One of these needs, ever since 1963, has been to preserve the threadbare fiction that Lee Harvey Oswald by himself killed the president, and no one in the CIA was involved in any way.
How can we make the American people more aware that elements of the CIA lied about the assassination in 1964, and are still lying today?
In this he would assuredly have had the support of Angleton.
Angleton later testified to the Senate Church Committee that “it is I argue that these two decades, the sixties and seventies, were a crucial period in American history, two decades in which the American constitutional state and its structural deep state (including the CIA) were opposing each other and struggling to see which power would prevail over the other. It is noteworthy that in 1973, when Helms perjured himself again, not only the agency’s but his own personal career were again at risk. In December 1972, after the Watergate break-in, Nixon believed Helms “was out to get him;” and accordingly he banished Helms to be Ambassador in Iran.
” Some people have deduced, from the fact that CIA officials lied, that the CIA killed Kennedy.
I myself believe only that some CIA individuals were involved, along with others in other agencies.
At risk in these crucial months was the preservation of the agency itself, or at a minimum the preservation of its operational capacity.
The choice confronting him was not between two conflicting oaths.
This is an old ploy dating back to 1965, following in the footsteps of old CIA veterans and friends like Brian Latell and Gus Russo.
It allows a writer like Philip Shenon to quote from the Robarge study the old red herring question “Did Castro kill the president because the president had tried to kill Castro?