As we’ve been going through the scribbles on Ron’s docs, it’s becoming clear that having one or two of them strategically placed on a document is one thing. But to have a whole menagerie of them, including the ST-102 and MCT stamps, PLUS a “see index” in the left margin of the first page? Hoo boy. Pretty soon, I imagine that the FBI is going to start taking Ron Tammen seriously.
Well, just wait, because I’ve found another scribble that, to the best that I can determine, would be akin to sticking the biggest reddest sticky note on top of his file folder as a warning to passersby.
Before I proceed, I want to remind my readers—be you a government official, a representative of law enforcement, a member of the military, or a fellow member of the general public—that what I am doing is 100% permissible by law. I am reviewing declassified documents, some having been declassified only recently, and comparing them with each other to discover similarities and patterns. Once these records were declassified and released to the public, I was immediately given carte blanche to report on them. It is my inalienable right.
OK! So here we go:
On page 1 of Ron’s missing person documents, in the bottom lefthand corner, is a notation that, again, isn’t very common among FBI records. The format is consistent: there’s a number, which, in my experience, is either 1 or 2, there’s usually a dash, and there’s the letter D, which is either written in lowercase or uppercase.
For a while, I thought that the D stood for detention and the numbers were assigned according to their priority level on the FBI’s Security Index. So in my initial hypothesis, 1-D would be the individuals of highest priority, who would be detained first in the event of a national emergency. 2-D would be second highest priority, so they’d be detained next, and 3-D, which, to date, I’ve never seen, would be everyone else whose name resides in the Security Index.
But then… I found the below document, which happens to concern James W. McCord, our friend from Watergate fame. To remind readers, James McCord did things long before Watergate, which took place on June 17, 1972. He was in the CIA from 1951 to 1970, which is more than enough time to become entangled in something pernicious, especially during those wild years. Throughout his time with the CIA, McCord was employed by the Office of Security, and, from what I can tell, had been part of the Security Research Staff until 1962, which was headed up for many years by Paul Gaynor. Morse Allen, whom I’ve written about in other posts, was a colleague as well. Security Research was the epicenter of Project Artichoke, the CIA’s interrogation research program. As you know, I strongly believe that Ron Tammen’s psychology professor, St. Clair Switzer, was recruited as a consultant for Project Artichoke for his expertise in hypnosis and drugs as well as his strong ties to the United States Air Force. Louis Jolyon West ostensibly started out with Project Artichoke too, but then he moved over to MKULTRA. (As has been pointed out by H.P. Albarelli, Jr., and Jeffrey Kaye in 2010, Project Artichoke didn’t just evolve into MKULTRA, as many people have mistakenly claimed—including yours truly when I was just getting started in my research. The two programs were operated in tandem for nearly 17 years after MKULTRA’s start in 1953!) I guess what I’m trying to say is that whenever I write the name James W. McCord, don’t just think Watergate. Think Project Artichoke too. Maybe even think Project Artichoke before you think Watergate, since Artichoke came first.
OK, so let’s look at the document from July 7, 1972. When you examine the bottom lefthand corner, in the distribution list, you see that they made 2 copies for the Bureau—which means FBI Headquarters—and that number is circled. However, in the white space northeast of the circled 2, someone has written: “1 – Dept.; 2 of T file copy.”
I take that to mean that of the 2 Bureau copies, one will go to the Department, and the second of two (T stands for two) will be the file copy at FBI Headquarters.
And that’s when it hit me: d or D stands for Department, as in the Department of Justice, the umbrella organization under which the FBI falls. So whenever we see a 1-d or 1-D, one copy went to the DOJ. When we see 2-d or 2-D, two copies were sent to the DOJ, which, it seems to follow, is more…um…elevated in importance. Doubly so, in fact.
You guys…Ron has 2-D written on the first page of his missing person documents.
I will now post some of the people who had 1-d’s or 1-D’s on their docs, many of whom you know well. (I’ve provided links to a couple who may be new.)
LEE HARVEY OSWALD
KLAUS BARBIE
(I think this is the same thing as the Cuban Revolutionary Council)
RICHARD COLVIN COX
ROCK HUDSON
The list of people with 2-d’s (2-D’s) is shorter. To date, I’ve only found four of them, including Ron. And the other three people who do have them?
Hoo boy.
