The ad in the newspaper read, "Wanted Dispatcher for temporary labor company." The Company was Peakload. I quickly made a call to the chief dispatcher, with whom I had worked previously, and found he was working sixteen hours every day. He was so happy to hear from me, because of his workload, that he offered to come and get me so that I could go to work that day. The company had a new office manager, Jim Morris. I went in, immediately to apply--at the urging of the chief dispatcher, Bill Funderburke--and for an interview with Jim Morris, the manager. He was from Ft. Worth and knew more about the assassination and me than I would have preferred (from the questions he asked me concerning Bill Decker, Jim Garrison and others who had made the news). However, the office was in trouble as they had not been able to keep an evening dispatcher for more than three or four weeks at a time since I worked there in 1969.

With a word of caution as to my activities, Jim put me to work. This made Bill very happy as the pressure was now off him. I knew the work, the customers and most of the men I would be dealing with so Peakload did not have to worry about breaking in a new man. The rest of May and early June passed uneventfully but around the middle of June Molly went into Baylor Hospital, through the clinic as we could not afford a private doctor or the high rate of regular hospital services (I had only worked a short time and we still had a balance owing on Molly's surgery in August 1969). On June 26 Molly underwent major surgery. She had been under a tremendous strain the past years and was physically and mentally exhausted. During this period I had managed to gather enough money to buy a 1962 Ford from a friend. It was not the best car in the world but it was only a hundred and fifty dollars and it did ran. I paid $50.00 down and was to pay him the rest in a month or so. I also rented a small apartment and it seemed good to once again be by ourselves in our own home. But our new found "Wealth" was short lived.

Shortly after this, a self-professed private detective in Dallas, by the name of Al Chapman, had written a story about new evidence in the assassination which he had sold to the "National Enquirer." In this article he quoted me as saying that I had given certain information to him and had personally identified a picture of a man and car saying it was Lee Harvey Oswald and his accomplice.

The entire story, with reference to me, was completely false. I had never been interviewed by this man and had at no time seen the picture to which he referred. AI Chapman, prior to the assassination, was a custodian for a church in Oak Cliff. There is a good deal of mystery about him for he will not reveal his business or residential address. Nor is the name of the church available. Although he is a part-time private investigator, he has no license.

The story was all over the office and Jim was concerned as he had been keeping up on anything written involving these events.

Before long the FBI and the Dallas Police were making regular visits to the office on the pretext of looking for "Jim Jones" or "Tom Smith" or any excuse they could use to let me know they could also read! The heat was on. Jim was constantly there everytime I looked up which was unusual. This leech, this skid row bum, and I am referring to Al Chapman, in his lust for money, not caring whom he hurt, had not only sold his story but my future with Peakload as well.

On July 17, 1970, I reported for work to find another man doing my job. I was told by this "replacement" that Jim wanted to see me. As I sat in Jim's office I knew what was coming. Jim said, "Roger, you've done a good job but it is time for a change." I asked him for an explanation but all he would say was that it was time for a change and he was sorry!

Bill Decker died in August. The County Commissioners appointed his executive assistant, Clarence Jones, to fill the job until November, when he had to run for election (with the backing of the Democratic Party). For the first time since Decker's reign, the Republicans nominated someone to oppose a Democrat for the office.

The man was Jack Revell, former Chief of the Dallas Police Intelligence Division. This meant that the voters had the choice between two evils. Well, Clarence Jones was elected--his campaign signs and posters read, "Elect Clarence Jones - In the Tradition of Bill Decker"! It would be nice if Jack Revel would be upset enough over his loss of the election to make public some information--but this is very wishful thinking indeed.

Meanwhile, I am still out of a job (but still looking). I would like to think that the people of Dallas will change and rise up against the dishonest and irresponsible tyrants who govern in their name--but I do not see it happening in the near future. Dallas is my home but I will always feel like an outsider because I simply will not adjust to the idea that for Dallas, for Texas, for America this must serve as DEMOCRACY.

