JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Discussion & Debate => Topic started by: Anthony Frank on May 25, 2021, 09:44:55 PM
-
CIA Headquarters sent a cable to the Mexico City station on November 23 instructing them to send a CIA officer “with all photos” of Oswald at the Soviet and Cuban Embassies “to HQ on next available flight.”
But the CIA’s Mexico City station sent back a cable on November 23 stating they had done a “complete recheck” of the photographs of “all visitors” to the Soviet and Cuban Embassies from September 1 through the “first half November,” and it “shows no evidence Oswald visit,” and a CIA memorandum on December 13, 1963 states, “None of our several photo observation points in Mexico City had ever taken an identifiable picture of Lee Oswald.”
A 1967 CIA memorandum confirms, “No photograph was taken, acquired, or received of Oswald alone or with any individual in front of the Cuban Embassy, the Soviet Embassy, or anywhere else in Mexico.”
The CIA documented that their “criteria for selecting subjects for photographing” is as follows: “If the target is unknown, and/or a previous photograph has not been taken, the observer takes one.” (Oswald was unknown and the CIA did not have a “previous photograph” of him.)
A CIA memorandum on November 27, 1963, states, “We have photographic coverage during daylight hours,” and “their consulates are located in the embassies and therefore the coverage of the embassies would include coverage of the consulates. The photographic coverage of the mentioned installations is of a continuous nature during daylight hours.”
Another CIA memo states that during September 1963, Soviet Embassy hours were from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m., and “offices in the Soviet compound may be visited by appointment only.” It also states, “Visitors may enter the Cuban Consulate” from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m., Monday through Friday.
The CIA documented that Sylvia Duran, the Cuban Consulate employee who spoke with the KGB officer impersonating Oswald, “works at the Cuban Consulate from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. daily.”
Oswald’s alleged visits would have clearly occurred “during daylight hours” when the “photographic coverage” of the embassies “is of a continuous nature.” If Oswald had made six visits to the Soviet and Cuban Embassies, CIA observers at each embassy would have had ample opportunity to take several pictures of him coming and going.
In 1975, the CIA claimed they had no photograph of Oswald visiting the Cuban Embassy on Friday, September 27, 1963, because, “The camera, based upon the recollection of officers still in service at headquarters, was down on the 27 because of mechanical malfunction.”
But on November 23, when the CIA’s Mexico City station did a “complete recheck” of the photographs of all visitors to the Soviet and Cuban Embassies from September 1 through the first half November, the complete recheck that “shows no evidence Oswald visit,” they made no mention of a malfunctioning camera at the Cuban Embassy on September 27.
The allegedly malfunctioning camera explained only why Oswald was not photographed visiting the Cuban Embassy on Friday, September 27, but as for the alleged visit to the Soviet Embassy on that day, the CIA stated, “Why Oswald was missed in his probable entry to the Soviet installation on the 27th is not yet explained,” which means they have no explanation.
And as for no photographs of Oswald during his alleged visits to the two embassies on Saturday, September 28, the CIA claimed, “Both the Cuban and Soviet Embassies were closed to the public on Saturdays,” and “photographic coverage was normally suspended” on Saturdays.
How could Oswald have visited either embassy on Saturday, September 28, if both embassies were closed to the public that day?
Three years later, in 1978, the CIA came up with a new story in a memorandum to the House Select Committee on Assassinations about the “camera bases” at the Soviet Embassy, stating, “There were two separate bases which covered the Soviet gate,” and one camera base “was not working on September 28, 1963, a Saturday, although it did work four out of the eight Saturdays in September and October 1963 . . . . Coverage for the Soviet gate on Saturdays was standard operating procedure.”
So, the new story is that photographic coverage was not suspended on Saturdays, but they had no photograph of Oswald coming and going from the Soviet Embassy due to one of the two cameras not working on some Saturdays, whereas their previous story was that the camera covering the Cuban Embassy was not working on Friday, September 27.
Again, there had been no mention of a malfunctioning camera when the CIA’s Mexico station did the “complete recheck” of all visitors to the Soviet and Cuban Embassies from September 1 through the first half of November. And since they were specifically looking for photographs of Oswald on September 27 and 28, it certainly would have been important to say something about cameras not functioning on those two particular days.
The CIA’s 1978 story continues by stating the other camera base covering the Soviet Embassy “would have been working on the afternoon of the 27th and on Saturday the 28th,” but it is “the base whose production is unaccountably missing. The Agency has not as yet offered any explanation as to why the production is ‘missing.’”
The CIA “acknowledged” to the Assassination Records Review Board that back in 1963, the Mexico City station had “three photographic surveillance operations targeting the Soviet compound; and one photographic surveillance operation, which employed at least two cameras, targeting the Cuban compound.”
On March 12, 1964, the Warren Commission told the CIA that no government agency could “fill in the very large gaps still existing in Lee Harvey Oswald’s visit to Mexico.” The Commission also stated “there were many days during which we knew nothing about his whereabouts” and “the evenings of his entire trip were unaccounted for.”
Further, the Warren Commission stated the “registry” at the hotel where Oswald allegedly stayed “showed the name of Oswald,” but the hotel clerk “completely denies any other memory of Oswald’s being at the hotel . . . . All the subordinate hotel personnel, such as cleaning ladies, etc., likewise deny any memory of Oswald,” and a CIA document from December 1963 addresses Oswald’s alleged time in Mexico, stating, “No source then at our disposal had ever actually seen Lee Oswald while he was in Mexico.”
Two Church Committee staffers examined the CIA’s records on Oswald and the alleged Mexico visit, and in correspondence to another staffer, they wrote, “The unidentified individual visited the Soviet Embassy on October 1 and October 4, 1963 and impersonated Lee Harvey Oswald.”
The staffers also wrote that according to “a dispatch from Mexico City to Headquarters,” the CIA’s Western Hemisphere Division Chief “knew the identity of the individual.”
The evidence is overwhelming that it was not Oswald at either the Soviet Embassy or the Cuban Embassy, but the entire cover-up hinged on Oswald’s alleged visits to the Soviet and Cuban Embassies, which would cause President Johnson to fear that Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev and Cuban Premier Fidel Castro were behind President Kennedy’s assassination.
The Church Committee Report states, “For the first twenty-four hours after the assassination, the CIA’s attention focused primarily on Oswald’s September 27, 1963, visit to Mexico City.”
It’s all in my book. Click the link.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
-
The photo below is the one (of
four six) that a person saying he was Oswald gave to the Cuban secretary (Silvia Duran) at the consulate in Mexico City for the transit visa application he applied for. Duran testified that she made sure the photo was of the man who applied for the visa. She says the man was Oswald.
CORNWELL - Correct?... Did you look at the photos when he brought them back, careful about to be sure that it was the same man who was standing in front of you?
DURAN - Yes.
(https://history-matters.com/essays/frameup/MoreMexicoMysteries/images/Oswald_Passport_F-194.jpg)
The signature on the visa application was identified as belonging to Oswald. Oswald's signature on the hotel registrar that he stayed at in MC was identified as his. Several people at the hotel where he stayed at said the man was Oswald. Two Australian women who were on a bus to Mexico City said they met Oswald. A Mexican visa application - in Oswald's signature - was found.
Oswald's visa with his signature and the dates stamped on his entry to and exit from Mexico: https://ep01.epimg.net/internacional/imagenes/2017/10/26/estados_unidos/1508970024_281131_1508972040_sumario_normal.jpg
Oswald typed a letter - using Ruth Paine's typewriter - that he sent to the Soviet Embassy where he discussed going to Mexico City. A draft copy of that letter - in his handwriting - was discovered. It too mentions the Mexico City visit.
The three Soviet Embassy officials/KGB officers who say they met Oswald over two days and several hours when he went to Mexico City to go to Cuba all said the man they met was indeed Lee Oswald, the man arrested for the assassination of JFK.
The three KGB officers are shown below. They were shown the photo of the reported "impostor" and all said the man was not the person who said he was Oswald. They said the man who identified himself as Lee Oswald was the actual Oswald.
The video of their interview is here: go to the 1:10:30 mark to see the above:
https://www.pbs.org/video/frontline-who-was-lee-harvey-oswald/
We have numerous eyewitness accounts, physical evidence - signatures, photos, and circumstantial evidence. The evidence is overwhelming that he went to Mexico City and went to the Cuban consulate and Soviet Embassy.
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/HgBI1u7YwJ2uEa4etsbvlx4OZnh0Nlbp4rsZ-kowPJlfXmBIQZqrjitNaPRhNkUoxP-SqTyH9SZ37bpjCaTec2RRWg72AkJBsAUNNVMpfzHFYAdq83zPhXVjyuMeLU1kGSgv34yV3e0nDMOaE_Bcj0zw0gn0bM2T4ZnUPXamI_1II9DrHp-IA13VH279GIatRiJX58JERY3ClER7veS7M4dTIUweTGBGeTQXFWBqA7hV8RzQvh1zvzOku37UvUmGJEvfzsxQRB5elmJGvoQkahtw2BfpapDcuL88wFXOKBsRxVMOz76UaEhtWdP8XGD7oVPJVMqG2Av0iay3p7kQ1ZQ19vfh_I3lg3Qz9eTGpEB0yd2mf8I48DnYdogL638JamCisQ-qwDTdm1ReXQeP_vmRPZR6VBT0W9rtP4rmu7LW2Wiu09FYZx3BUk1DBxOJ-RjKP6tYfyivTTdBFQMQ3v67GalUWGvMlmf91BpOUqb_OcdXHxoiaQcKmmeMq9z91H8FiIsUd3zmXBHp9ucDNGOafkxqvMJZnVFRiOP3HdXeOKe6QgEtG98tRdPHyCvmSFUxDEKFvvXabekHhnj13sYTZWoszScYuo_rMmZaKzCaWImDni4SM6_gRR47iJyIYytKUi3TK5SYTLINZzbQBVwID30s2r6OKUVgqJJ8ztdvKm9h3Y7X5S7eA0zu=w695-h314-no?authuser=0)
-
Here is the typed letter (both Marina and Ruth Paine saw him type it; he used Ruth's typewriter and the FBI verified that it was typed on her typewriter) that Oswald typed and sent to the Soviet Embassy where he discussed his trip to Mexico City. The signature and the writing on the envelope were identified as his.
(https://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo/jfk8/8p358ex48.gif)
-
And here are the pages of the draft for the above letter that Oswald sent. In the draft he mentions - as in the sent letter - going to Mexico City and visiting the consulate and embassy. The handwriting was identified as his.
(http://www.mediafire.com/convkey/a7ff/2iqc47nb6wy30onzg.jpg)
Page two:
(http://www.mediafire.com/convkey/a62b/29mi8qxajawmbmlzg.jpg)
-
Sylvia Duran testified to the House Select Committee on Assassinations about the man claiming to be Oswald, and a staff member of the Committee asked Sylvia Duran how much the man weighed, and she said, “About your weight.”
She also said, “He has stronger shoulders, perhaps, than yours.”
The staff member then stated, “Just for the record, my weight is 199 pounds.”
Duran also testified that the man she saw “didn’t have very much hair.”
When asked if “his hair line” was “receding,” she said, “Yeah, yeah. Quite a bit.”
But less than two months after the alleged visit to Mexico, the autopsy report on Oswald stated that he was only 5 feet, 9 inches and weighed 150 pounds, which is exactly what Oswald put on his job applications, including his application for employment at the Texas School Book Depository on October 15, less than three weeks after the alleged visit to Mexico.
Sylvia Duran, who spoke with someone weighing as much as the 199-pound staff member, but with “stronger shoulders,” a receding hair line, and not very much hair, obviously did not speak with Lee Harvey Oswald, who, besides being 5 feet, 9 inches and 150 pounds, had a slender build and a full head of hair. Duran’s description matched the description of the man photographed by the CIA at the Soviet Embassy, who clearly impersonated Oswald.
A CIA memo states that in 1978, Eusebio Azcue, a Cuban Consul who spoke with the Oswald impersonator, “said that the man who applied for a visa was not the man shown on TV as Lee Harvey Oswald.”
Azcue stated at a gathering in Havana, “In no way did the person I saw in film and photographs resemble the person who visited me.”
As for that “Oswald letter” that someone sent to the Soviet Embassy in Washington, the Soviet Ambassador to the United States, Anatoly Dobrynin, sent a telegram to Moscow on November 26, 1963, declaring that someone had forged the letter as a “provocation.” The letter, allegedly written by Oswald, is on file as a Warren Commission Exhibit.
In it, “Oswald” allegedly wrote, “I had not planned to contact the Soviet Embassy in Mexico, so they were unprepared. Had I been able to reach the Soviet Embassy in Havana as planned, the embassy there would have had time to complete our business . . . . Please inform us of the arrival of our Soviet entrance visas as soon as they come.”
Dobrynin’s telegram to Moscow states, “This letter is clearly a provocation. It gives the impression we had close ties with Oswald and were using him for some purposes of our own. It was totally unlike any other letters the embassy had previously received from Oswald. Nor had he ever visited our embassy himself. The suspicion that the letter is a forgery is heightened by the fact that it was typed, whereas the other letters the embassy had received from Oswald before were handwritten.”
Oswald had written letters to the Soviet Embassy in Washington to inform them of the current address of his wife, Marina, pursuant to her Soviet-issued visa requirements. He also wrote to the Embassy on July 1, 1963, requesting that they “rush” an “entrance visa” for his wife and make “transportation arrangements” for her to go back to the Soviet Union. And as Anatoly Dobrynin noted in his telegram to Moscow, all of Oswald’s letters were handwritten, not typed like the letter implying Oswald had been to the Soviet Embassy in Mexico and had plans to go to Cuba and the Soviet Union.
Dobrynin goes on to say in his telegram to Moscow, “One gets the definite impression that the letter was concocted by those who, judging from everything, are involved in the President’s assassination. The competent U.S. authorities are undoubtedly aware of this letter, since the embassy’s correspondence is under constant surveillance.”
To repeat: Killing President Kennedy was part of the CIA’s quest to control the government, and I have it all documented. Click the link.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
-
Sylvia Duran testified to the House Select Committee on Assassinations about the man claiming to be Oswald, and a staff member of the Committee asked Sylvia Duran how much the man weighed, and she said, “About your weight.”
She also said, “He has stronger shoulders, perhaps, than yours.”
(https://www.eastbaytimes.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/ap_2577954786861.jpg)
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
His shoulders were pretty strong-looking. Ossie was 24, muscular with solid forearms for cycling bolt-actions.
The staff member then stated, “Just for the record, my weight is 199 pounds.”
Depends on the staff member's height and how the weight appears on him. People have different body shapes. Was there a raised counter between Duran and Oswald?
And why did the interviewer say 199? If my scale said that, I would round it up. It's like Trump's magical 240-lb weight and 6'3" height.
Duran also testified that the man she saw “didn’t have very much hair.”
When asked if “his hair line” was “receding,” she said, “Yeah, yeah. Quite a bit.”
(https://i2.wp.com/www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/2013111813557_3311.jpg)
(https://sites.google.com/site/jfkforum/misc/newsgroup/spacers/dot_clear.gif)
Seems to be early thinning underway. Strong overhead lighting would make it appear more so.
But less than two months after the alleged visit to Mexico, the autopsy report on Oswald stated that he was only 5 feet, 9 inches and weighed 150 pounds, which is exactly what Oswald put on his job applications, including his application for employment at the Texas School Book Depository on October 15, less than three weeks after the alleged visit to Mexico.
Oswald would be considered on the tall side to a Mexican woman. She might assume American men are typically heavier than Mexican men because Americans eat more.
On the day of the assassination, Oswald took a two-foot-long sub-sandwich into the Depository. It was so loaded it had to placed across the backseat of Frazier's car. Oswald was on the Subway diet and a woman-abuser, decades before the Jared guy.
Sylvia Duran, who spoke with someone weighing as much as the 199-pound staff member, but with “stronger shoulders,” a receding hair line, and not very much hair, obviously did not speak with Lee Harvey Oswald, who, besides being 5 feet, 9 inches and 150 pounds, had a slender build and a full head of hair. Duran’s description matched the description of the man photographed by the CIA at the Soviet Embassy, who clearly impersonated Oswald.
"Impersonated Oswald". :D Thank you. I needed that.
-
My documented evidence in the first post speaks for itself. If Oswald had visited the Soviet and Cuban embassies six times, the CIA would have photos of him doing so.
The CIA had ample resources, yet no one saw Oswald in Mexico. Anyone who thinks Oswald made the trip to Mexico needs to go back and read my first post.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
-
My documented evidence in the first post speaks for itself. If Oswald had visited the Soviet and Cuban embassies six times, the CIA would have photos of him doing so.