They are:
JAMES W. MCCORD
JACK RUBY
Trust me, we will be discussing these folks more in the future, particularly James McCord and Thomas Peasner. But for now, here’s today’s announcement:
Of the four individuals I’ve found who have 2-Ds, two of them (Jack Ruby and Thomas Peasner) have been investigated for having possible ties to the assassination of JFK. One (James McCord) was reported by two separate sources to have been in Dallas on November 22, 1963. That just leaves us with Ron.
Coming next: Counting the lbs.
Thanks to the Mary Ferrell Foundation, The Black Vault, and the Assassination Archives and Research Center for making these records accessible.
Hey, I’m back, it’s been quite a busy week for me, but finally got caught up. So theory….Jack Ruby was probably gay (his roommate described him as “my boyfriend” to the Warren commission, but denied they were lovers, which I get doing since the 1960s was not a great time for gay rights, but seems unlikely to be true). And Ron was likely gay, although I don’t think we have enough information to make an accurate declaration of the fact.
So…what if Ron was sent in to seduce Ruby into killing Oswald, to make sure he wouldn’t talk? Or perhaps not even seduce, but become buddies with, as they possibly had at least this one thing in common? (Which would circle back to a previous theory of mine a few years ago that the CIA may have recruited Ron/homosexuals because of their sexuality, deeming it an asset despite the Lavender Scare occurring in the rest of the government.)
Anyway, Ruby was said to have a hair-trigger temper, so it might not have been too hard to accomplish. Also, here’s an interesting bit pulled from his Wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Ruby):
Ruby asked Dallas attorney Tom Howard to represent him. Howard accepted and asked Ruby if he could think of anything that might damage his defense. Ruby responded that there would be a problem if a man by the name of “Davis” should come up. Ruby told his attorney that he “had been involved with Davis, who was a gunrunner entangled in anti-Castro efforts.”[42][43]
So, perhaps looking for a “Davis” as part of Ron’s alias might be helpful? Sadly, this is all based on speculation, but in the absence of concrete documentation, that’s really all we have.
Interesting theory. Also, thanks for the tip about Davis. I’ll do some checking on maryferrell.org to see if anything turns up. In the meantime, a few thoughts/hints about what’s to come:
1) Jack Ruby is particularly intriguing here. Did you know that Louis Jolyon West was brought in to psychoanalyze him while he was in the Dallas County Jail?
Here’s one article from MuckRock: https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2017/dec/19/mkruby/.
And here’s LJW’s analysis that’s available on maryferrell.org: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11719#relPageId=1&search=11719.
In my view, there were lots of psychiatrists who would have been willing and able to psychoanalyze Jack Ruby. Why was Jolly West, who was one state over at the University of Oklahoma, brought in?
2) Thomas Peasner knew Jack Ruby. I think the chances are greater than zero that Louis Jolyon West knew Peasner too. We’ll be talking much more about Thomas Peasner in the future.
3) Keep your eye on James W. McCord. Of all the people who turn up when I compare the various stamps and scribbles to Ron’s FBI documents, he turns up most frequently.
I have two more stops to go on my walking tour, which I plan to finish this week. Stay tuned!
Just a couple thoughts going through my head after reading this:
1. I find it incredibly baffling that none of these documents appear to reference an alternate identity for Ron; something I would think would have been necessary for staff to connect the two, or to even know to put all these ominous abbreviations on Ron’s documents. Have you seen anything on any of the documents that look like a redacted name?
2. If Ron had really been involved in nefarious stuff like what these documents are pointing to, do you think the FBI would have removed his fingerprints from their files? Do you think the fact that his prints were removed means he either was mistakenly lumped in with these people, or that he was acting on orders from the government? You might have already explained this, but I don’t recall.
3. I hope you enjoy abbreviations on documents more than hockey tapes!
Amazing finds, as always. I always look forward to your posts and they don’t disappoint!
Thank you so much! These are really great questions, to which I don’t really have adequate answers at the moment. I haven’t seen any redacted names on the documents that I have. But I’m sure there are way more documents that we haven’t seen. I did have this thought: could the reason the DOJ received two copies of Ron’s file was to put it under both names? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
As for question #2: I guess I’m working under the notion that the FBI was looking the other way for whatever reason…that if the CIA was somehow involved, they’d let them do whatever it was they were doing without FBI interference.
And #3: I’ve come to enjoy both very much!
Incredible job of course on all of this.
It’s looking more and more wild by the day.
Thank you, Kyle! It most definitely is. More wildness to come…