* * * * *

A Few Odd and Interesting Facts
Allen Sweatt, Decker's Chief criminal investigator, let me know that he was aware of my friendship with Hiram Ingram and that he did not like it one bit.

Before I departed the Sheriff's Office for good Allen Sweatt and I talked a couple of times and he revealed to me that he knew Lee Harvey Oswald. He also told me that Oswald worked for the FBI as an informer, that he was paid $200.00 a month and his code number was S 172.

ROBERT PERRIN AND NANCY PERRIN RICH
When Penn Jones wanted the records of Robert Perrin, the ex-husband of Nancy Perrin Rich, I had to find a new source of information. (I won't release this name for obvious reasons.) It seems that Nancy Perrin was connected with Jack Ruby, Clay Shaw and Lee Oswald at about the time of President Kennedy's death.

Robert Perrin was reported to have committed suicide in New Orleans, La. The autopsy showed no visible scars, marks or tattoos and Penn knew that Perrin had been arrested in Dallas and wanted me to get the records of the arrest along with his description. After some doing I finally obtained the record. It showed that Perrin had several tattoos and part of his right index finger was missing.

None of this information showed up on the autopsy report. It would be interesting to know who was buried in Robert Perrin's place and where Robert Perrin is now, wouldn't it?

* * * * *
ADDENDUM
The favorite pastime in Dallas
Is a game they call murder with malice.
They don't ask your leave.
But not to deceive....
To tell you would be - well, too callous.

CAR ACClDENT
On Wednesday, October 27, 1970 I went to downtown Dallas to Jack Revel's campaign headquarters to pick up some campaign signs. The headquarters were not open and I decided to visit a friend who works at a restaurant across the street. While talking with my friend the conversation turned, as it so often does, to the assassination. He and I had discussed this in the past.

During the course of our conversation a man who I had not met before entered into the conversation. He, of course, did not know me (not to my knowledge). I told him that I was from out of town and that I was interested in facts that hadn't been printed and in persons that had known Jack Ruby and Lee Oswald. This man said, "I knew Oswald and Ruby. I can tell you anything you want to know about them."

At this point I became very interested and I told him again that I'd sure like to know first hand what they were like. He said, "I knew Ruby well--I had seen Oswald a couple of times in Ruby's place." I then said, "Well, in Ruby's business--the night club--I imagine a lot of people were seen there." He sort of chuckled and said "Huh--Jack Ruby's business was spelled Mafia." He then said, "I can show you a used car lot where Ruby collected a lot of gambling money over on Ross Avenue" (it was the 4600 block of Ross Avenue). So I offered to drive him over there and he said, "No do you have your car here?" I did. He said I should follow him, which I did. I parked my car on the same side of the street as the car lot, a short distance down and walked back to his car. I opened the door of his car on the passenger side and he pointed to the car lot and said, "That's where a lot of the money comes in from the gambling operation and Jack picked it up here."

He said, "If you really want to know what's going on in Dallas you have to talk to someone who's been around--and I've been around in those circles." Then he said, "Just leave your car parked there and come with me---I'll show you something that's REALLY interesting." He drove me to 300 1/2 South Ewing in the Oak Cliff area to an apartment that had been a family dwelling and was converted into apartment units. I should mention here that Jack Ruby's address at the time of the assassination was 323 South Ewing.

The apartment at 300 1/2 South Ewing is upstairs and when we walked into the apartment there was a distinct feeling of an unlived-in atmosphere. The furnishings were bare. There was a couch, chair and coffee table--no lamps, no ash trays, nothing on the walls. The man had been smoking so it was odd that there were no ash trays. He said, "How about a cup of coffee?" We went into the kitchen, he opened the cabinet and said, "Oh well, I guess I'm out of coffee." He was also out of everything else as there was nothing in the cabinet.