The CIA had ample resources, yet no one saw Oswald in Mexico. Anyone who thinks Oswald made the trip to Mexico needs to go back and read my first post.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
If the conspirators faked the backyard photos (as CTers propose), then why not just fake photos of Oswald entering the Cuban and Soviet consulates?
-
Re: the "199 pounds" subject....
That's merely a typo. It should say 119. Here's the proof of that (near the bottom of this page):
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/09/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-793.html
-
Re: the "199 pounds" subject....
That's merely a typo. It should say 119. Here's the proof of that (near the bottom of this page):
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/09/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-793.html
DVP, nice to see you again. I have not seen you since the CIA contacted you and brought you to see me in Marysville, CA. I'm sure you remember signing a secret agreement with the CIA. You seemed really afraid of the information in my book.
As for Oswald in Mexico, I will simply repeat that the documented evidence in my first post speaks for itself. If Oswald had visited the Soviet and Cuban embassies six times, the CIA would have known about it.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
-
DVP, nice to see you again. I have not seen you since the CIA contacted you and brought you to see me in Marysville, CA. I'm sure you remember signing a secret agreement with the CIA. You seemed really afraid of the information in my book.
I see your fanciful delusions are still going strong. (If, that is, you're the same person named Anthony Frank that I remember from Debra Conway's Lancer Forum in the early 2000s.)
Unfortunately, I didn't archive a whole lot of the discussions during my Lancer days, so the following delusional comment is the only one written by Anthony Frank that I've been able to find on my own website/archive ----- "Anything linking LHO to the Tippit shooting was manufactured." -- Anthony Frank; June 26, 2005
As for Oswald in Mexico, I will simply repeat that the documented evidence in my first post speaks for itself. If Oswald had visited the Soviet and Cuban embassies six times, the CIA would have known about it.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
Isn't it nice that there are so many people (like Tony Frank) who are willing to just toss all this evidence out the nearest window in order to endorse their inept theories?:
http://jfk-archives.blogspot.com/2014/09/jfk-assassination-arguments-part-793.html
Given all of the above evidence, it would have been virtually impossible for Lee Oswald to have NOT been in Mexico City in September & October of 1963.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/1939521238
-
Oleg Nechiporenko was one of the three KGB agents/Soviet Embassy officers who talked with Oswald when he, Oswald, went to the Embassy in Mexico City in search of a visa. Nechiporenko (and the others) said Oswald was hysterical, emotional and erratic. He described the meeting in his book "Passport to Assassination"
This is part of it (pgs. 77=78): "[During the discussion] Oswald suddenly became hysterical, began to sob, and through his tears cried, "I am afraid...they'll kill me!" Repeating over and over that he was being persecuted and that he was being followed even here in Mexico, he stuck his right hand into the left pocket of his jacket and pulled out a revolver, saying, "See? This is what I need to defend myself!"
"I was dumbfounded and looked at Pavel [Yatsov, his fellow KGB agent], who had turned slightly pale but then quickly said to me, "Here, give me that piece." I took the revolver from the table and handed it to Pavel. Oswald, sobbing wiped away his tears. He did not respond to my movements. Pavel, who had grabbed the revolver, opened the chamber and emptied the bullets..."
After the assassination, Nechiporenko discussed Oswald with his fellow agents. He read the files on Oswald compiled by the KGB. The KGB had concluded that Oswald's traits included:
1. Strongly individualistic, conflicts with society
2. Psychological [problems], nervous instability
3.Inertia when he has no interest in the matter
4.Lack of organizing skills
5. Lack of any professional skills
The Cubans who met Oswald at the Cuban consulate in Mexico City said he was hysterical and aggressive and had to be physically escorted out the building. Oswald was told that "the Revolution doesn't need people like you" and was told to leave.
It's difficult to imagine why an impostor - trying to persuade the Cubans or Soviets that he was an ally - would behave this way. It makes no sense on any level. This is the behavior of someone - who if he's acting - that is trying to get rejected by the Cubans and Soviets. And if you're impersonating Oswald why go back again and again and again? And leave a photograph for an application? That's risking exposure.
In any case, the three KGB senior officials - these were very serious and well trained people; not a office secretary - said the man they met was indeed Lee Oswald. Is that proof? No but if you look at the totality of evidence it shows that Oswald did go to Mexico City.
The lack of a photograph of him entering the facilities (and the CIA had no coverage on weekends) doesn't eliminate all of this other evidence.
The three KGB agents were interviewed in 1993. They are shown below.
(https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/ejb_6unCT4j5XHFTSf5FexjSl8sAACYEzk6T803v-0MinKIcxLkpUXmb7QpS8m9dunk1A2KXYCeWUd1qO93Xvu0kTtHKQ5jrQhvRj5KgjPkfg4qW3-r8qaHU2qmJI9AWfMzKV_-rS-Uq-dAnT39pum0q0V3PmOJgNCN_aH2cii08P75cMg6p3QeDegS7gr2SxmK9bFjzth7LFbyah-ZHO0PoRLmbjsJEUaRJnsxEC2LD0-Boy4V2-fXI5tn3EZPp2MYnRTp0MMHqQG8ik4O0-8nMyYASPuXaRvio0KNthpcO6zzbt9QYNb13d3ABuqCTRwsOwZ5vOfg7ChcYd3wRe_jiSmsl07Y--tNC5QSxXCTdM5SmQh3oACYQh5F31DwXrqQteIRUPom081Wwy-td4v3hjxGixnfLvMU4ZjDqwHsk-Gu7-OcgIY95qtvmtxdZk48urOFFbO-yUsHaOWBkAlqCKGKFeSSZZ1MugXYY8oGSDUAeSKkSOHAtvtarLrx-8CF7gwRPOLdqnmZuJuoxH7ZqdRO8btQy1D60IA-n0lcLXULq0byy74wBdOEAA2VJ_KrN83WhVnoHi5nNFq88OAWqz_tCelZdJ5swXq7JYelM4bmdYRmg1TPm_Ak9QvX7xYbV0N0nBPh1fyop0wnImbNe8UnZcUQ8v6x0XOuN-tvola3QjuefUqNkxfvGrwg-r-XOi-WjF_QYua08jDiCm0ru=w695-h314-no?authuser=0)
-
Some claims are so outlandish that there is no basis for reasonable discussion as the poster would not have reached this conclusion had they not been impervious to facts or reason. Oswald's presence in Mexico is well documented. There would be no real reason for conspirators to fake such a trip. And think of the complexity and risk of pulling that off including convincing employees of the embassies of a hostile power to lie for them. It's ridiculous. Oswald was already a known Marxist defector. There would be no apparent purpose to faking his presence in Mexico City. If the conspirators wanted to make it look as though Cuba played a role in the assassination as a pretext for an invasion via this trip to the embassy, then why would they do exactly the opposite and put all the blame on Oswald and absolve Cuba of any involvement after the assassination? Narrative consistency has never stood in the way of a good CTer yarn, though.
-
Some claims are so outlandish that there is no basis for reasonable discussion as the poster would not have reached this conclusion had they not been impervious to facts or reason. Oswald's presence in Mexico is well documented. There would be no real reason for conspirators to fake such a trip. And think of the complexity and risk of pulling that off including convincing employees of the embassies of a hostile power to lie for them. It's ridiculous. Oswald was already a known Marxist defector. There would be no apparent purpose to faking his presence in Mexico City. If the conspirators wanted to make it look as though Cuba played a role in the assassination as a pretext for an invasion via this trip to the embassy, then why would they do exactly the opposite and put all the blame on Oswald and absolve Cuba of any involvement after the assassination? Narrative consistency has never stood in the way of a good CTer yarn, though.
If this was an impostor then his behavior makes no sense on any level. Why act like an erratic, unstable person? And why go back several times? Isn't once enough?
If the idea was for the CIA to connect Oswald to the Cubans and/or Soviets (for whatever reason) then why send an agent to act this way? And look at the timing. This was about two months before the assassination. How does connecting Oswald to the Cubans/Soviets on September 27, 1963 get you to the assassination on November 23 22, 1963?
Furthermore, as you point out, the Warren Commission exonerated Cuban and the Soviets from any role. They said Oswald alone - with no foreign help - assassinated JFK. So what's the purpose of falsifying a visit?
Finally, this claim is especially illogical. Supposedly this person photographed below was impersonating Oswald.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Xe7k8C-LyvU/U50qy9oQFBI/AAAAAAAA05Q/e4ry5Oocjd0/s1600/Mexico-City-Photos.jpg)
The KGB officers in the MC Soviet Embassy were shown this man and they all said the man was not the Lee Oswald they met. One of them, Oleg Nechiporenko, said it was an American who had visited the Embassy before and that he did not say he was Lee Oswald.
But the Cubans got this photo below from the above alleged impersonator for his transit visa application.
(https://www.justice-integrity.org/images/jip/i-l-photos/lee-harvey-oswald_cuba-passport_application.jpg)
So the above balding older man gave the photo immediately above for his application? And Duran didn't notice it was two completely different men?
It's like "Groundhog Conspiracy Day". Day after day the same conspiracy silliness.
-
CIA Headquarters sent a cable to the Mexico City station on November 23 instructing them to send a CIA officer “with all photos” of Oswald at the Soviet and Cuban Embassies “to HQ on next available flight.”
You are correct. He was never there. And Oswald himself denied he was there.
-
If they're framing Oswald for going to Mexico City why did they, e.g., the FBI, say he denied going there when asked? He's dead, he can't refute the allegation.
If the FBI et al. framed him they would say, as part of this plan, that he admitted to going there. They're not going to say that he denied it. Why would they do that? If the purpose was to frame him then frame him: have him say he admitted to it. Again, he's dead, he can't deny it.
-
Furthermore, as you point out, the Warren Commission exonerated Cuban and the Soviets from any role. They said Oswald alone - with no foreign help - assassinated JFK. So what's the purpose of falsifying a visit?
My book makes it clear that KGB officers inside the CIA assassinated JFK and that a KGB officer impersonated Oswald at the Soviet and Cuban embassies. They needed to connect the Soviet Union and Cuba to President Kennedy’s assassination so that LBJ would fear the possibility of a nuclear war.
My book clearly lays out the need to establish a Soviet/Cuban connection.
“Chief Justice Earl Warren admitted that Johnson established the Warren Commission seven days after the assassination because Johnson came to have a profound fear that Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev and Cuban Premier Fidel Castro were behind the assassination. President Johnson feared that their involvement could get the United States into, in Earl Warren’s words, ‘a nuclear war.’
“The retired Chief Justice was interviewed in December 1972 and stated that when he went to the White House on November 29, 1963, President Johnson ‘told me he felt conditions around the world were so bad at the moment that he thought it might even get us into a war; a nuclear war.’”
“When President Johnson called Senator Richard Russell on November 29 to enlist him for the Warren Commission, he pointedly told Russell, ‘We’ve got to take this out of the arena where they’re testifying that Khrushchev and Castro did this and did that and chuck us into a war that can kill 40 million Americans in an hour.’”
“Warren met with the Commission staff on January 20, 1964, and a staff memorandum from the meeting states that Warren ‘discussed the circumstances under which he had accepted the chairmanship of the Commission.’ Warren told the staff that ‘rumors’ that were ‘circulating in this country and overseas’ had to be ‘quenched, or the rumors ‘could conceivably lead the country into a war which could cost 40 million lives. No one could refuse to do something which might help to prevent such a possibility.’”
The Warren Commission was obviously given a “no conspiracy” mandate based on the claim that Oswald went to Mexico an visited the Soviet and Cuban Embassies.
I am not surprised that KGB officers would maintain that it was actually Oswald in Mexico. They certainly would not be admitting that their KGB colleagues assassinated President Kennedy and that a KGB officer impersonated Oswald in Mexico as part of the plan.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
-
My book makes it clear that KGB officers inside the CIA assassinated JFK and that a KGB officer impersonated Oswald at the Soviet and Cuban embassies. They needed to connect the Soviet Union and Cuba to President Kennedy’s assassination so that LBJ would fear the possibility of a nuclear war.
This doesn't seem to make sense. You are saying the KGB assassinated JFK and made no effort to conceal this but in fact they actively planted evidence so LBJ would know it was them who assassinated JFK?
All this seems like alot of work. Why wouldn't the KGB just send LBJ a postcard saying we assassinated JFK?
-
This doesn't seem to make sense. You are saying the KGB assassinated JFK and made no effort to conceal this but in fact they actively planted evidence so LBJ would know it was them who assassinated JFK?
On the contrary, the KGB’s objective was to blame anti-Castro Cubans for the assassination. Oswald’s alleged Mexico visit caused LBJ to fear a nuclear war due to Soviet and Cuban involvement, which would cause Johnson to establish the Warren Commission with a “no conspiracy” mandate.
The following excerpts from my book should give you some understanding.
“Nicholas Katzenbach, a CIA officer operating with an “official cover” as Deputy Attorney General, initiated the push for a Presidential Commission on Saturday, November 23, one day after President Kennedy’s assassination.
“Katzenbach continued to push for a Commission on Sunday, and his three-day effort culminated in a memo to the White House on Monday, November 25, stating, ‘The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial,’ which means Katzenbach’s proposed Commission would have a ‘no conspiracy’ mandate and be tasked with making a case for the deceased Oswald being the lone assassin.”
“Katzenbach’s memo to the White House also states that a perspective should be proffered ‘which will satisfy people in the United States and abroad that all the facts have been told, and that a statement to this affect be made now . . . . We should have some basis for rebutting the thought that this was a Communist conspiracy.’”
“The simple fact is that no matter what the Warren Commission found out, they would abide by their instructions to tell the American public that there was no conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy.”
“The CIA initially supplied President Johnson and the Warren Commission with information that implicated Castro in the assassination, and they later told the Warren Commission that anti-Castro Cubans were responsible for assassinating President Kennedy. The anti-Castro Cubans’ alleged motive was to blame Castro for the assassination and thus provoke a U.S. invasion of Cuba.”
“Soviet KGB officers inside the CIA were more than happy to orchestrate a grand production blaming anti-Castro Cubans for assassinating President Kennedy.”
“In Katzenbach’s memo to the White House on November 25 as he pushed to establish a Presidential Commission, he not only said that the Commission should establish “some basis for rebutting the thought that this was a Communist conspiracy,” but also that the Commission needed to rebut the idea that it was ‘a right-wing conspiracy to blame it on the Communists.’
“When the Warren Commission was formed, covering up the CIA’s information that anti-Castro Cubans killed President Kennedy was just as important as covering up the CIA’s initial information implicating Castro in the assassination.”
It’s all in my book. Click the link.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
-
On the contrary, the KGB’s objective was to blame anti-Castro Cubans for the assassination. Oswald’s alleged Mexico visit caused LBJ to fear a nuclear war due to Soviet and Cuban involvement, which would cause Johnson to establish the Warren Commission with a “no conspiracy” mandate.
The following excerpts from my book should give you some understanding.
“Nicholas Katzenbach, a CIA officer operating with an “official cover” as Deputy Attorney General, initiated the push for a Presidential Commission on Saturday, November 23, one day after President Kennedy’s assassination.
“Katzenbach continued to push for a Commission on Sunday, and his three-day effort culminated in a memo to the White House on Monday, November 25, stating, ‘The public must be satisfied that Oswald was the assassin; that he did not have confederates who are still at large; and that the evidence was such that he would have been convicted at trial,’ which means Katzenbach’s proposed Commission would have a ‘no conspiracy’ mandate and be tasked with making a case for the deceased Oswald being the lone assassin.”
“Katzenbach’s memo to the White House also states that a perspective should be proffered ‘which will satisfy people in the United States and abroad that all the facts have been told, and that a statement to this affect be made now . . . . We should have some basis for rebutting the thought that this was a Communist conspiracy.’”
“The simple fact is that no matter what the Warren Commission found out, they would abide by their instructions to tell the American public that there was no conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy.”
“The CIA initially supplied President Johnson and the Warren Commission with information that implicated Castro in the assassination, and they later told the Warren Commission that anti-Castro Cubans were responsible for assassinating President Kennedy. The anti-Castro Cubans’ alleged motive was to blame Castro for the assassination and thus provoke a U.S. invasion of Cuba.”
“Soviet KGB officers inside the CIA were more than happy to orchestrate a grand production blaming anti-Castro Cubans for assassinating President Kennedy.”
