RESOLVED: President Kennedy was killed as the result of a 

[Continuation of my transcription of a radio debate which took 
place in the Fall of 1993 between Peter Dale Scott and Gerald 
Posner. Today, Mr. Scott gives his closing statement.]

MODERATOR: You will now each have 6 minutes to close. Mr. Scott, 
you have 6 minutes.

PETER DALE SCOTT: The Warren Commission, and again, now, Mr. 
Posner, tell us that Ruby and Oswald each were people who acted 
alone. What I've learned in my years is that each of these two 
individuals take us to very important institutional secrets that 
are part of what I call the "deep politics" of this country.

To start with Jack Ruby: He came out of Chicago, in the 24th ward 
of Jake Arvey, which was a signal point of corruption in the 
Democratic party in Chicago and in the nation. A man called James 
Ragen was killed in 1946. Oswald {1} knew the two assassins 
intimately. One of them was used by the Chicago FBI to make the 
case that Oswald {2} is not mob connected. They said that this 
man Dave Yaras... They sent this memo out and it was sent on to 
the Warren Commission: "Dave Yaras says that Oswald was not mob 
connected." They granted that Dave Yaras knew Oswald, but [what] 
they didn't say was that Dave Yaras was a *top* syndicate killer 
and that the killing of Ragen in 1946 (which he was guilty of) 
was one which [J. Edgar] Hoover was personally involved in. And 
we have it from one of Mr. Posner's own sources in the FBI that 
it was Hoover himself who dropped the investigation when Mr. 
Ragen was investigated. I have a [unclear] of that case, because 
it is a signal event in the evolution of organized crime in this 

Lee Harvey Oswald, in 1963, was involved with the *most* 
conspiratorial Cuban anti-Castro group (such as Alpha-66), whose 
main target by then was not so much Castro as Kennedy. Their... 
most of their raids were against Soviet ships in order to 
embarrass Kennedy's policy of detente with Kruschev. And the kind 
of story that Mr. Posner will *not* tell you is that a Dallas 
sheriff had said that Oswald had been seen with anti-Castro 
Cubans at a Harlandale(?) address in Texas which -- in Dallas -- 
which he says nothing more about, but which the FBI files show us 
was the Dallas headquarters of the Alpha-66 in Dallas and that 
they had been buying guns. And at least one of their milieu was 
an Oswald look-alike.

It is a symptom that the investigation was mishandled; that this 
rather significant lead which corroborates the leads in New 
Orleans of Oswald and anti-Castro Cubans, all of whom were arms 
trafficking. That is probably the key to why Oswald himself 
ordered guns. Because I believe that he *was* working part of the 
government's campaign against arms sales.

Now you tell me, Mr. Posner, that Bringuier denies his DRE 
connections. Mr. Bringuier has also denied his connections to the 
Cuban Revolutionary Council [CRC]. (And I can't remember if that's 
in your book, but it's certainly in the Warren Commission.) And 
yet I found a Cuban "Who's Who" of Cuban exiles, and it's 
*listed* in Mr. Bringuier's biography, in print, that he was the 
propaganda secretary for the CRC -- as I report in my book. (And 
I hope you have a refutation of it.)

If we had more time, I would respond to what you said about my 
book. But yes, all of these things are part of the deep politics. 
But they could also have been lone assassins. You're drawing 
conclusions that cannot be drawn.

What I have been trying to say and say is that the more we look 
into the, this case, pressure has forced the FBI to "cough up" 
files. The... forced just recently, the CIA to force up files. 
And the more documents we get, the less and less and less Oswald 
looks like a loner. If he was a loner, why did every single junky 
FBI report on him go over to CIA and get read in at least 10 
sections of the CIA? Why are there references that are still 
blacked out? Why are so many of the crucial documents suppressed?

We have a record here which we have to get to the bottom of. And, 
uh, I am open-minded about this. I don't quite know how you prove 
someone is a loner after you have already established that 
there's such intense and continuous government interest in him -- 
including documents we've been denied which are only one and two 
days before the assassination.

But I can tell you one thing: When the CIA called him Lee Henry 
Oswald it wasn't from a clumsy accident, as you suggest. Because 
they had been doing it consistently for 3 years in a file which 
had been... treated him as a *secret* case, when other defectors 
were treated as unclassified ones. He was a very special 
"defector" among those defectors. And the CIA falsified not only 
his name [but] the name of his wife, the name of the city in 
which he was born. The conclusion is unmistakable that he was 
part of some kind of operation that was being kept secret even in 
CIA files. And if you're going to prove me wrong, Mr. Posner, 
you're going to have to join with me in getting the rest of the 
files declassified.

MODERATOR: Thank you, Mr. Scott. Mr. Posner, you have 6 minutes.

                      (to be continued)

--------------------------<< Notes >>----------------------------
{1} Mr. Scott *says* "Oswald" here. He may *mean* "Ruby". Due to 
pressure of allowed time, Mr. Scott may have inadvertantly mixed 
the names.
{2} Again (see note #1, above), Mr. Scott *says* Oswald, but may 
have meant to say "Ruby."