The arrangement of the apartment was unusual as you had to go through the bedroom to the kitchen, which was very small. The closet door was open in the bedroom. However, there were no clothes in it. At that time I became slightly nervous about the situation.

We went back into the bedroom from the kitchen. While in the bedroom he said, "I want to show you something." He opened the top drawer of the dresser and pulled out a shoulder holster--there was a .32 revolver with a three inch barrel in the shoulder holster. He pulled the .32 out of the holster and said, "what do you think about that?" I remarked that you don't see many .32' s with a barrel like that. He put the .32 back in the drawer and went around to the side of the closet which was not visible when you went into the kitchen.

At that time he produced two rifles one was a bolt action which looked like a 30.06, the other was a high power automatic which appeared to be a .257 caliber.

I remarked that they were nice rifles and I would like to have a good deer hunting rifle. He then laid those two on the bed and he said, "You haven't seen anything yet." He then got down on the floor and he pulled 5 more rifles from under the bed. Each of these were equipped with scopes. He then pulled a cardboard box about 13 inches long and 10 inches deep also from under the bed. The box was closed and on the side was printed "Ammunition - Handle With Care." He then slid the rifles and ammunition back under the bed. I said jokingly, "What are you gonna do--start a war?" He said, "Could be."

At that time he looked at his watch and said "excuse me just a minute, I have to go down to the landlady's apartment and make a phone call--I promised some people I would call them" (there was no telephone in the apartment). He was gone for about ten minutes.

During this time I made a mental inventory of the apartment. After he returned he asked me if I was ready to go back to my car. There was a pay phone on the corner from the apartment and I asked him to pull over so that I could call the people who owned the car (I had told him that it was borrowed while I was in Dallas), that I wanted to let them know that the car was okay. From the pay phone I called my wife and gave her the man's name and address and told her of the situation. His name--as he gave me is A.E. Allen, 300 1/2 South Ewing, Dallas, Texas.

Before we went to his apartment, or the apartment, I told him being from out of town that I didn't know much, but that I had heard that Ruby was in the gun running business. He said that Ruby wasn't actually buying and selling weapons. That people in higher positions made the arrangements for the buying and selling of weapons. That Ruby was mainly the go-between for delivering the money and making arrangements for the storage of the weapons until they were shipped out.

During the course of the evening he made the statement several times that, "if you want to stay healthy, don't say anything to anybody in Dallas about the assassination unless you're damn sure you know who you're talking to."

He then said that there were a lot of people in Dallas who were out to "get" him because he knows too much. ?

One of the strangest things that he did was to drive on East Jefferson to a used car lot and stop. There were two men inside the office and he went in and talked to them. I stayed in the car and could see them through a window of the office. He was in there only a few minutes. His car was a light blue Oldsmobile 66 model.

When he came out of the office he got into a gray Olds sitting on the lot and he drove it onto the drive stopping just before he entered the street--he motioned to me--I was watching him. I got out of the blue Olds and he took me back to my car in the gray Olds. ?

On the way to my car across town, he kept repeating there's a lot more to this (the assassination) than they'll ever know. In taking me to my car he cut across to Ft. Worth Avenue. While driving slowly along he pointed out certain private clubs--saying that he wasn't allowed in one or the other. My first thought was that he was trying to give me the impression that he was knowledgeable about the workings of the Dallas underworld. However, it really seems that he was using a delaying measure--since it took from 10:00 p.m until 11:15 p.m to drive me to my car--an ordinary 15 minute drive at that time.

When I got out of his car at mine he said, "I'll call you tomorrow." Earlier in the evening he had implied he was going to give me more information. I had given him a number to reach me by. Needless to say I did not hear from him after the incident that followed!

I had locked my car when I parked it. When I got into it I turned the key over to start the engine. At this point there was a muffled type explosion and then smoke came out the sides of the hood. The hood had a double latch and didn't blow. Fire was coming through the air vents under the dash and a pillow was burning inside the car.