“In Katzenbach’s memo to the White House on November 25 as he pushed to establish a Presidential Commission, he not only said that the Commission should establish “some basis for rebutting the thought that this was a Communist conspiracy,” but also that the Commission needed to rebut the idea that it was ‘a right-wing conspiracy to blame it on the Communists.’
“When the Warren Commission was formed, covering up the CIA’s information that anti-Castro Cubans killed President Kennedy was just as important as covering up the CIA’s initial information implicating Castro in the assassination.”
It’s all in my book. Click the link.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
A few snippets from the reviews of your book:
" So if the CIA was so sinister and so skilled at killing people, why didn't they simply kill Anthony Frank?
The bottom line is that if you believe only half of what the author presents as evidence it should scare the bejesus out of you. Worth the time to read but you'll have to decide how much is believable.”
This is a poor excuse for a book claiming to examine the CIA’s continued efforts to subvert the United States government for its own ends. With virtually no supporting evidence Mr Frank adopts a scattergun approach of claiming both CIA and KGB affiliation for virtually every character he presents. From the Secret Service to Barry Goldwater he informs us JFK was surrounded by double agents determined to engineer his death on 22nd November 1963. Absolute nonsense. HOWEVER - I do want to add that the points he makes surrounding the actions of Secret Service officers the night before the attack and during the actual assassination ARE pertinent. Their slowness to react - or their failure to do anything to protect the President in fact - is highly questionable and requires further investigation. I do not believe however that an unsubstantiated leap to membership of the KGB is warranted, proven or even helpful in assisting the search for the truth.
Where is his specific evidence that the "KGB" controlled assets within the CIA????
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on October 2, 2020
What strange statements he makes! He says that key CIA personalities, including George H. W. Bush was controlled by the KGB!!! Also that the KGB controlled other assets within the CIA and Secret Service and it was therefore the KGB that was responsible for, inter alia, the assassination of JFK and the attempted assassination of Ronald Reagan! The only evidence he cites is the uncovering in 1984 of KGB infiltration of the CIA. That's it! Quite ridiculous statements.
-
If they're framing Oswald for going to Mexico City why did they, e.g., the FBI, say he denied going there when asked? He's dead, he can't refute the allegation.
If the FBI et al. framed him they would say, as part of this plan, that he admitted to going there. They're not going to say that he denied it. Why would they do that? If the purpose was to frame him then frame him: have him say he admitted to it. Again, he's dead, he can't deny it.
And what does going to Mexico City do to "frame" Oswald for anything? Anyone can go there. Many people do. Oswald was already a known political nut job. Marina confirmed that Oswald was trying to get to Cuba. So his visit to the Cuban embassy doesn't add much to framing him for anything. It seems entirely pointless as part of any planned "framing" of Oswald. I'm not so sure why CTers struggle so mightily against Oswald's presence in Mexico City. Why do they believe the conspirators conjured up this fake story? It's not unlike Oswald's presence on the bus after the assassination that they believe was faked for some unspecified purpose that seemingly adds nothing to the plot.
-
And what does going to Mexico City do to "frame" Oswald for anything? Anyone can go there. Many people do. Oswald was already a known political nut job. Marina confirmed that Oswald was trying to get to Cuba. So his visit to the Cuban embassy doesn't add much to framing him for anything. It seems entirely pointless as part of any planned "framing" of Oswald. I'm not so sure why CTers struggle so mightily against Oswald's presence in Mexico City. Why do they believe the conspirators conjured up this fake story? It's not unlike Oswald's presence on the bus after the assassination that they believe was faked for some unspecified purpose that seemingly adds nothing to the plot.
CTers struggle so mightily feebly
-
Sure, approved by Richard HIMSELF.
Like Oswald's well documented rifle, ROFL.
The LN clown show never ends.
No substance - check.
Personal insult - check.
Your standard contribution. How about you change this endless leitmotiv and try to have a discussion? Let me start you off. "The conspirators faked Oswald's presence in Mexico City because [here you provide the reason that your fantasy conspirators wanted us to believe Oswald was in Mexico City]."
-
This is a great documentary. The Mexico City talk begins at 1:01:30
-
It's interesting that that documentary is in black and white. The original is in color.
-
"The conspirators faked Oswald's presence in Mexico City because [here you provide the reason that your fantasy conspirators wanted us to believe Oswald was in Mexico City]."
I addressed it in a previous post. KGB officers inside the CIA assassinated JFK and their chosen patsies in the assassination were anti-Castro Cuban exiles.
The KGB officers needed to connect the Soviet Union and Cuba to President Kennedy’s assassination so that LBJ would fear the possibility of a nuclear war and establish the Warren Commission with a “no conspiracy” mandate.
The Church Committee Report states, “For the first twenty-four hours after the assassination, the CIA’s attention focused primarily on Oswald’s September 27, 1963, visit to Mexico City.”
It also states that “on the morning of November 23,” CIA Director John McCone met with President Johnson and his National Security Advisor, McGeorge Bundy, to “brief them on the information CIA Headquarters had received from its Mexico City station,” which means CIA Director John McCone immediately initiated the effort to implicate Khrushchev and Castro.
On following day, November 24, that McCone informed Johnson of the CIA’s “plans against Cuba,” which included plans to assassinate Castro.
Then, after his official morning meeting with the President, McCone met with President Johnson “in his private residence” and suggested that he get “an early briefing on the Soviet long-range striking capability” and Soviet “air defense posture.”
The CIA continued to foster concerns about Castro and Khrushchev in the week following the assassination, and after the Warren Commission was established, the CIA began transitioning into a claim that “anti-Castro Cubans” assassinated President Kennedy.
The anti-Castro Cubans’ alleged motive was to blame Castro for the assassination and thus provoke a U.S. invasion of Cuba.
It’s all in my book. Click the link.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
-
It’s all in my book. Click the link.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
How did you sell 3000 copies? You should start a thread and tell us all about the book. There are so many books on the JFK case its hard to keep track of them. You should start a thread and tell us about it, how you marketed it and what your experience has been to date.
-
This is a great documentary. The Mexico City talk begins at 1:01:30
The key part in the show - or one of them - for this question is the interview for the first time with the KGB agents who were working at the Embassy in Mexico City and who said they met and talked to Oswald over two days. This is at the 1:03:40 mark. These were very serious men in a very serious occupation who were astonished at Oswald's behavior. Oswald was, according to them, acting erratic and unstable and at one point brings out a revolver and waves it around saying he needed it for protection from the "notorious FBI." Remarkable.
They are watching this person very, very carefully. Is he a nut? A provocateur? What exactly?
They all said that the man they met over two days, the man who behaved like this was, was Lee Oswald. It is simply inconceivable to me that an impostor trying to pull an impersonation off would act like this.
Is this proof? Could they have been wrong? Yes. But if we look at the other evidence - the other eyewitnesses, the physical evidence, the circumstantial - it all points to Lee Oswald being the man they met.
-
Sure, approved by Richard HIMSELF.
Like Oswald's well documented rifle, ROFL.
The LN clown show never ends.
Otto-matic troll
-
I addressed it in a previous post. KGB officers inside the CIA assassinated JFK and their chosen patsies in the assassination were anti-Castro Cuban exiles.
The KGB officers needed to connect the Soviet Union and Cuba to President Kennedy’s assassination so that LBJ would fear the possibility of a nuclear war and establish the Warren Commission with a “no conspiracy” mandate.
The Church Committee Report states, “For the first twenty-four hours after the assassination, the CIA’s attention focused primarily on Oswald’s September 27, 1963, visit to Mexico City.”
It also states that “on the morning of November 23,” CIA Director John McCone met with President Johnson and his National Security Advisor, McGeorge Bundy, to “brief them on the information CIA Headquarters had received from its Mexico City station,” which means CIA Director John McCone immediately initiated the effort to implicate Khrushchev and Castro.
On following day, November 24, that McCone informed Johnson of the CIA’s “plans against Cuba,” which included plans to assassinate Castro.
Then, after his official morning meeting with the President, McCone met with President Johnson “in his private residence” and suggested that he get “an early briefing on the Soviet long-range striking capability” and Soviet “air defense posture.”
The CIA continued to foster concerns about Castro and Khrushchev in the week following the assassination, and after the Warren Commission was established, the CIA began transitioning into a claim that “anti-Castro Cubans” assassinated President Kennedy.
The anti-Castro Cubans’ alleged motive was to blame Castro for the assassination and thus provoke a U.S. invasion of Cuba.
It’s all in my book. Click the link.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
That is possibly the dumbest explanation that I've ever heard. So the KGB was behind the assassination and they wanted to blame it on anti-Castro Cubans? And the way they did this was to frame a Marxist by having him visit the Cuban embassy? HA HA HA. Where to start?
-
The key part in the show - or one of them - for this question is the interview for the first time with the KGB agents who were working at the Embassy in Mexico City and who said they met and talked to Oswald over two days. These were very serious men in a very serious occupation who were astonished at Oswald's behavior. Oswald was, according to them, acting erratic and unstable and at one point brings out a revolver and waves it around saying he needed it for protection from the "notorious FBI." Remarkable.
They all said that the man they met over two days, the man who behaved like this was, was Lee Oswald. It is simply inconceivable to me that an impostor trying to pull an impersonation off would act like this.
Is this proof? Could they have been wrong? Yes. But if we look at the other evidence - the other eyewitnesses, the physical evidence, the circumstantial - it all points to Lee Oswald being the man they met.
They weren’t “wrong.” They simply lied.
They met with the so-called “unidentified mystery man,” who was one of their KGB colleagues in the CIA.
The KGB officer impersonating Oswald spoke with a KGB officer named Kostikov, who “specialized in handling Soviet agents operating under deep cover in the United States,” which, of course, included KGB officers inside the CIA.
Kostikov was “believed to work for Department Thirteen of the First Chief Directorate of the KGB. It is the Department responsible for executive action, including sabotage and assassination.”
I have first-hand knowledge that Warren Commission Exhibit 237, the Mexico City “unidentified mystery man,” is a photograph of one of President Kennedy’s three assassins.
It’s all explained in my book.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
(https://www.wnd.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/warren-commission-photo-oswald.jpg)
-
Your illiteracy concerning "actual evidence" is actually "well documented", true cringe material!
Coming from you, "well documented" translates to "the WC said... " which, sooner rather than later, turns into "no substance" as witnessed in our latest "discussion" RE "Oswald's rifle" (BTW, thanks for taking the bait).
Wow, did you really hope to "start me off" using decade old stinking strawman bait?
Again, no substantive discussion. All commentary and personal insults. I tried. Bye bye.
-
Again, no substantive discussion. All commentary and personal insults. I tried. Bye bye.
Make that 'buh-bye'
You know, the sarcastic SNL version
-
Facts misinterpreted as personal insults, what's new?
Your bluff ("Oswald's rifle") was called and you jumped ship.
That's how your "well documented" "substantive discussions" have worked for years -- LOL
Buh-bye.
-
No worries.
Just enjoy sniping a Lone Nutter once in a while.
Richard popped his head out and.... BOOM!
More importantly:
JFK popped his head out
BOOM>Click-Click
BOOM>Click-Click
BOOM>Click-Click
Poor dumb president
-
That is possibly the dumbest explanation that I've ever heard. So the KGB was behind the assassination and they wanted to blame it on anti-Castro Cubans? And the way they did this was to frame a Marxist by having him visit the Cuban embassy? HA HA HA. Where to start?
In LBJ's last interview as president - one that was withheld until his death - he said he "never believed" that Oswald acted along and that he suspected that Castro was behind the assassination. He apparently was more open at other times in saying that Castro retaliated against the Kennedys because he, Castro, learned of the assassination plots against him. The Kennedys, LBJ reportedly said, were running a "Damned Murder Inc."
And many LBJ aides lived long after the Soviet Union dissolved. Bill Moyers, LBJ's press secretary, is still alive. I would think that these aides would have revealed this information after the demise of the USSR. What's the worry? There's no USSR to wage war with. Besides, I would rely on Robert Caro's reporting on such matters and to my knowledge he's uncovered nothing remotely related to this theory.
-
They weren’t “wrong.” They simply lied.
They met with the so-called “unidentified mystery man,” who was one of their KGB colleagues in the CIA.
The KGB officer impersonating Oswald spoke with a KGB officer named Kostikov, who “specialized in handling Soviet agents operating under deep cover in the United States,” which, of course, included KGB officers inside the CIA.
Kostikov was “believed to work for Department Thirteen of the First Chief Directorate of the KGB. It is the Department responsible for executive action, including sabotage and assassination.”
I have first-hand knowledge that Warren Commission Exhibit 237, the Mexico City “unidentified mystery man,” is a photograph of one of President Kennedy’s three assassins.
It’s all explained in my book.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
(https://www.wnd.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/warren-commission-photo-oswald.jpg)
Well, if all of the evidence that Oswald went to MC can be dismissed as lies and fake then where do we go? If I presented a thousand pieces of evidence - hell, if Oswald himself said he went there - your response would be it's all lies, correct? Or faked. It's a useless conversation.
One question, please. You believe this person below (and pictured above) impersonated Oswald. Even though there is no evidence whatsoever that he did so. Nobody - including the CIA - said he said he was Oswald. It was simply a photo they erroneously released.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Xe7k8C-LyvU/U50qy9oQFBI/AAAAAAAA05Q/e4ry5Oocjd0/s1600/Mexico-City-Photos.jpg)
As I mentioned above, all of the KGB officers in the MC Soviet Embassy were shown this man in 1993 after there was no Soviet Union in existence and they all said the man was not the Lee Oswald they met. One of them, Oleg Nechiporenko, said it was an American who had visited the Embassy before and that he did not say he was Lee Oswald. You say that they're all lying and if I understand you correctly believe they were the real assassins of JFK, right?
But the Cubans got this photo, provided to the HSCA, below from the above alleged impersonator for his transit visa application.
(https://www.justice-integrity.org/images/jip/i-l-photos/lee-harvey-oswald_cuba-passport_application.jpg)
So you believe the above balding man impersonating Oswald gave the photo above to the Cubans, i.e., Duran, for his transit visa application and the Cubans didn't see it was two different men? So do you believe that the Cubans were involved in this too? And all of the other eyewitnesses - the women on the bus, the people at the hotel - who said the man was Oswald are lying? Or what?
I'll just add: no aide to LBJ, including ones who lived AFTER the collapse of the Soviet Union, revealed this plot, this suppression of the knowledge that the KGB was behind the assassination, that you say took place. Two of his top aides: Bill Moyers and Joe Califano are still alive. Why don't they reveal this conspiracy? BTW, Califano believes Oswald acted on behalf of Castro. And no one in the Pentagon or CIA or otherwise alive at the time who lived after the demise of the USSR admitted to this. If your theory is true then why did they continue to hide it? There was no Soviet Union anymore. They can reveal what happened. And become famous. And make lots of money with a book detailing this. But none did.
And no one who worked for the Warren Commission, including men who lived after the end of the Soviet Union, ever came forward and said anything about this. Howard Willens, a major member of the commission, is still alive. Why doesn't he reveal this coverup? Other members of the commission lived until recently. None - not one - revealed this supposed coverup.
It makes no sense to me. You have conspiracy on top of conspiracy and coverup on top of coverups as your explanation. The whole explanation collapses on its contradictions.
-
And to repeat one point: Here are the pages below of the notes/draft copy of the letter Oswald sent to the Soviet Embassy where he discussed going to Mexico City. In the drafts he mentions - as in the sent letter - going to Mexico City and visiting the consulate and embassy. The handwriting was identified as his.
If one says these were faked, who faked them? And if you insist they're fake then what evidence would you accept that Oswald went to Mexico City? If there is none they what is to discuss?
(http://www.mediafire.com/convkey/a7ff/2iqc47nb6wy30onzg.jpg)
Page two:
(http://www.mediafire.com/convkey/a62b/29mi8qxajawmbmlzg.jpg)
-
Some 500 posts were done on this stuff last year. Why bring it up again?
Did Oswald Go To Mexico City?
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1599.0.html
-
And to repeat one point: Here are the pages below of the notes/draft copy of the letter Oswald sent to the Soviet Embassy where he discussed going to Mexico City.
Yes... repeating the same errors from two years ago. How is it that Oswald [who could read and write in Russian] would write a letter to the Soviet Embassy in English? Does that make any sense? Perhaps Chapman, Smith, Von Pein or Organ could clarify that as they have failed to do this for months.
You have also posted that---
The Cuban official - Sylvia Duran - who typed out the visa forms...
Not true... Ms Duran was not a Cuban official .
-
Yes... repeating the same errors from two years ago. How is it that Oswald [who could read and write in Russian] would write a letter to the Soviet Embassy in English? Does that make any sense? Perhaps Chapman, Smith, Von Pein or Organ could clarify that as they have failed to do this for months.
You have also posted that---Not true... Ms Duran was not a Cuban official .
Silly. What difference does it make what language that Oswald wrote the letter in? The point is that it confirms he went to Mexico City. There is zero doubt on this point and it makes absolutely no sense for anyone including your fantasy conspirators to have faked such a trip. That would have been pointless and extremely risky.
-
Silly. What difference does it make what language that Oswald wrote the letter in? The point is that it confirms he went to Mexico City. There is zero doubt on this point and it makes absolutely no sense for anyone including your fantasy conspirators to have faked such a trip. That would have been pointless and extremely risky.
A written letter [even if it was in Swahili] confirms without a doubt that a trip was made?
'Absolutely no sense to have faked....'? People fake stuff all the time.
What was so 'extremely risky'?
-
A written letter [even if it was in Swahili] confirms without a doubt that a trip was made?
'Absolutely no sense to have faked....'? People fake stuff all the time.
What was so 'extremely risky'?
Ah, yes. It was written by Oswald. It confirms he went to Mexico City. Why would Oswald or anyone fake a letter confirming that he went to Mexico City? It was risky to fake Oswald's presence for obvious reasons. If he wasn't in Mexico City, then he was somewhere else. And whoever saw him there could have blown the conspiracy. How do they get the folks at the Russian and Cuban embassies to go along with the fraud? Random people who were on his bus etc. Good grief.
-
And whoever saw him there could have blown the conspiracy.
So you admit that there was a conspiracy. That is OK. The HSCA states that there probably was.
-
Yes... repeating the same errors from two years ago. How is it that Oswald [who could read and write in Russian] would write a letter to the Soviet Embassy in English? Does that make any sense? Perhaps Chapman, Smith, Von Pein or Organ could clarify that as they have failed to do this for months.
You have also posted that---Not true... Ms Duran was not a Cuban official .
Okay, my sloppiness. She was a secretary/officer worker/visa worker who worked in the consulate.
Now your mistake: he didn't write a letter to the Soviet Embassy. He typed it on Ruth Paine's typewriter. The FBI matched the letter to the typewriter. Both Ruth and Marina testified they saw him type it out. He then signed it and addressed it. Both his signature and the handwriting on the enveloped was identified as belonging to him.
But you believe they were lying too, correct? The signatures identified as belonging to him were faked. The eyewitnesses who saw him on the bus, who saw him at the Cuban consulate, who saw him at the Soviet Embassy, who saw him at the hotel, who saw him at the restaurant were all wrong. All of the evidence - the physical, the eyewitness and circumstantial are all meaningless.
As to his writing proficiency in Russian: what's the evidence that he was proficient in writing Russian? Proficient meaning capable of writing a legible letter. Look at that draft note. It's a mess. But you think that note is fake, right? So look/read his English writings, his writings on politics. They are almost unreadable; filled with grammar problems and spelling mistakes. And that's in his native language. He was probably dyslexic as well. His ability to write a coherent, readable letter in Russian at that time was, in my considered view, nonexistent. Thus the typewritten letter.
-
Here is the typed letter..both Marina and Ruth Paine saw him type it...
Again you post---Now your mistake: he didn't write a letter to the Soviet Embassy. He typed it on Ruth Paine's typewriter. The FBI matched the letter to the typewriter. Both Ruth and Marina testified they saw him type it out. He then signed it and addressed it. Both his signature and the handwriting on the enveloped was identified as belonging to him. As to his writing proficiency in Russian: what's the evidence that he was proficient in writing Russian? Look at that draft note. It's a mess. But you think that note is fake, right?
For one thing...I didn't suggest that Oswald wrote anything to anyone. To avoid confusion...what are we discussing? CE 15? Composed just barely weeks before the assassination? Nov 9, 1963 to be exact [date on the letter]
Here is a clearer copy---- https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh16/html/WH_Vol16_0029a.htm
OK...so Mrs Paine didn't have a Cyrillic keyboard but just like Russian correspondence isn't [as a token rule] accepted by the American government....well anyway I know what I am talking about [having married a Soviet national myself]
Mr. RANKIN. Do you know about a letter from your husband to the Embassy asking that his request for a visa be considered separately from yours?
Mrs. OSWALD. No, I don't.
Why did Marina deny it there?
Mr. RANKIN. I offer in evidence Exhibit 15.
The CHAIRMAN. It may be admitted.
(The document referred to was marked Commission Exhibit No. 15, and received in evidence.)
Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Chief Justice, I think in the examination about this letter, if I would circulate it to the Commission it would be a little clearer what it is all about--if you could have a moment or two to examine it, I think it would help in your understanding of the examination.
Mrs. OSWALD. This was typed on the typewriter belonging to Ruth. [Who coached her to say that?]
Mr. RANKIN. You can tell that by the looks of the typing, can you, Mrs. Oswald?
Mrs. OSWALD. No, I don't know, but I know that he was typing there. I don't know what he was typing.
Mr. RANKIN. And it is Ruth Paine's typewriter that you are referring to, when you say Ruth?
Mrs. OSWALD. Ruth Paine. Because Lee did not have a typewriter, and it is hardly likely that he would have had it typed somewhere else.
Mr. RANKIN. I hand you Exhibit 16, which purports to be the envelope for the letter, Exhibit 15. Have you ever seen that?
Mrs. OSWALD. The envelope I did see. I did not see the letter, but I did see the envelope. Lee had retyped it some 10 times or so.
Mr. RANKIN. Do you recall or could you clarify for us about the date on the envelope--whether it is November 2 or November 12?
Mrs. OSWALD. November 12.
Lee had to retype an envelope "10 times or so"? Good Lord! How many times did he [supposedly] type the actual letter? This letter business was a couple of weeks before the assassination so how come it was not mentioned at all in the timeline of events?----
Let's see...
October 16, 1963: LHO begins work at the TSBD.
October 23, 1963: LHO attends a right-wing rally where General Walker is a speaker. [Why? When supposedly it was Oswald's wish that Walker were dead]
October 25, 1963: Michael Paine and LHO attend a meeting of the ACLU. [Why?]
November 1, 1963: Hosty interviews Ruth and Marina at the Paine home. Also that day, LHO rents a new PO box and sends letters to the ACLU and the American Communist Party [Why?]
November 3, 1963: Ruth gives LHO a driving lesson. [Oswald wants to learn to drive and yet still wants to go back to Russia?]
November 9, 1963: Ruth takes LHO to the Driver Examination Station it was closed [so what about the letter supposedly written on the 9th?]
November 11, 1963: LHO spends Veteran's Day at the Paine home.
November 12, 1963: LHO delivers a note to the FBI building addressed to Hosty
November 15, 1963: Marina advises LHO not to come the following weekend [Friday 7 days before the assassination]
https://jfkassassination.net/parnell/chrono.htm
Nothing in the timeline about any letter writing to the Soviet Embassy... not anywhere.
Mr. JENNER - Would you describe the incident? In the meantime, I will obtain the rough draft here among my notes.
Mrs. PAINE - All right. This was on the morning of November 9, Saturday. He asked to use my typewriter, and I said he might.
Mr. JENNER - Excuse me. Would you please. state to the Commission why you are reasonably firm that it was the morning of November 9? What arrests your attention to that particular date?
Mrs. PAINE - Because I remember the weekend that this note or rough draft remained on my secretary desk. He spent the weekend on it. And the weekend was close and its residence on that desk was stopped also on the evening of Sunday, the 10th, when I moved everything in the living room around; the whole arrangement of the furniture was changed, so that I am very clear in my mind as to what weekend this was.
Mr. JENNER - All right, go ahead.
Mrs. PAINE - He was using the typewriter. I came and put June in her high-chair near him at the table where he was typing, and he moved something over what he was typing from, which aroused my curiosity.
Mr. JENNER - Why did that arouse your curiosity?
Mrs. PAINE - It appeared he didn't want me to see what he was writing or to whom he was writing.
Mr. JENNER - It did make you curious?
Mrs. PAINE - It did make me curious. Then, later that day, I noticed a scrawling handwriting on a piece of paper on the corner at the top of my secretary desk in the living room. It remained there. [Like every thing else...It seemed as though Lee went out of his way to leave every piece of incriminating evidence he possibly could to show what a deceitful sneaky phony he was. If Ruthie felt this way why did she allow him into her house to begin with?]
Mrs. PAINE - He typed it early in the morning of that day because after he typed it we went to the place where you get the test for drivers. It was that same day.
Mr. JENNER - It was election day and the driver's license place was closed, is that correct?
Mrs. PAINE - Yes.
Mr. JENNER - And that was November 9?
Mrs. PAINE - Yes.
Mr. JENNER - Now you have reached the point where you are reading the letter on the morning of November 10.
Mrs. PAINE - That is right; after I had noticed that it lay on my desk the previous evening.
"I was unable to remain in Mexico City (because I considered useless--)"
If Oswald didn't want Mrs Paine to see what he was writing then why would he leave everything there laying around so she could pick it up and read it?
Mr. JENNER - What did you do?
Mrs. PAINE - I then proceeded to read the whole note, wondering, knowing this to be false, wondering why he was saying it. I was irritated to have him writing a falsehood on my typewriter, I may say, too. I felt I had some cause to look at it. [What did she say/think was "false"?]
Mr. JENNER - May I have your permission, Mr. Chairman. The document is short. It is relevant to the witness' testimony, and might I read it aloud in the record to draw your attention to it?
Mr. McCLOY - Without objection.
Mr. JENNER - Mrs. Paine, would you help me by reading it, since you have it there.
Mrs. PAINE - Do you want me to leave out all the crossed out--
Mr. JENNER - No; I wish you would indicate that too.
Mrs. PAINE - "Dear Sirs:
"This is to inform you of events since my interview with comrade Kostine in the Embassy of the Soviet Union, Mexico City, Mexico."
(Discussion off the record.) Wonder what was said by the nosy Mrs Paine?
Mrs. PAINE - He typed it early in the morning of that day because after he typed it we went to the place where you get the test for drivers. It was that same day. [Oh! He typed it all early in one morning while the girls weren't looking :-\]
Mr. JENNER - It was election day and the driver's license place was closed, is that correct?
Mrs. PAINE - Yes.
Mr. JENNER - And that was November 9?
It just all doesn't pass the smell test.
Also I see [nor can find] any testimony where Ruth and Marina said that they actually saw Oswald type any letter. One morning--wala there it was [or wasn't].
BTW ...Silvia Duran was a Mexican national.
Again a lot of this was covered here....
https://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/index.php/topic,1599.0.html
-
This is a great documentary. The Mexico City talk begins at 1:01:30
You mean a great crockumentary. You really like Priscillakins huh?
-
And as for no photographs of Oswald during his alleged visits to the two embassies on Saturday, September 28, the CIA claimed, “Both the Cuban and Soviet Embassies were closed to the public on Saturdays,” and “photographic coverage was normally suspended” on Saturdays. How could Oswald have visited either embassy on Saturday, September 28, if both embassies were closed to the public that day?
That question has been and will continue to remain ignored.
-
This is a great documentary. The Mexico City talk begins at 1:01:30
Good things on the menu... waiter, I'll have the "mumbo"? Small, sir? No, jumbo!
http://www.jfk-info.com/pjm-3.htm
... A large number of questions related to Marina's ongoing association with Priscilla Johnson McMillan, who herself had testified in closed session the previous year. Mrs. Porter began by describing how she first met Miss Johnson after rejecting a written request to coauthor a book, when the writer arrived at her doorstep (despite the fact that Marina was under Secret Service protection and FBI scrutiny.) Through her business manager, James Martin (whom she later fired), Marina had received numerous offers, but until she met Miss Johnson, felt uneasy about the idea of the "shameful position" she was in. She indicated to the committee that she liked Miss Johnson because of "her intelligence," along with "the way she spoke Russian beautifully," and the fact that she had lived in the Soviet Union. She was asked if Miss Johnson had mentioned having worked for the CIA, or if the CIA was ever discussed such as in connection with Lee, but Marina could not recall any reference having been made. Marina also couldn't remember any details about the bus ticket found in 1964 during Miss Johnson's interviews, verifying Oswald's bus trip to Mexico City (which James Hosty later described having looked at while at Dallas police headquarters on Monday, Nov. 25, 1963.)(5)
Mrs. Porter was asked if she and Priscilla were still close friends; she not only answered "yes" but revealed that she had seen Mrs. McMillan as recently as the night before her testimony, certainly suggesting the possibility that Marina had been "coached" in preparation for her testimony. ..
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51217655608_dfaa9b2c84_b.jpg)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51218254074_eccc9b5234_b.jpg)
https://www.google.com/search?q=%22davenport+was+a+former+cia+man%22&safe=off&biw=794&bih=401&tbm=bks&ei=yv61YKHTBJSJ-gSNqYjABA&oq=%22davenport+was+a+former+cia+man%22&gs_l=psy-ab.3...5498.18306.0.18561.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..0.0.0....0.N_z-t97iDYA (https://www.google.com/search?q=%22davenport+was+a+former+cia+man%22&safe=off&biw=794&bih=401&tbm=bks&ei=yv61YKHTBJSJ-gSNqYjABA&oq=%22davenport+was+a+former+cia+man%22&gs_l=psy-ab.3...5498.18306.0.18561.0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0..0.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..0.0.0....0.N_z-t97iDYA)
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51216767202_8cef259e99_b.jpg)
...When Priscilla asked what was of interest , I implied that I had some explosive documents on the Oppenheimer affair and was searching for an honest journalist to complete the investigation and let the chips fall where they may . “ Well , Sam , I ..."
-
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51217655608_dfaa9b2c84_b.jpg)
What happened to the ticket stub? Anyone?
-
What happened to the ticket stub? Anyone?
http://www.jfk-info.com/pjm-3.htm#5.
.....
5. In Clarence M. Kelley, Kelley: The Story of an FBI Director, p. 295: "Note" - I wrote to Hosty in regard to his comment in a chapter which he basically put together. In his reply of Dec. 11, 1990, Hosty indicated that "The carbon of the round trip ticket was found with Oswald's things by the police department. The carbon is not the ticket." ..
-
And as for no photographs of Oswald during his alleged visits to the two embassies on Saturday, September 28, the CIA claimed, “Both the Cuban and Soviet Embassies were closed to the public on Saturdays,” and “photographic coverage was normally suspended” on Saturdays. How could Oswald have visited either embassy on Saturday, September 28, if both embassies were closed to the public that day?
That question has been and will continue to remain ignored.
The CIA made their “closed embassies” claim in 1975, but in 1978, the CIA came up with a new story in a memorandum to the House Select Committee on Assassinations, stating, “There were two separate bases which covered the Soviet gate,” and one camera base “was not working on September 28, 1963, a Saturday, although it did work four out of the eight Saturdays in September and October 1963 . . . . Coverage for the Soviet gate on Saturdays was standard operating procedure.”
So, the new story is that photographic coverage was not suspended on Saturdays, but they had no photograph of Oswald coming and going from the Soviet Embassy due to one of the two cameras not working on some Saturdays, whereas their previous story was that the camera covering the Cuban Embassy was not working on Friday, September 27.
Again, there had been no mention of a malfunctioning camera when the CIA’s Mexico station did the “complete recheck” of all visitors to the Soviet and Cuban Embassies from September 1 through the first half of November. And since they were specifically looking for photographs of Oswald on September 27 and 28, it certainly would have been important to say something about cameras not functioning on those two particular days.
The CIA’s 1978 story continues by stating the other camera base covering the Soviet Embassy “would have been working on the afternoon of the 27th and on Saturday the 28th,” but it is “the base whose production is unaccountably missing. The Agency has not as yet offered any explanation as to why the production is ‘missing.’”
-
That question has been and will continue to remain ignored.
The Soviets/KGB officers explained this in their interviews. One of them, Oleg Nechiporenko, went into greater detail in his book. So did the Cuban consuls Azcue and Mirabal. Yes, Duran said that Oswald only came in on Friday and not Saturday. But Azcue, the consul, said Oswald came in on Saturday (and again, yes, he says the man didn't look to him like Oswald). The building were closed to the public but Oswald requested to be allowed in and was let in (since they had met him the day before).
The Cuban consul Azcue explained (HSCA testimony):
Mr. CORNWELL. September 27, 1963, was a Friday. Does that mean that the third visit [by Oswald/the impostor] could have occurred on the following Saturday?
Senor AZCUE. On Saturday, exactly.
Mr. CORNWELL. The consulate was open on Saturday.