I jumped out of the car and raised the hood. The engine, hoses, firewall and even under the bell housing was all ablaze. Several persons came up and someone called the fire department. A man named Bill Booken was walking by at about the time it happened. The fire department used 2 cans of chemical to extinguish the fire.

This was one of the hottest fires I had ever seen. There was no smell of gasoline before or after, there was no back fire as the car had not started and afterwards the gas lines were checked and there were no leaks. There was an air breather on the car and in fact, there was no mechanical reason for the explosion.

This happened at 4625 Ross Avenue. Mr. Booken took me to Anderson's Restaurant at 4909 Ross Avenue where I called my wife and she arranged for my brother Duane to come after me. I didn't know that I had been injured until I felt the warm blood running down my shirt after my brother picked me up. I had lost quite a lot of blood by the time I went to the emergency room. I was there for three hours. A police report was made. I had received 5 puncture type wounds in the chest area. One vein had been severed and had to be tied and stitches taken in the wounds. X-rays were also made. I went to our family physician the following day and had the stitches removed the following Monday. It was never completely determined what hit me. Another close call! The doctor at the emergency room said I was lucky the wounds had not been lower and our family physician said I was lucky the wounds were not in the neck. So... I suppose I'm just lucky all the way round!

Olliewood! Oliver Stone's JFK sequel has Nixon turning in his grave by E. Burton Mercer.
Filmmaker Oliver Stone has begun production on the sequel to his 1991 blockbuster JFK, taking his controversial theories surrounding the John F. Kennedy assassination and transplanting them into the shadowy world of the Watergate conspiracy.

The Warner Bros/Cinergi production, Nixon, commenced principal photography on May 1, and is due for worldwide release at the climax of the US presidential elections next year. The US$60 million epic stars Academy Award winning actor Anthony Hopkins as the disgraced former president, and boasts a supporting cast of A-list megastars that seems destined to out class even the lofty talents assembled for JFK.

Oscar nominee James Woods is reunited with Stone for the first time since Salvador, and has signed on to portray Nixon's ruthless "son of a bitch"-cum-chief of staff, H.R. Haldeman. Filling out the other half of the infamous "Berlin Wall" is character actor J.T. Walsh, appearing as the crafty John Ehrlichman, Nixon's domestic affairs advisor.

Broadway star Joan Allen appears as the put-upon First Lady Pat Nixon, Wild At Heart Oscar nominee Diane Ladd appears as the manic Martha Mitchell, and Goodfella Paul Sorvino brings his considerble skill to the coveted role of Henry Kissinger, Tricky Dick's ambitious Secretary of State. (John Turturro was originally slated for the role, but dropped out six weeks before shooting.) The brilliant Peter O'Toole makes a welcome return to the big screen as Nixon's collaborator-turned-nemesis, CIA Director Richard Helms, and Bob Hoskins gets set to shock cinemagoers worldwide with a cross-dressing, sado-masochistic take on veteran FBI chief J. Edgar Hoover.

The story itself conjures up a surprisingly sympathetic portrait of the much-maligned title character, following Nixon's rollercoaster ride from his defeat at the 1960 presidential election to his downfall at the height of the Watergate scandal.

And at the core of this Oliver Stone blockbuster is a theory that is sure to set the American media establishment into a feeding frenzy -- namely, that the Watergate break-in and subsequent cover-up was sparked by Nixon's intimate knowledge of the events surrounding the JFK assassination conspiracy.

Based on a first draft screenplay acquired by Hollywood showbiz bible Daily Variety, it appears that Stone is setting out to prove that the "Murder Incorporated" established in 1959 by then-Vice President Nixon to eliminate Cuban Premier Fidel Castro was later used by elements within the Military-Industrial Complex to assassinate President Kennedy in 1963.