Senor AZCUE. Saturday morning--not open to the public.
Mr. CORNWELL. Would you tell us how the conversation on the third visit ended.
So the consulate was conducting business but not to the general public.
The KGB agents said they were at the Soviet Embassy on Saturday preparing to play their weekly volleyball game with the Embassy guards. Oswald showed up and they were informed by the Embassy guard about his appearance and request to see them (they had talked to him on Friday). They went to talk with him, to see what he wanted. This is when he pulled out his revolver and waved it around and generally acted crazy. This is all in Necihiporenko's book.
-
58 year old crap regurgitated once again. To sell a book. Save your money. Keep your dignity.
-
I don't know the significance of supposing that Oswald's visits to the embassy/consulate (or to Mexico) was faked. But I think that the speculation persists, in part, because the CIA was photographing people upon exit and entrance, yet failed (apparently, supposedly) to photograph Oswald.
Yet they did photograph this other person, whoever he is, and attempted to associate the photos with Oswald. It is an oddity.
When you're looking for evidence of a conspiracy or a cover-up, or to disprove the same, you have to probe such oddities. (Because, to the extent that a cover-up is successful, all that will be left are such apparent incongruities; the actual evidence is meant to be suppressed -- that's what it means to cover-up.) Why was this man's photo identified as Oswald? Why weren't there photos of the real man? There are claims that Oswald's phone conversations were recorded, so what became of the recordings?
Anthony Summers (who may or may not be reliable) quotes an FBI report as stating, re: Oswald's visit to the Soviet Embassy, "Special agents of this Bureau, who have conversed with Oswald in Dallas, Texas, have observed photographs of the individual referred to above and have listened to a recording of his voice. These Special Agents are of the opinion that the above-referred-to individual was not Lee Harvey Oswald." And then he goes on to quote J. Edgar Hoover in conversation with President Johnson, saying, "That picture and the tape do not correspond to this man's voice, nor to his appearance. In other words, it appears there was a second person who was at the Soviet Embassy down there."
There could be any number of reasons for these "oddities," including innocent error, but surely it's worthwhile to question them? I don't know that Kennedy was killed as a result of a conspiracy, though I highly suspect that he was; I don't know what role Oswald played, before, during or after the assassination. I do know that the CIA specifically got into all sorts of monkey business throughout the sixties and beyond. Their behavior with respect to Oswald's visit to Mexico is suspect at least, whatever it means for broader questions about the assassination, and I think it's worth investigating for that reason alone.
-
I don't know the significance of supposing that Oswald's visits to the embassy/consulate (or to Mexico) was faked. But I think that the speculation persists, in part, because the CIA was photographing people upon exit and entrance, yet failed (apparently, supposedly) to photograph Oswald.
Yet they did photograph this other person, whoever he is, and attempted to associate the photos with Oswald. It is an oddity.
When you're looking for evidence of a conspiracy or a cover-up, or to disprove the same, you have to probe such oddities. (Because, to the extent that a cover-up is successful, all that will be left are such apparent incongruities; the actual evidence is meant to be suppressed -- that's what it means to cover-up.) Why was this man's photo identified as Oswald? Why weren't there photos of the real man? There are claims that Oswald's phone conversations were recorded, so what became of the recordings?
Anthony Summers (who may or may not be reliable) quotes an FBI report as stating, re: Oswald's visit to the Soviet Embassy, "Special agents of this Bureau, who have conversed with Oswald in Dallas, Texas, have observed photographs of the individual referred to above and have listened to a recording of his voice. These Special Agents are of the opinion that the above-referred-to individual was not Lee Harvey Oswald." And then he goes on to quote J. Edgar Hoover in conversation with President Johnson, saying, "That picture and the tape do not correspond to this man's voice, nor to his appearance. In other words, it appears there was a second person who was at the Soviet Embassy down there."
There could be any number of reasons for these "oddities," including innocent error, but surely it's worthwhile to question them? I don't know that Kennedy was killed as a result of a conspiracy, though I highly suspect that he was; I don't know what role Oswald played, before, during or after the assassination. I do know that the CIA specifically got into all sorts of monkey business throughout the sixties and beyond. Their behavior with respect to Oswald's visit to Mexico is suspect at least, whatever it means for broader questions about the assassination, and I think it's worth investigating for that reason alone.
The photo of the "other person" - shown below - was simply a mistake by the Mexico City CIA station that released photos of people who entered the Soviet Embassy on Monday. They thought this man looked American and they simply sent it out. They had no idea what the real Oswald looked like. The knew that a person identifying himself as Oswald phone the Soviet Embassy on Monday and thought he had visited it that same day. So they went through the photos taken that day and sent it out.
Nobody, including the CIA, said the person said or identified himself as Oswald. And the Soviet Embassy officials - all KGB agents - were shown the photo and they all said the man did not identify himself as Oswald. One of the agents, Oleg Nechiporenko, said he recognized the man as an American who had visited the Embassy before in search of a visa.
Again, nobody identified the man as Oswald. How could the CIA know that that man identified himself to the Soviets as Oswald? Did they hear him say that? Again, the Soviet Embassy officials/KGB agents were shown the photo and they all said the man was not the Oswald they met. And they all insisted the man they met was Lee Oswald.
The HSCA investigated this matter and determined that the "pulse" cameras that the CIA used were down on that Friday. And the CIA did not have camera coverage on weekdays (unbelievable).
There's a long list of evidence that, for me, shows that Oswald did go to Mexico City. We have multiple eyewitness accounts, physical evidence and circumstantial. I'm not sure that if the CIA did have photos that the same people who reject all of this evidence would be persuaded by such photos.
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Xe7k8C-LyvU/U50qy9oQFBI/AAAAAAAA05Q/e4ry5Oocjd0/s1600/Mexico-City-Photos.jpg)
-
I don't know the significance of supposing that Oswald's visits to the embassy/consulate (or to Mexico) was faked. But I think that the speculation persists, in part, because the CIA was photographing people upon exit and entrance, yet failed (apparently, supposedly) to photograph Oswald.
Yet they did photograph this other person, whoever he is, and attempted to associate the photos with Oswald. It is an oddity.
When you're looking for evidence of a conspiracy or a cover-up, or to disprove the same, you have to probe such oddities. (Because, to the extent that a cover-up is successful, all that will be left are such apparent incongruities; the actual evidence is meant to be suppressed -- that's what it means to cover-up.) Why was this man's photo identified as Oswald? Why weren't there photos of the real man? There are claims that Oswald's phone conversations were recorded, so what became of the recordings?
Anthony Summers (who may or may not be reliable) quotes an FBI report as stating, re: Oswald's visit to the Soviet Embassy, "Special agents of this Bureau, who have conversed with Oswald in Dallas, Texas, have observed photographs of the individual referred to above and have listened to a recording of his voice. These Special Agents are of the opinion that the above-referred-to individual was not Lee Harvey Oswald." And then he goes on to quote J. Edgar Hoover in conversation with President Johnson, saying, "That picture and the tape do not correspond to this man's voice, nor to his appearance. In other words, it appears there was a second person who was at the Soviet Embassy down there."
There could be any number of reasons for these "oddities," including innocent error, but surely it's worthwhile to question them? I don't know that Kennedy was killed as a result of a conspiracy, though I highly suspect that he was; I don't know what role Oswald played, before, during or after the assassination. I do know that the CIA specifically got into all sorts of monkey business throughout the sixties and beyond. Their behavior with respect to Oswald's visit to Mexico is suspect at least, whatever it means for broader questions about the assassination, and I think it's worth investigating for that reason alone.
Tyler: Let me narrow this issue down by asking one question.
Allegedly, this man below impersonated Oswald. Now, the Soviets who said they met someone who identified himself as Oswald all said the man below was NOT the man they met. They said this man below was a different man and was NOT the man who identified himself as Oswald. But let's set that aside for a second.
(https://www.illuminatirex.com/wp-content/uploads/jfk-conspiracy-oswald-cia.jpg)
Now, the Cubans - more accurately the Cuban secretary/office worker Sylvia Duran - said the man who identified himself as Lee Oswald and who requested a transit visa gave the below photo for the application.
(https://history-matters.com/essays/frameup/MoreMexicoMysteries/images/Oswald_Passport_F-194.jpg)
Duran said she looked at the photo (actually it was four photos since she had to make copies of the application) and made sure it was the same man who gave them to her.
This is from her HSCA testimony:
CORNWELL - Correct?... Did you look at the photos when he brought them back, careful about to be sure that it was the same man who was standing in front of you?
DURAN/TIRADO - Yes.
CORNWELL - And what did you do at that time?
DURAN/TIRADO - I filled out application.
So the question is: Do you believe it makes sense that the man pictured above at the top gave the second photo to the Cubans and Duran didn't notice it was two different men? Do you think a person impersonating Oswald in the photo above would then give a photo of the actual Oswald for his application? Isn't it obvious that it's two different men?
And just to add: the FBI agents in Dallas all testified that they heard no tapes of any voices or phone calls. Hoover was mistaken in thinking so. There were no tapes played for them.
Eldon Rudd was the FBI agent who was given the material (photographs, transcripts but not tapes) from the CIA in Mexico City and flew with it to Dallas to be given to the agents there for review. He wrote a memo on the morning of November 23 about what he had.
In it he wrote: "With regard to the tapes... the CIA has advised that tapes have been erased and are not available for review." So no tapes were sent to Dallas - and none were heard - although there is a long controversy on whether there were tapes or whether they were erased prior to the assassination.
The entire memo is here: https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/fbi/105-3702/124-10230-10430/html/124-10230-10430_0002a.htm
-
So the question is: Do you believe it makes sense that the man pictured above at the top gave the second photo to the Cubans and Duran didn't notice it was two different men?
Another question that is never really answered....Why make out an application for a visa to a country that is expressly prohibited to visit?
See page 4--- https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1139#relPageId=851
I've seen one response that people still flew to Cuba all the time anyway...a nifty reply that has no discernible foundation.
February 8, 1963: Shortly after the Cuban Missile Crisis, President Kennedy prohibits travel to Cuba and makes financial and commercial transactions with Cubans illegal for U.S. citizens.
-
Tyler: Let me narrow this issue down by asking one question.
Hi, Steve. I'll be responding to both of your posts here, in summary. If there's a specific point I don't address from either, feel free to bring it back to my attention.
So the question is: Do you believe it makes sense that the man pictured above at the top gave the second photo to the Cubans and Duran didn't notice it was two different men? Do you think a person impersonating Oswald in the photo above would then give a photo of the actual Oswald for his application? Isn't it obvious that it's two different men?
It is obvious to me that it's two different men. It doesn't make strict sense to me that Duran (or whomever) would not notice; but then, people do make these sorts of mistakes. The stakes were hardly comparable, but in college I used someone else's ID for various purposes; I looked not remotely like the picture on the ID apart from some very basic qualities, like hair color, skin tone -- and people purported (and were required) to check me against the photo, to establish my identity, yet I was never once caught out.
It's clear at least, and I think we would both agree, that "mistakes" were made by someone, somewhere. Perhaps some of how we regard these mistakes or evidence or arguments depends on our wider context of belief. If you believed, as I do, that Oswald was likely working for intelligence in some capacity, at some point prior to Mexico, then perhaps that would change your perception; if you believed, as I do, that the CIA was (and perhaps is) utterly untrustworthy and inscrutable, then perhaps that would change it further; and if you believed, as I do, that some kind of plot was likely already underway, then what might appear to be simple screw-ups or miscommunications on behalf of the CIA, etc., would perhaps take on a completely different character.
Given the context of my beliefs, I find it easier to believe further that something strange went on in Mexico City -- something outside of the official narrative, whether that involved a "double" or not (and "doubles" have been used elsewhere in the history of espionage; it isn't conceptually out of bounds, asinine though it may seem) -- and that Duran (or whomever else) was mistaken in her recollection, or otherwise at fault, than to believe that the CIA somehow failed to get a photo of the real Oswald, despite their surveillance, and matched a picture of someone else to Oswald's name, and destroyed whatever taped conversations, and Hoover "mistakenly" advised the President that his agents had listened to such recordings and found that they did not match Oswald's voice. That's one hell of a mistake on Hoover's part, for instance, given how important such a point was (and remains). For me, it's clear which way Occam's razor cuts.
-
The Warren Commission told the CIA that no government agency could “fill in the very large gaps still existing in Lee Harvey Oswald’s visit to Mexico.” The Commission also stated “there were many days during which we knew nothing about his whereabouts” and “the evenings of his entire trip were unaccounted for.”
Further, the Warren Commission stated the “registry” at the hotel where Oswald allegedly stayed “showed the name of Oswald,” but the hotel clerk “completely denies any other memory of Oswald’s being at the hotel . . . . All the subordinate hotel personnel, such as cleaning ladies, etc., likewise deny any memory of Oswald.”
A CIA document from December 1963 addresses Oswald’s alleged time in Mexico, stating, “No source then at our disposal had ever actually seen Lee Oswald while he was in Mexico.”
Oswald was not in Mexico.
-
Another question that is never really answered....Why make out an application for a visa to a country that is expressly prohibited to visit?
See page 4--- https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1139#relPageId=851
I've seen one response that people still flew to Cuba all the time anyway...a nifty reply that has no discernible foundation.
It wasn't a visa; it was a transit visa. He told the Cubans - Duran - that he was headed to the Soviet Union to live and that on the way there he wanted to transit or go through Havana. He wasn't going to return to the US. This is why the Cubans needed to see his Soviet visa; to prove that he wasn't lying about going to the USSR. And it's why he then went to the Soviet Embassy in search of one. If he was just getting a visa to Cuba he didn't need to show a Soviet visa.
From Duran's testimony:
TIRADO - Well, that he needed to, he said that a transit visa so that he needs a visa to the country that he was going, from, if it was a Socialist country, the visa was given, as soon as he gets the other visa, and uh...
CORNWELL - When he first asked about the requirements for a visa, did he tell you that his objective was to go to cuba or to another country?
TIRADO - To the Soviet Union.
His plan was to defect, leave the US and live in Cuba. How he was going to persuade the Cuban officials to let him stay there is a mystery; probably claim that he was being politically persecuted by the "notorious FBI", the phrase he used when he talked with the Soviets. But he lied about wanting to go to the USSR (he had no visa for the country; how was he going to get there?). Marina said that he told her that she could - somehow - get herself to Cuba and meet him there. In other words, he was abandoning her on her own. Swell guy.
From her testimony:
Mr. RANKIN. Did he tell you why he wanted to go to Mexico City?
Mrs. OSWALD. From Mexico City he wanted to go to Cuba--perhaps through the Russian Embassy in Mexico somehow he would be able to get to Cuba.
Mr. RANKIN. Did he say anything about going to Russia by way of Cuba?
Mrs. OSWALD. I know that he said that in the embassy. But he only said so. I know that he had no intention of going to Russia then.
Mr. RANKIN. How do you know that?
Mrs. OSWALD. He told me. I know Lee fairly well--well enough from that point of view.
Mr. RANKIN. Did he tell you that he was going to Cuba and send you on to Russia?
Mrs. OSWALD. No, he proposed that after he got to Cuba, that I would go there, too, somehow.
You think Oswald was worried about violating American laws against visiting Cuba? He was leaving the US - defecting - to live in another country; what was going to happen to him legally if he was in Cuba? He didn't give a damned about US laws since he was, again, turning his back on the country.
There were regular flights leaving from Mexico City to Cuba and vice versa. Mexico had normal relations with the Castro government; hence the establishment of the Cuban Embassy and consulate. This method, the flights, was how people in the Cuban consulate got from Cuba to Mexico. And then went back.
Question: Why would an impostor ask for a transit visa? If they gave him one then what was he going to do?
This "Oswald was impersonated" theory makes no sense to me on any level. Not the way this supposed impersonator acted. He gave the Cubans an actual photo of Oswald. Why would an impostor do that? And he behaved like an erratic unstable person. For what purpose? This supposed impostor was lucky the Cubans or Soviets didn't have the police arrest him.
-
Tyler: Let me narrow this issue down by asking one question.
-snip-
And just to add: the FBI agents in Dallas all testified that they heard no tapes of any voices or phone calls. Hoover was mistaken in thinking so. There were no tapes played for them.
Eldon Rudd was the FBI agent who was given the material (photographs, transcripts but not tapes) from the CIA in Mexico City and flew with it to Dallas to be given to the agents there for review. He wrote a memo on the morning of November 23 about what he had.
In it he wrote: "With regard to the tapes... the CIA has advised that tapes have been erased and are not available for review." So no tapes were sent to Dallas - and none were heard - although there is a long controversy on whether there were tapes or whether they were erased prior to the assassination.
The entire memo is here: https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/fbi/105-3702/124-10230-10430/html/124-10230-10430_0002a.htm
Eldon Rudd, LOL !
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eldon_Rudd
....A staunch anticommunist, Rudd was a tireless supporter of US anticommunist efforts in Central and South America, and he was the last American to visit with Nicaraguan President Anastasio Somoza Debayle, who was killed by Sandinista forces.
During the 1980 presidential election, Rudd, with help from FBI colleagues with access to security officials at the White House, allegedly obtained debate preparation documents prepared for President Jimmy Carter for his election debates against Republican nominee Ronald Reagan and provided the so-called "Carter debate papers" to the Reagan presidential campaign in the Debategate scandal.
(https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/51230636274_e03fa33dd2_h.jpg)
-
This "Oswald was impersonated" theory makes no sense to me on any level. Not the way this supposed impersonator acted. He gave the Cubans an actual photo of Oswald. Why would an impostor do that? And he behaved like an erratic unstable person. For what purpose? This supposed impostor was lucky the Cubans or Soviets didn't have the police arrest him.
It doesn't make much sense to me, either. But the supposed failure (or string of failures) of our intelligence likewise makes no sense to me. I find this happens a lot, with respect to the Kennedy assassination: I find that I'm presented with two or more options, none of which makes sense to me, none of which explains in full what we're given as evidence. And as I've referred to earlier, I do not trust the CIA a bit. (I'm sure you're familiar with the kinds of things the CIA was up to, in and around this time frame, so perhaps you understand my mistrust.)
As a possible explanation for the questions you've raised, an actual photo of Oswald might be supplied if it were believed that this event might be scrutinized later. Consider, for instance, that you yourself are relying upon it right now to help establish that the real Oswald was there. And erratic behavior might serve a purpose of being noticed. I've heard it suggested that Oswald's FPCC activities in New Orleans, for instance, were meant to draw attention, to be memorable, such that people could say, "yes, Oswald was certainly here; he really loves Cuba." Maybe something like that was intended in Mexico? Or are those at cross-purposes?
I don't know. I don't have a specific theory to push, or any explanation I find wholly satisfactory, and I'm not wedded to the "double" angle. It seems ridiculous to me on its face, only not so ridiculous as the notion that "no tapes were sent to Dallas - and none were heard" was mistook by Hoover, and perhaps others, as "Special agents of this Bureau [...] have listened to a recording of his voice. These Special Agents are of the opinion that the above-referred-to individual was not Lee Harvey Oswald." Supposing such a "mistake" makes an imposter Oswald seem reasonable by comparison.
Frankly, it sounds like something you might hear during a Stalin-era show trial, or out of an Orwell novel, and though I've only begun to converse with you, I already am of the opinion that you also understand how unreasonable it is. So they lied. That much seems clear to me. But why?
As I say, I don't think the only alternative is some imposter Oswald. It's possible that there is some other explanation; some other reason the CIA and/or federal agents would lie, during or after the fact. I trust that there are explanations consonant with both the idea of a conspiracy and with Oswald as the lone gunman. But if we're serious about trying to understand Oswald and his activities, insofar as it might shed light on the assassination, I think such oddities must be recognized, admitted and explored.
-
It doesn't make much sense to me, either. But the supposed failure (or string of failures) of our intelligence likewise makes no sense to me. I find this happens a lot, with respect to the Kennedy assassination: I find that I'm presented with two or more options, none of which makes sense to me, none of which explains in full what we're given as evidence. And as I've referred to earlier, I do not trust the CIA a bit. (I'm sure you're familiar with the kinds of things the CIA was up to, in and around this time frame, so perhaps you understand my mistrust.)
As a possible explanation for the questions you've raised, an actual photo of Oswald might be supplied if it were believed that this event might be scrutinized later. Consider, for instance, that you yourself are relying upon it right now to help establish that the real Oswald was there. And erratic behavior might serve a purpose of being noticed. I've heard it suggested that Oswald's FPCC activities in New Orleans, for instance, were meant to draw attention, to be memorable, such that people could say, "yes, Oswald was certainly here; he really loves Cuba." Maybe something like that was intended in Mexico? Or are those at cross-purposes?
I don't know. I don't have a specific theory to push, or any explanation I find wholly satisfactory, and I'm not wedded to the "double" angle. It seems ridiculous to me on its face, only not so ridiculous as the notion that "no tapes were sent to Dallas - and none were heard" was mistook by Hoover, and perhaps others, as "Special agents of this Bureau [...] have listened to a recording of his voice. These Special Agents are of the opinion that the above-referred-to individual was not Lee Harvey Oswald." Supposing such a "mistake" makes an imposter Oswald seem reasonable by comparison.
Frankly, it sounds like something you might hear during a Stalin-era show trial, or out of an Orwell novel, and though I've only begun to converse with you, I already am of the opinion that you also understand how unreasonable it is. So they lied. That much seems clear to me. But why?
As I say, I don't think the only alternative is some imposter Oswald. It's possible that there is some other explanation; some other reason the CIA and/or federal agents would lie, during or after the fact. I trust that there are explanations consonant with both the idea of a conspiracy and with Oswald as the lone gunman. But if we're serious about trying to understand Oswald and his activities, insofar as it might shed light on the assassination, I think such oddities must be recognized, admitted and explored.
An example of an "Oswald was in Mexico, "paint brush"". This allegedly independent businessman happened to have the same address as JMWAVE before it was relocated to the Miami Univ. campus.
How would an former oil company executive have any idea of what people "connected with" Oswald would look like?
Mebbee this guy Barnes did not get the message? IOW, mudd's Sovs and their boy Lee had it all covered
and had no need for this ESSO exec. to make such a nonsensical notification to the FBI? And, how could
Barnes possibly notice (and later recall) anyone on September 26 as connected with Oswald, unless?
The Castro Obsession: U.S. Covert Operations Against Cuba, ...
https://books.google.com/books?id=PFYLAAAAYAAJ (https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=jmwave+alhambra+&=)
Don Bohning - 2005 - Snippet view - More editions
6 While JMWAVE was by far the biggest, it was not the first CIA presence in Miami. ... Gleichauf opened an overt CIA office at 299 Alhambra Circle, a well- known, east-west street in Coral Gables, an upscale area abutting Miami on the south, ...
https://www.maryferrell.org/php/jfkdb.php?field=subjects&value=LHO%2C+POST-RP%2C+SIGHTING%2C+LAREDO%2C+TX%2C+NUEVO+LAREDO%2C+MX
(http://jfkforum.com/images/EssoCubaWinifredBarnesSeeingPeople.jpg)
Barnes's given name was misreported in this 1960 articles, but it is the same guy who "tipped" the FBI
ten days after the JFK Assassination.:
(http://jfkforum.com/images/WinstonCbarnesOneOfTheLast.jpg)
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=72011&search=winifred_and+barnes#relPageId=4
(http://jfkforum.com/images/EssoCubaWinifredBarnes.jpg)
Entry into Mexico on September 26, 1963, at Nuevo Laredo...
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11075&relPageId=5
....371 Winfred Barnes...
AND...
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=59595&relPageId=33
....371. Winfred Barnes... 372.,,,,Bowen...
Winfred Barnes's CIA file proves a relationship with that agency but omits 1963 activities.:
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2018/104-10215-10128.pdf
-
An example of an "Oswald was in Mexico, "paint brush"". This allegedly independent businessman happened to have the same address as JMWAVE before it was relocated to the Miami Univ. campus.
How would an former oil company executive have any idea of what people "connected with" Oswald would look like?https://www.maryferrell.org/php/jfkdb.php?field=subjects&value=LHO%2C+POST-RP%2C+SIGHTING%2C+LAREDO%2C+TX%2C+NUEVO+LAREDO%2C+MX
(http://jfkforum.com/images/EssoCubaWinifredBarnesSeeingPeople.jpg)
Barnes's given name was misreported in this 1960 articles, but it is the same guy who "tipped" the FBI
ten days after the JFK Assassination.:
(http://jfkforum.com/images/WinstonCbarnesOneOfTheLast.jpg)
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=72011&search=winifred_and+barnes#relPageId=4
(http://jfkforum.com/images/EssoCubaWinifredBarnes.jpg)
Entry into Mexico on September 26, 1963, at Nuevo Laredo...
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11075&relPageId=5
....371 Winfred Barnes...
AND...
https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=59595&relPageId=33
....371. Winfred Barnes... 372.,,,,Bowen...
Winfred Barnes's CIA file proves a relationship with that agency but omits 1963 activities.:
https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2018/104-10215-10128.pdf
You're stirring up trouble again, Tom......... delicious !!!
-
The CIA enlisted Oswald to feign defection to the Soviet Union.
A CIA document titled “Excerpts From Unpublished Writings of Lee Harvey Oswald” quotes Oswald as having written, “When I first went to Russia in the winter of 1959 my funds were very limited, so after a certain time, after the Russians had assured themselves that I was really the naive American who believed in Communism, they arranged for me to receive a certain amount of money every month . . . . It was arranged by the MVD [Russian Ministry of Internal Affairs] . . . . It really was payment for my denunciation of the US in Moscow in November 1959.”
A CIA memo makes reference to Oswald’s writings and states, “In his writings, Oswald is highly critical of Soviet rigged elections, the massing of crowds for staged demonstrations, travel restrictions, regimentation, and the lack of freedom of press, speech, and religion.”
Oswald’s Marine Corps record shows that on February 25, 1959, he was tested on his Russian language “comprehension” skills, including his ability to “understand” Russian, his ability to “read” Russian, and his ability to “write” in Russian.
Fifteen days after arriving in the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Oswald went to the U.S. Embassy in Moscow and claimed that he was renouncing his American citizenship, stating afterward, “I will never return to the United States for any reason.”
The Embassy reported that Oswald “was aggressive, arrogant, and uncooperative,” and in response to his alleged desire to renounce his citizenship, the Embassy “advised Oswald by mail of his right to renounce citizenship, such renunciation in manner prescribed by law being valid, and that he might appear on any normal business day and request documents be prepared.”
According to the State Department officer who dealt with Oswald during the phony attempt to renounce citizenship, Oswald appeared to have been “tutored in connection with his apparent attempts to renounce his American citizenship,” and Oswald’s trip to the Soviet Union was suspiciously a “competently arranged trip.”
The State Department officer also reported, “Oswald evidently knew something of the procedure for renunciation of citizenship when he came into the office. This seemed a bit unusual since it was so soon after his first departure from the United States on his first trip abroad traveling as a private citizen.”
The Warren Commission told CIA officials in March 1964, “The letters Lee Oswald wrote to the American Embassy in Moscow while he was trying to get permission for himself and his wife Marina to return to the United States might have been ‘coached.’”
A Warren Commission staff member told the CIA officials that “these letters reflected a higher degree of sophistication and knowledge of passport procedures than would be expected of a man of Lee Harvey Oswald’s known character.”
The FBI documented that an Associated Press reporter spoke with Oswald at his hotel soon after his claim that he wanted to “relinquish his United States citizenship and remain in Russia.” The reporter “engaged him in a conversation” and “asked Oswald why he was going to remain in Russia.”
The FBI report states, “Oswald replied, ‘I’ve got my reasons,’ but did not elucidate.”
Five days after returning from the Soviet Union, Oswald had Pauline Bates, a stenographer in Fort Worth, Texas, type up notes that he made while in Russia. Bates testified to the Warren Commission that the notes, both typed and handwritten, were in Russian and that Oswald spent three days translating them for her. She also stated that she was “anxious to get on it” because she was very interested in the fact that Oswald “had just come back from Russia and had notes.”
She told the Warren Commission, “I started asking him some questions – ‘Why did you go to Russia?’ - and a few things like that. Some of them he’d answer and some of them he wouldn’t . . . . He wasn’t very talkative. And whenever I did get him to talk, I had to drag it out of him. He didn’t talk voluntarily.”
The information that Pauline Bates “dragged” out of Oswald included the fact that he would “scribble notes” while in Russia “whenever he could” and then “surreptitiously” type them when “Marina would cover for him . . . muffle the tone of the typewriter and everything . . . . He said she would cover or watch for him so that nobody would know that he was making them . . . try to steer anybody away while he was doing this, because he could have got in trouble.”
She testified that the notes were “about the living conditions and the working conditions in Russia. And they were very bitter against Russia . . . . It was the terrible living conditions and the terrible working conditions . . . . The notes were very, very bitter about Russia.
“He smuggled them out of Russia. And he said that the whole time until they got over the border, they were scared to death they would be found, and, of course, they would not be allowed to leave Russia.”
Oswald also told Pauline Bates that while he was in the Marine Corps, he “had taken elementary Russian - a course in elementary Russian.” As noted earlier, six and a half months before he left on a “passenger-carrying freighter” with the Soviet Union as his ultimate destination, the Marines tested Oswald on his ability to understand Russian, read Russian, and write in Russian.
The FBI reported that when they interviewed Oswald on June 26, 1962, thirteen days after he returned to the United States, “Oswald declined to answer the question as to why he made the trip to Russia in the first place” and stated he “would not be willing to take a polygraph test.”
Oswald was put on the CIA’s Counterintelligence “Watch List” on November 9, 1959, nine days after he told U.S. embassy officials that he was renouncing his American citizenship and would “never return to the United States for any reason.”
The card with Oswald’s name on it simply states, “Recent defector to the USSR, Former Marine,” but it is also stamped “Secret: Eyes Only,” which means it was of the highest restriction when it comes to who sees it, and anyone who sees it knows they are not supposed to ask any questions about Lee Harvey Oswald.
To repeat, the CIA enlisted Oswald to feign defection to the Soviet Union. The idea that he was in Mexico trying to get a visa for travel to Cuba and the Soviet Union was completely manufactured in order to link Khrushchev and Castro to the assassination. LBJ would then fear a nuclear war and establish the Warren Commission with a “no conspiracy” mandate.
It’s all in my book. Click the link.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
-
The only people that said Oswald was in Mexico are KGB officers and Sylvia Duran, who worked for the Cubans.
KGB officers inside the CIA, including CIA Director John McCone, wanted to tie Oswald to Khrushchev and Castro.
According to the Church Committee, “For the first twenty-four hours after the assassination, the CIA’s attention focused primarily on Oswald’s September 27, 1963, visit to Mexico City,” and “on the morning of November 23,” KGB officer John McCone met with President Johnson and his National Security Advisor, McGeorge Bundy, to “brief them on the information CIA Headquarters had received from its Mexico City station.”
And there was no letting up in McCone’s efforts to have the President worry about Soviet and Cuban involvement and the possibility of a nuclear war. It was the on following day, November 24, that McCone informed Johnson of the CIA’s “plans against Cuba,” which included plans to assassinate Castro.
Then, after his official morning meeting with the President, McCone met with President Johnson “in his private residence” and suggested that he get “an early briefing on the Soviet long-range striking capability” and Soviet “air defense posture.”
The CIA's Mexico City station was not part of the plan.
After CIA Headquarters requested that the Mexico City station send a CIA officer to Headquarters “with all photos” of Oswald at the Soviet and Cuban Embassies, the Mexico City station sent back a cable stating they had done a “complete recheck” of the photographs of “all visitors” to the Soviet and Cuban Embassies from September 1 through the “first half November,” and it “shows no evidence Oswald visit.”
-
What Was Lee Harvey Oswald Doing in Mexico?: Much about his trip—weeks before the assassination—remains unexamined
By PHILIP SHENON March 18, 2015
What if the answers to the many, persistent questions surrounding the assassination of President John F. Kennedy lie not in Dallas or Washington, D.C., but in the streets of a foreign capital that most Americans have never associated with the president’s murder? Mexico City.
Only hours after shots rang out in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963, U.S. Ambassador Thomas C. Mann told colleagues in the American embassy in Mexico that he was certain Lee Harvey Oswald had not acted alone in killing JFK.
Oswald had visited Mexico City several weeks earlier, apparently to obtain a visa that would allow the self-proclaimed Marxist to defect to Cuba, and Mann, a veteran diplomat, suspected that a plot to kill Kennedy had been hatched on Mexican soil, during Oswald’s encounters there with Cuban diplomats and Mexicans who supported Fidel Castro’s revolution. How did Mann know about those meetings? It turned out the CIA had Oswald under surveillance in the Mexican capital after he had showed up at both the Cuban and Soviet embassies there.