Nixon's fear that he may somehow be implicated in the JFK murder propels him to orchestrate the infamous Watergate burglary as a last ditch attempt to retrieve the incriminating ZR/RIFLE documents - documents that demonstrate his involvement in the "Executive Action" plots.

With those documents in hand, Nixon plans to finally bury his last great "skeleton in the political closet". However, that plan, as history reflects, failed on a massive scale.

If any of this sounds familiar to Probable Cause readers, it should. Our series on the Nixon/Dallas connection, Prince Of Thieves, set out to prove exactly the same scenario that Mr. Stone is now committing to the silver screen. However, we took our research to the next logical step by attempting to integrate the "French Connection" theory into the Nixon/Dallas conspiracy, a theory first postulated by Los Angeles-based journalist Steve Rivele on The Men Who Killed Kennedy documentary series.

The question is, will Oliver Stone do the same?

We don't know the answer to that, but we can report that the Nixon screenplay has three co-writers: Oliver Stone, Christopher Wilkins, and, yep, you guess it, Steve J. Rivele. Whatever the results of this multi-million dollar Hollywood opus, one thing is for sure: The controversy guaranteed to accompany Nixon into the cinemas will make the furore surrounding JFK look like a duck-walk.

You heard it here first, folks. Stay tuned...

* * * * *

Behind You! Those Oliver Stone conspiracy theories in full...
Blame The Hand!
In The Hand (1981) Stone's conspiracy theories reach an early peak when mutilated artist Michael Caine starts believing that his own disembodied five-digit extremity is trying to ruin his life...

Blame The Government! And The Media!
In Salvador (1986) journalist James Woods discovers that the corrupt and brutal Salvadorian government is being shored up by a mixture of aid from the US government and biased reporting from his colleagues...

Blame The Government! (Again!)
In Platoon (1987) the lives of Charlie Sheen and countless other army grunts are ruined when Uncle Sam decides it would be a really ace idea to declare war on Vietnam. The same, generally speaking, applies to Born On The Fourth Of July (1989) -- the government persecutes Tom Cruise -- and Heaven & Earth (1994) -- the government persecutes Hiep Thi Le...

Blame Capitalism!
In Wall Street (1987) the honest working man (Martin Sheen) is mercilessly taken to the cleaners by the fascistic lackeys of corporate big business (Michael Douglas)...

Blame Society!
In Talk Radio (1988) motormouth talk show host Eric Bogosian is first driven virtually insane and ultimately killed by the selection of freaks, weirdos, metalheads and fascists who call in to his show...

Blame The Military-Industrial Complex!
In JFK (1991) the death of President Kennedy is blamed on a conspiracy of the military, big business, the CIA, Cuban-Exiles, the Mob, Ed Lansdale and other assorted right-wing nutters...

Blame, er, Everybody!
In the near-future TV mini-series Wild Palms (1993) corporate executive James Belushi uncovers a plot so hideously widespread and complex that only Stone himself appears to know what the hell is really going on...

Why not continue and read the internet version of Probable Cause Australia, Probable Cause: Internet Live?

Backcopies of all issues, including all photographs, are still available. Just contact the editor via the Feedback link on the Probable Cause Australia welcome page.

N.B. The opinions expressed above are not necessarily those of the editor but all comments will be passed on to the relevant authors.

Credits

Editor-in-Chief : Steve Gerlach

Art Editor : E. Burton Mercer

Managing Editor : Paul Jones

Contributing Editor : Stephen Webb

Photographic Analysis : Tony Skomina

Internet : Steve Gerlach

Contributors : Adelaide Tapper, Walt Brown, David B. Perry, Roger Craig, E. B. Mercer, Dallas JFK-AIC, Steve Gerlach, Paul Jones, Tony Skomina, Steve Webb.