Back at the State Department, however, a baffled Mann hit a brick wall. No one in Washington seemed interested in his suspicions, he would later complain to colleagues. And within days of the assassination, the ambassador received an astonishing top-secret message directly from Secretary of State Dean Rusk. According to Mann’s testimony years later to congressional investigators, Rusk ordered the embassy to shut down any investigation in Mexico that might “confirm or refute rumors of Cuban involvement in the assassination.” No reason was given for the order, the ambassador said.
Mann told the congressional investigators that he was under the impression that the same “incredible” shut-down order had been given by the CIA to the spy agency’s station chief in Mexico, Winston Scott. In memoirs quietly declassified in the 1990s, after his death, Scott confirmed that he, too, suspected that Oswald was an “agent” of a foreign power who may have been part of a conspiracy to kill Kennedy (though Scott did not suggest that the CIA’s investigation was shut down).
What happened in Mexico City in the weeks before JFK’s murder? It is clear from government files declassified in recent decades that Oswald’s six-day trip to Mexico was never adequately investigated by the CIA, the FBI and the State Department—and, as a result, by the Warren Commission, the panel named by President Lyndon Johnson to investigate the assassination. The question has been raised anew in recent weeks by a surprising source—the Warren Commission’s chief conspiracy hunter. And in fact, lots of evidence has accumulated over the years to suggest that historians, journalists and JFK buffs who are still trying to piece together clues about the president’s murder—whether from the memories of still-living witnesses or in the new tranche of assassination-related documents the National Archives is set to release in two years—would be wise to look to Mexico City.
In the half-century since the commission named for Chief Justice Earl Warren concluded that Oswald was the sole gunman in Dallas and that there was no evidence of a conspiracy, foreign or domestic, it is startling to discover how many credible government officials—beginning with Ambassador Mann and CIA station chief Scott—have suggested that evidence was missed in Mexico that could rewrite the history of the assassination. The list includes the late former FBI Director Clarence Kelley and former FBI Assistant Director William Sullivan, as well as David Belin, a former staff lawyer on the Warren Commission.
Last month, another commission staffer joined their ranks: David Slawson, a retired University of Southern California law professor who, 51 years ago, was the commission’s chief investigator searching for evidence that might have pointed to a foreign conspiracy in JFK’s murder. In interviews for a new edition of my 2013 history of the assassination, Slawson said he is now convinced the commission was the victim of a “massive cover-up” by the CIA and other agencies to hide evidence that might have identified people in Mexico City who knew and encouraged Oswald to carry out his threat when he returned to the United States.
Declassified government records back up Slawson’s suspicion of how much information was withheld in 1964, when senior officials at both the CIA and the FBI assured the commission that there was no evidence in Mexico—or anywhere else—to suggest that Oswald was anything other than a delusional lone wolf. In sworn testimony to the commission, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover insisted that “there was nothing up to the time of the assassination that gave any indication that this man was a dangerous character who might do harm to the president.”
The records declassified decades later tell a very different story, and show just how much evidence about Oswald’s Mexico trip —including CIA tape recordings of wiretaps of Oswald’s phone calls in Mexico—never reached the commission. Although the spy agency assured the commission in 1964 that there were no surveillance photos of Oswald in Mexico, CIA Station Chief Scott, in his memoirs, strongly suggested that there were photos, and other CIA officials later told congressional investigators in the 1970s that they recalled seeing the pictures. CIA and FBI records, meanwhile, show that the agencies never tried to track down or interview key witnesses who had encountered Oswald in Mexico.
Slawson is also convinced that someone blocked him from seeing a top-secret June 1964 letter from Hoover to the commission in which Hoover revealed that Oswald may have openly boasted about his plans—“I’m going to kill Kennedy”—while in Mexico, apparently at the Cuban embassy. Slawson believes the CIA was desperate to shut down any investigation in Mexico City out of fear the Warren Commission might stumble onto evidence of the spy agency’s long-running schemes to murder Fidel Castro. (Mexico City had been a staging area for some of the plots.)
Slawson is careful to note that he is not suggesting any sort of far-flung, carefully laid-out conspiracy. For one thing, he notes, Oswald did not get the job he held at the time of the assassination, at the Texas School Book Depository, which was on the president’s motorcade route, until after he had returned to Texas from Mexico in early October 1963; the route itself was not announced until days before JFK’s arrival in Dallas.
Still, if Oswald openly boasted about his plans to kill JFK among people in Mexico, it would undermine the official story that he was a lone wolf whose plans to kill the president could never have been detected by the CIA or FBI. In Slawson’s mind, it could even raise the question of whether people in Mexico might have been charged as accessories in the murder if they had known about Oswald’s threats but did nothing to stop him.
Ambassador Mann appears to have had similar suspicions. After retiring from the State Department, he told House investigators in 1977 that he had never stopped believing that Oswald had been part of a conspiracy somehow linked to Cuba, and that the CIA and other agencies had refused to investigate Oswald’s activities in Mexico “because it would have resulted in the discovery of covert U.S. government action” that somehow involved Cuba.
In memoirs published in 1987, former FBI Director Clarence Kelley, Hoover’s immediate successor, revealed that, after having a chance to read through the bureau’s raw files on the Kennedy assassination, he, too, came to believe that Mexico held the key to unanswered questions about the president’s murder. “Oswald’s stay in Mexico City apparently shaped the man’s thinking irrevocably,” Kelley wrote.
He said he became convinced from the files that, during meetings with Cuban diplomats in Mexico, “Oswald definitely offered to kill President Kennedy,” and that he had probably made a similar offer during the same trip at a meeting at the Soviet embassy in Mexico. That did not mean that either communist government was behind the assassination, Kelley insisted. But it did mean that people in both the Cuban and Soviet embassies were aware, weeks before the assassination, that a young American—a former Marine with rifle training who was eager to be known as a champion of Castro’s revolution—was talking openly about killing the president.
Another top FBI official, former Assistant Director William Sullivan, who directed the bureau’s investigation of JFK’s murder, wrote in his own memoirs that “there were huge gaps” in the FBI’s investigation and that many of them involved Oswald’s trip south of the border. “We never found out what went on between Oswald and the Cubans in Mexico City,” Sullivan admitted.
After finishing his work on the commission, staff lawyer David Belin, who died in 1999, wrote in a little-publicized book that he came to believe that Oswald may have planned to head from Dallas back to Mexico by bus after the assassination because he had some promise of help from co-conspirators who were waiting on the Texas-Mexico border.
Belin’s theory, which he developed during his work on the commission, stemmed from his analysis of local bus schedules and of a bus transfer issued on the day of the assassination that was found in Oswald’s clothing. According to Belin, Oswald may have met with Cuban diplomats and others in Mexico City who saw the Kennedy administration as a mortal threat and who “promised financial and other support to Oswald if he was ever able to succeed” in killing the president. Belin said that, to his disappointment, there was no mention of his theory in the commission’s final report because, as he admitted, it was “pure speculation” that undermined Chief Justice Warren’s hopes to snuff out conspiracy allegations.
Belin’s theory would have made sense to another American official—diplomat Charles William Thomas, whose once-promising career was mysteriously derailed after he pressed colleagues in the U.S. embassy in Mexico to pursue unanswered questions about Oswald’s Mexico City trip. In late 1965, Thomas was told by a friend—a prominent Mexican writer, Elena Garro de Paz—that she had seen Oswald at a dance party during his visit to Mexico that was also attended by a Cuban diplomat who had spoken openly about his hope that someone would assassinate Kennedy. Thomas said he was also told that Oswald had a brief affair with a vivacious young Mexican woman, a committed Socialist, who worked in the Cuban consulate and who had introduced Oswald around town to other Castro supporters.
State Department and CIA records declassified in recent years show that the agencies rebuffed Thomas in his requests for a new investigation, which he continued to raise even after he left Mexico in 1967 for a new posting in Washington. Thomas was dismissed from the department in 1969, a decision that the State Department years later would acknowledge was made in error—the result of what the department insisted was a clerical mistake related to the misfiling of some of Thomas’s personnel records. The department’s admission would come only after Thomas, who struggled to establish a new career, committed suicide in 1971.
Congressional investigators, who later reviewed the case and obtained pension benefits for Thomas’s family, said they suspected, but could not prove, that the diplomat had actually been forced out because of his persistent, unwelcome effort to open a new investigation of Oswald’s activities in Mexico. “It was impossible to prove, though,” one of the congressional investigators told me when I was writing my book. “If he was forced out because of Mexico City, it was all done with a wink and a nod.”
Decades after Thomas’s death, the State Department would declassify internal memos that he had written to superiors, in which he had pleaded for someone to go back and reinvestigate Oswald’s Mexico trip. What Thomas had learned in Mexico would not, by itself, “prove that there was a conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy,” he wrote. But he warned of what might happen if long-secret evidence suggesting a Mexican-born conspiracy in JFK’s murder ever became public. “Those who have tried to discredit the Warren Report could have a field day,” he wrote.
In 1975, Thomas’s widow received a formal apology from the White House. “The circumstances surrounding your husband’s death are a source of deepest regret to the government he served so loyally and so well,” the letter said. “I can only hope that the measures which came about as a result of this tragedy will prevent reoccurrences of this kind in the future.” The letter was signed by President Gerald R. Ford, who, as a rising Republican congressman from Michigan in 1964, had been a member of the Warren Commission.
Thomas’s family may have reason to hope for even greater justice for the late diplomat, since so many of the people who encountered Oswald during his mysterious trip to Mexico half a century ago were young at the time and are still alive. I found some of them for my book, including people who suggest that Oswald had many more contacts with people in Mexico City who might have wanted to see JFK dead. The National Archives faces a 2017 deadline to release about 1,200 documents related to the assassination, many of them from the CIA, that still remain classified. While refusing to describe what is in the documents, CIA lawyers have acknowledged over the years that many of them are out of the files of agency employees who were stationed in the early 1960s in, of all places, Mexico City.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/03/jfk-assassination-lee-harvey-oswald-mexico-116195/
-
It turned out the CIA had Oswald under surveillance in the Mexican capital after he had showed up at both the Cuban and Soviet embassies there.
A CIA document from December 1963 addresses Oswald’s alleged time in Mexico, stating, “No source then at our disposal had ever actually seen Lee Oswald while he was in Mexico.”
A CIA memorandum on December 13, 1963 states, “None of our several photo observation points in Mexico City had ever taken an identifiable picture of Lee Oswald.”
A 1967 CIA memorandum confirms, “No photograph was taken, acquired, or received of Oswald alone or with any individual in front of the Cuban Embassy, the Soviet Embassy, or anywhere else in Mexico.”
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
-
A CIA document from December 1963 addresses Oswald’s alleged time in Mexico, stating, “No source then at our disposal had ever actually seen Lee Oswald while he was in Mexico.”
A CIA memorandum on December 13, 1963 states, “None of our several photo observation points in Mexico City had ever taken an identifiable picture of Lee Oswald.”
A 1967 CIA memorandum confirms, “No photograph was taken, acquired, or received of Oswald alone or with any individual in front of the Cuban Embassy, the Soviet Embassy, or anywhere else in Mexico.”
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
The JFK files document Oswald taking the trip to Mexico City and you're making the claim he was never there. :D
The records declassified decades later tell a very different story, and show just how much evidence about Oswald’s Mexico trip —including CIA tape recordings of wiretaps of Oswald’s phone calls in Mexico—never reached the commission. Although the spy agency assured the commission in 1964 that there were no surveillance photos of Oswald in Mexico, CIA Station Chief Scott, in his memoirs, strongly suggested that there were photos, and other CIA officials later told congressional investigators in the 1970s that they recalled seeing the pictures. CIA and FBI records, meanwhile, show that the agencies never tried to track down or interview key witnesses who had encountered Oswald in Mexico.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/03/jfk-assassination-lee-harvey-oswald-mexico-116195/
-
The JFK files document Oswald taking the trip to Mexico City and you're making the claim he was never there. :D
The records declassified decades later tell a very different story, and show just how much evidence about Oswald’s Mexico trip —including CIA tape recordings of wiretaps of Oswald’s phone calls in Mexico—never reached the commission. Although the spy agency assured the commission in 1964 that there were no surveillance photos of Oswald in Mexico, CIA Station Chief Scott, in his memoirs, strongly suggested that there were photos, and other CIA officials later told congressional investigators in the 1970s that they recalled seeing the pictures. CIA and FBI records, meanwhile, show that the agencies never tried to track down or interview key witnesses who had encountered Oswald in Mexico.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/03/jfk-assassination-lee-harvey-oswald-mexico-116195/
There are no declassified documents confirming the claim that Oswald was in Mexico, just a news article claiming that there are documents.
CIA Director William Colby testified to the newly formed House Select Committee on Intelligence in 1975 that “several full-time employees of major domestic media outlets” are also “full-time employees of the Central Intelligence Agency.”
Colby also testified that the CIA employs people at “major circulation American journals.”
When Colby was pointedly asked, “Has the CIA ever asked media networks or journals to kill a story,” he boasted, “I spent a great deal of my time earlier this year trying to get that done.” (Hearings Before The Select Committee On Intelligence, Part 5, p. 1593. I can provide a link if you need one.)
The JFK files contain absolutely no documents confirming that Oswald was in Mexico. The official claim is that he made the Mexico trip, but as evidenced from the official documentation in my first post, Oswald was never in Mexico.
-
The fabricated claim that Oswald was in Mexico goes hand-in-hand with Castro threatening to kill JFK and CIA plans to kill Castro.
Two and half months before the assassination, Fidel Castro held a three-hour interview at the Brazilian Embassy in Cuba and warned that “United States leaders” (meaning President Kennedy) “will not be safe” if they give aid to anyone with “plans to eliminate Cuban leaders.”
Castro said he was prepared to “fight them and answer in kind.” In other words, Castro would eliminate President Kennedy if the United States continued to support anti-Castro Cubans and their plans to eliminate Castro.
On September 7, 1963, the day that Castro threatened “United States leaders,” one of his underlings went into action to make it seem like President Kennedy’s assassination would mean Castro had made good on his threat. President Ford’s National Security Advisor, Brent Scowcroft, wrote a memorandum stating that on September 7, 1963, a Cuban official named Rolando Cubela, who was “highly placed in the Castro government,” initiated a meeting with the CIA and claimed that he had a “specific plan” to “foment a coup against Castro.”
CIA documents state that Cubela told the CIA that the only possible way to “effect a coup” against Castro was through an “inside job,” and Cubela was “waiting for a plan of action from the United States Government.”
Cubela wanted “high-level assurances of support for a successful coup.” The high-level assurances, of course, could only come from “U.S. leaders” who “support” a coup against the Castro regime.
Scowcroft wrote that “at Cubela’s instigation,” the CIA “began to support” the coup plan, which included, “as a first step, the assassination of Fidel Castro.”
And while Cubela was instigating CIA support for a coup that would kill Castro, the U.S. Coordinating Committee for Cuban Affairs met on September 12, 1963, and “agreed unanimously that there was a strong likelihood Castro would retaliate in some way against the rash of covert activity in Cuba.”
“Within weeks” of the September 12 meeting, the CIA, under the leadership of KGB officer John McCone, “escalated the level of its covert operations” against Cuba and informed Cubela that the United States “supported” his plans for a coup.
On October 11, 1963, Rolando Cubela, described as “a high level Cuban government official,” told the CIA that he wanted “a meeting with a senior U.S. official, preferably Robert F. Kennedy, for assurance of ‘moral support’” for his coup plans, which included Castro’s assassination.
On October 29, 1963, fifty-two days after Castro threatened the safety of “United States leaders,” Desmond Fitzgerald, Chief of the CIA’s Special Affairs Staff, met with Cubela and told him that he was the “personal representative” of Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy.
Fitzgerald also gave Cubela the task of assassinating Fidel Castro, telling him that “the United States is prepared to render all necessary assistance to any anti-communist Cuban group which succeeds in neutralizing the present Cuban leadership.” (Neutralize is a CIA code word for kill.)
The meeting took place “despite warnings from certain CIA staffers that the operation was poorly conceived and insecure.”
Two days later, a CIA document stated that if the coup against Castro were going to be “supportable” by the United States, those involved must “neutralize the top echelon of Cuban leadership.”
The document emphasized that “the situation in Cuba at the time of U.S. intervention” must be one in which “Fidel Castro, and possibly Raul Castro, President Dorticos, and Che Guevara” have been “neutralized by the insurgents.”
A CIA document on “Highly Sensitive Activities” states, “At the very moment President Kennedy was shot in Dallas, a CIA officer was meeting with a Cuban agent in Paris and giving him an assassination device for use against Castro.” The “Cuban agent” was Rolando Cubela, and prior to November 22, Cubela “spoke repeatedly of the need for an assassination weapon.”