Art Direction : Louie Louie Enterprises Australia

Return to Issue Summaries.

web hosting • domain names
web design • online games

	KENNEDY	WHITLAM
Populist Image:	"Camelot"	"It's Time"
Thawed realations with:	Russia, Cuba	Russia, China, Vietnam
Reformist Policy Base:	Civil Rights Help for the poor	Social Reforms National Health Sysytem Established "Australia First" Policy
On Vietnam:	Prepared for withdrawal	Ended Conscription, withdrew all troops Criticised US and Nixon's role in war
Secret Government:	CIA / FBI / PENTAGON Threatened to scatter CIA to the winds Fired heads Allan Dulles and Richard Bissell	ASIO / ASIS / CIA Fired heads of both ASIO and ASIS Stormed ASIO HQ for documents Launched inquiry into practices and liaisons with USA and CIA
Military Industrial Complex:	Saw JFK as a threat: Possibility of withdrawal from Vietnam Bay of Pigs fiasco Missile Crisis	Whitlam threatened US bases in Australia with closer scrutiny and possible closure
Final Acts:	Signed NSAM #273 starting the withdrawal of troops from Vietnam	Prepared Speech to Parliament to expose CIA operatives in Australia and CIA infiltration of Military Bases (Speech due on November 11, 1975)
Coup D'Etat:	November 22, 1963	November 11, 1975
How?:	Killed in Crossfire in Dallas Most probably by 3 men.	Government Dismissed by Governor General Sir John Kerr. Whitlam Government destroyed undemocratically by 1 man.

PROBABLE CAUSE AUSTRALIA

A Continuing Inquiry into the JFK Assassination

Editorial

COUP D'ETAT IN AUSTRALIA HOW THE CIA DID A DALLAS, 1963, DOWN UNDER IN 1975! BY ADELAIDE TAPPER AND STEVE GERLACH 20 years of cover-up WORLD EXCLUSIVE

"THE WRONG PEOPLE"

BUYING BACK THE FARM

THE LOANS AFFAIRS

THE CAIRNS LOAN AFFAIR

THE KHEMLANI AFFAIR

TOWARDS DISMISSAL

ENTER THE GOVERNOR-GENERAL

THE DISMISSAL - NOVEMBER 11, 1975

KERR'S COUP

COUP D'ETAT WAS THE CIA INVOLVED IN THE DISMISSAL OF AN AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT?

TROUBLE ON THE HORIZON

AMERICAN TOES

PINE GAP

SECURITY RISK

THE HATCHET MAN

UNRELIABLE

THE MURPHY RAID

ASIO, ASIS, AND THE CIA

THE SPY UNCOVERED

"NATIONAL SECURITY"

CIA IN CRISIS

STRAIGHT FROM THE HORSE'S MOUTH

WAS CAIRNS SET-UP?

CREEPY KHEMLANI

WAS NUGAN HAND INVOLVED?

THE BOYCE TRIAL

OTHERS SPEAK

WHITLAM'S EVIDENCE

"OUR MAN KERR"

PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY

COUP DE GRACE

Postscript

* * * * *

Kennedy & Whitlam - The Parallels

To the editors and readers of Probable Cause: an open letter by Walt Brown

The Warren Commission/The Warren Omission by Walt Brown, Ph.D.

Rosco Who? by David B. Perry

When They Kill A President - Part III by Roger Craig

A Few Odd and Interesting Facts

ADDENDUM

Olliewood! Oliver Stone's JFK sequel has Nixon turning in his grave by E. Burton Mercer.

* * * * *

Behind You! Those Oliver Stone conspiracy theories in full...

Return to Issue Summaries.

COUP D'ETAT IN AUSTRALIA
HOW THE CIA DID A DALLAS, 1963,
DOWN UNDER IN 1975!
BY ADELAIDE TAPPER AND STEVE GERLACH

20 years of cover-up
WORLD EXCLUSIVE

COUP D'ETAT
WAS THE CIA INVOLVED IN THE
DISMISSAL OF AN AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT?

To the editors and readers of Probable Cause:
an open letter by Walt Brown