CIA documents state that the Cubela episode began in March 1961 when he and another Cuban allegedly “wanted to defect” and “needed help” in escaping from Cuba, but no such defection took place because “Cuban police were aware” of Cubela’s “intention and plans.”
In August 1962, the CIA decided to use Cubela, the alleged defector, as an asset inside Cuba, but in a meeting with the CIA on August 20, 1962, Cubela “refused to be polygraphed.”
Nine days after refusing to take a lie detector test, Cubela flew back to Havana and “did not leave Cuba” again until September 1963, which resulted in the CIA having “no contact” with him from August 1962 until he initiated a meeting with the CIA on September 7, 1963, the very day that Fidel Castro threatened to retaliate against U.S. leaders if they gave aid to anyone trying to “eliminate Cuban leaders.”
The CIA finally terminated contact with Cubela in June 1965.
To summarize, then, Cubela claimed that he wanted to defect but never left Cuba, allegedly because the Cuban police knew he was a defector. And even though he was allegedly pegged as a traitor by Cuba, he was still “highly placed in the Castro government.”
A year and a half after his claim about wanting to defect, the CIA wanted to use him as an asset inside Cuba, but Cubela refused to take a lie detector test. He then had “no contact” with the CIA until the day that Castro threatened the safety of “United States leaders” if they gave aid to anyone with plans to “eliminate Cuban leaders,” at which time Cubela coincidentally initiated a meeting with the CIA and told them that he had a “specific plan” to “foment a coup against Castro.” He said he wanted “high-level assurances of support” as he waited for a “plan of action from the United States Government” that would result in Castro’s death.
Then, Cubela said he wanted to meet with Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy, another “United States leader,” so that Cubela could get “moral support” for his plan to assassinate Castro. A CIA official met with Cubela and told him that he was the “personal representative” of Robert F. Kennedy and that the United States would provide “all necessary assistance” to “any anti-communist Cuban group” that would kill Castro. Cubela then spoke repeatedly of needing “an assassination weapon,” and, coincidentally, at the very moment that President Kennedy was killed, a CIA officer was in Paris giving Cubela “an assassination device for use against Castro.”
Cubela, whose CIA code name was AMLASH, was nothing but a provocateur who, from the day Castro threatened the safety of “United States leaders,” enticed the CIA to actively plan Castro’s assassination. When President Kennedy was assassinated, the assumption was supposed to be that Fidel Castro had made good on his threat to retaliate. President Johnson would then fear Soviet and Cuban involvement and the possibility of “a nuclear war,” and he would establish a Presidential Commission with a “no conspiracy” mandate.
It’s all in my book. Click the link.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
-
Again, there is no apparent reason for anyone to fabricate Oswald's trip to Mexico City and fabricating that event would entail enormous risk if Oswald's whereabouts somewhere else could be confirmed. It's bizarre that CTers go to such lengths to discount matters like Oswald's trip to Mexico City or his ride on the bus to nowhere on 11.22 when those events do not lend themselves to his guilt in the JFK assassination or advance the cause of their fantasy conspirators but entail great risk of exposing the conspiracy if they are faked.
-
Again, there is no apparent reason for anyone to fabricate Oswald's trip to Mexico City and fabricating that event would entail enormous risk if Oswald's whereabouts somewhere else could be confirmed. It's bizarre that CTers go to such lengths to discount matters like Oswald's trip to Mexico City or his ride on the bus to nowhere on 11.22 when those events do not lend themselves to his guilt in the JFK assassination or advance the cause of their fantasy conspirators but entail great risk of exposing the conspiracy if they are faked.
Anyone can deduce from my previous post that the KGB officers inside the CIA wanted to establish a connection between Oswald and Castro, hence the fabricated Mexico trip.
As for where he was he while a KGB officer was impersonating him in Mexico, Oswald was a totally-controlled CIA asset, and the CIA kept him in Houston. The only people who would see him were his CIA handlers.
An FBI report on their interview with Ruth Paine “regarding the day by day location of Lee Harvey Oswald” states that on September 23, Oswald “stated he would go to Houston, where he had a friend and would look for work.”
A CIA report states that on September 23, 1963, when Oswald’s wife and daughter left New Orleans for Irving, Texas, Oswald told them that he would not go with them because he “wanted to visit a friend in Houston, Texas.”
The FBI report on the “day by day location” of Oswald also states that on October 4, “Oswald arrived at the Paine residence,” and told Mrs. Paine that “he had been in Houston but had not found work.” He also told her that he had been “in Dallas for a few days before coming out to the house.”
A Secret Service report states that Mrs. Paine “recalls Oswald being at her home for several days and stating that he had been in Houston, Texas, seeking employment, and that he had returned to Dallas several days prior to his arrival at the Paine home.”
The Washington Post reported that Ruth Paine said Oswald phoned his wife on October 4, 1963, “and related that upon leaving New Orleans, he had scouted around Houston for a job without success and had been looking around in Dallas the last few days.”
The New York Times attributed a “mysterious trip to Mexico” before his return to Dallas to “persons who saw him daily at that time,” but Oswald never told anyone anything about the alleged Mexico trip. The only possible source for a “mysterious trip to Mexico” would be Oswald’s CIA handlers, who were planning to kill President Kennedy, blame Oswald, and establish a connection between Oswald and Castro.
FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover sent a letter to the Warren Commission on September 11, 1964, “concerning schedules” of “bus lines in September 1963 for the route from New Orleans, Louisiana to Houston, Texas.” Hoover’s letter also referenced “the full schedule of Greyhound buses making that trip on September 25, 1963.”
A Secret Service report on August 18, 1964, states that the Secret Service checked the “flight manifests of National Air Lines” to see if anyone had traveled “from New Orleans to Houston” on September 25, 1963, “under the names of Lee Harvey Oswald or Alex Hidell.” In checking with National Air Lines, the Secret Service was informed that “the Federal Bureau of Investigation had previously checked their records.”
Oswald’s CIA handlers would, of course, not be leaving a paper trail indicating that he had actually gone to Houston while one of the KGB officers inside the CIA was impersonating Oswald in Mexico.
-
What Was Lee Harvey Oswald Doing in Mexico?: Much about his trip—weeks before the assassination—remains unexamined
By PHILIP SHENON March 18, 2015
What if the answers to the many, persistent questions surrounding the assassination of President John F. Kennedy lie not in Dallas or Washington, D.C., but in the streets of a foreign capital that most Americans have never associated with the president’s murder? Mexico City.
Only hours after shots rang out in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963, U.S. Ambassador Thomas C. Mann told colleagues in the American embassy in Mexico that he was certain Lee Harvey Oswald had not acted alone in killing JFK.
Oswald had visited Mexico City several weeks earlier, apparently to obtain a visa that would allow the self-proclaimed Marxist to defect to Cuba, and Mann, a veteran diplomat, suspected that a plot to kill Kennedy had been hatched on Mexican soil, during Oswald’s encounters there with Cuban diplomats and Mexicans who supported Fidel Castro’s revolution. How did Mann know about those meetings? It turned out the CIA had Oswald under surveillance in the Mexican capital after he had showed up at both the Cuban and Soviet embassies there.
Back at the State Department, however, a baffled Mann hit a brick wall. No one in Washington seemed interested in his suspicions, he would later complain to colleagues. And within days of the assassination, the ambassador received an astonishing top-secret message directly from Secretary of State Dean Rusk. According to Mann’s testimony years later to congressional investigators, Rusk ordered the embassy to shut down any investigation in Mexico that might “confirm or refute rumors of Cuban involvement in the assassination.” No reason was given for the order, the ambassador said.
Mann told the congressional investigators that he was under the impression that the same “incredible” shut-down order had been given by the CIA to the spy agency’s station chief in Mexico, Winston Scott. In memoirs quietly declassified in the 1990s, after his death, Scott confirmed that he, too, suspected that Oswald was an “agent” of a foreign power who may have been part of a conspiracy to kill Kennedy (though Scott did not suggest that the CIA’s investigation was shut down).
What happened in Mexico City in the weeks before JFK’s murder? It is clear from government files declassified in recent decades that Oswald’s six-day trip to Mexico was never adequately investigated by the CIA, the FBI and the State Department—and, as a result, by the Warren Commission, the panel named by President Lyndon Johnson to investigate the assassination. The question has been raised anew in recent weeks by a surprising source—the Warren Commission’s chief conspiracy hunter. And in fact, lots of evidence has accumulated over the years to suggest that historians, journalists and JFK buffs who are still trying to piece together clues about the president’s murder—whether from the memories of still-living witnesses or in the new tranche of assassination-related documents the National Archives is set to release in two years—would be wise to look to Mexico City.
In the half-century since the commission named for Chief Justice Earl Warren concluded that Oswald was the sole gunman in Dallas and that there was no evidence of a conspiracy, foreign or domestic, it is startling to discover how many credible government officials—beginning with Ambassador Mann and CIA station chief Scott—have suggested that evidence was missed in Mexico that could rewrite the history of the assassination. The list includes the late former FBI Director Clarence Kelley and former FBI Assistant Director William Sullivan, as well as David Belin, a former staff lawyer on the Warren Commission.
Last month, another commission staffer joined their ranks: David Slawson, a retired University of Southern California law professor who, 51 years ago, was the commission’s chief investigator searching for evidence that might have pointed to a foreign conspiracy in JFK’s murder. In interviews for a new edition of my 2013 history of the assassination, Slawson said he is now convinced the commission was the victim of a “massive cover-up” by the CIA and other agencies to hide evidence that might have identified people in Mexico City who knew and encouraged Oswald to carry out his threat when he returned to the United States.
Declassified government records back up Slawson’s suspicion of how much information was withheld in 1964, when senior officials at both the CIA and the FBI assured the commission that there was no evidence in Mexico—or anywhere else—to suggest that Oswald was anything other than a delusional lone wolf. In sworn testimony to the commission, FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover insisted that “there was nothing up to the time of the assassination that gave any indication that this man was a dangerous character who might do harm to the president.”
The records declassified decades later tell a very different story, and show just how much evidence about Oswald’s Mexico trip —including CIA tape recordings of wiretaps of Oswald’s phone calls in Mexico—never reached the commission. Although the spy agency assured the commission in 1964 that there were no surveillance photos of Oswald in Mexico, CIA Station Chief Scott, in his memoirs, strongly suggested that there were photos, and other CIA officials later told congressional investigators in the 1970s that they recalled seeing the pictures. CIA and FBI records, meanwhile, show that the agencies never tried to track down or interview key witnesses who had encountered Oswald in Mexico.
Slawson is also convinced that someone blocked him from seeing a top-secret June 1964 letter from Hoover to the commission in which Hoover revealed that Oswald may have openly boasted about his plans—“I’m going to kill Kennedy”—while in Mexico, apparently at the Cuban embassy. Slawson believes the CIA was desperate to shut down any investigation in Mexico City out of fear the Warren Commission might stumble onto evidence of the spy agency’s long-running schemes to murder Fidel Castro. (Mexico City had been a staging area for some of the plots.)
Slawson is careful to note that he is not suggesting any sort of far-flung, carefully laid-out conspiracy. For one thing, he notes, Oswald did not get the job he held at the time of the assassination, at the Texas School Book Depository, which was on the president’s motorcade route, until after he had returned to Texas from Mexico in early October 1963; the route itself was not announced until days before JFK’s arrival in Dallas.
Still, if Oswald openly boasted about his plans to kill JFK among people in Mexico, it would undermine the official story that he was a lone wolf whose plans to kill the president could never have been detected by the CIA or FBI. In Slawson’s mind, it could even raise the question of whether people in Mexico might have been charged as accessories in the murder if they had known about Oswald’s threats but did nothing to stop him.
Ambassador Mann appears to have had similar suspicions. After retiring from the State Department, he told House investigators in 1977 that he had never stopped believing that Oswald had been part of a conspiracy somehow linked to Cuba, and that the CIA and other agencies had refused to investigate Oswald’s activities in Mexico “because it would have resulted in the discovery of covert U.S. government action” that somehow involved Cuba.
In memoirs published in 1987, former FBI Director Clarence Kelley, Hoover’s immediate successor, revealed that, after having a chance to read through the bureau’s raw files on the Kennedy assassination, he, too, came to believe that Mexico held the key to unanswered questions about the president’s murder. “Oswald’s stay in Mexico City apparently shaped the man’s thinking irrevocably,” Kelley wrote.
He said he became convinced from the files that, during meetings with Cuban diplomats in Mexico, “Oswald definitely offered to kill President Kennedy,” and that he had probably made a similar offer during the same trip at a meeting at the Soviet embassy in Mexico. That did not mean that either communist government was behind the assassination, Kelley insisted. But it did mean that people in both the Cuban and Soviet embassies were aware, weeks before the assassination, that a young American—a former Marine with rifle training who was eager to be known as a champion of Castro’s revolution—was talking openly about killing the president.
Another top FBI official, former Assistant Director William Sullivan, who directed the bureau’s investigation of JFK’s murder, wrote in his own memoirs that “there were huge gaps” in the FBI’s investigation and that many of them involved Oswald’s trip south of the border. “We never found out what went on between Oswald and the Cubans in Mexico City,” Sullivan admitted.
After finishing his work on the commission, staff lawyer David Belin, who died in 1999, wrote in a little-publicized book that he came to believe that Oswald may have planned to head from Dallas back to Mexico by bus after the assassination because he had some promise of help from co-conspirators who were waiting on the Texas-Mexico border.
Belin’s theory, which he developed during his work on the commission, stemmed from his analysis of local bus schedules and of a bus transfer issued on the day of the assassination that was found in Oswald’s clothing. According to Belin, Oswald may have met with Cuban diplomats and others in Mexico City who saw the Kennedy administration as a mortal threat and who “promised financial and other support to Oswald if he was ever able to succeed” in killing the president. Belin said that, to his disappointment, there was no mention of his theory in the commission’s final report because, as he admitted, it was “pure speculation” that undermined Chief Justice Warren’s hopes to snuff out conspiracy allegations.
Belin’s theory would have made sense to another American official—diplomat Charles William Thomas, whose once-promising career was mysteriously derailed after he pressed colleagues in the U.S. embassy in Mexico to pursue unanswered questions about Oswald’s Mexico City trip. In late 1965, Thomas was told by a friend—a prominent Mexican writer, Elena Garro de Paz—that she had seen Oswald at a dance party during his visit to Mexico that was also attended by a Cuban diplomat who had spoken openly about his hope that someone would assassinate Kennedy. Thomas said he was also told that Oswald had a brief affair with a vivacious young Mexican woman, a committed Socialist, who worked in the Cuban consulate and who had introduced Oswald around town to other Castro supporters.
State Department and CIA records declassified in recent years show that the agencies rebuffed Thomas in his requests for a new investigation, which he continued to raise even after he left Mexico in 1967 for a new posting in Washington. Thomas was dismissed from the department in 1969, a decision that the State Department years later would acknowledge was made in error—the result of what the department insisted was a clerical mistake related to the misfiling of some of Thomas’s personnel records. The department’s admission would come only after Thomas, who struggled to establish a new career, committed suicide in 1971.
Congressional investigators, who later reviewed the case and obtained pension benefits for Thomas’s family, said they suspected, but could not prove, that the diplomat had actually been forced out because of his persistent, unwelcome effort to open a new investigation of Oswald’s activities in Mexico. “It was impossible to prove, though,” one of the congressional investigators told me when I was writing my book. “If he was forced out because of Mexico City, it was all done with a wink and a nod.”
Decades after Thomas’s death, the State Department would declassify internal memos that he had written to superiors, in which he had pleaded for someone to go back and reinvestigate Oswald’s Mexico trip. What Thomas had learned in Mexico would not, by itself, “prove that there was a conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy,” he wrote. But he warned of what might happen if long-secret evidence suggesting a Mexican-born conspiracy in JFK’s murder ever became public. “Those who have tried to discredit the Warren Report could have a field day,” he wrote.
In 1975, Thomas’s widow received a formal apology from the White House. “The circumstances surrounding your husband’s death are a source of deepest regret to the government he served so loyally and so well,” the letter said. “I can only hope that the measures which came about as a result of this tragedy will prevent reoccurrences of this kind in the future.” The letter was signed by President Gerald R. Ford, who, as a rising Republican congressman from Michigan in 1964, had been a member of the Warren Commission.
Thomas’s family may have reason to hope for even greater justice for the late diplomat, since so many of the people who encountered Oswald during his mysterious trip to Mexico half a century ago were young at the time and are still alive. I found some of them for my book, including people who suggest that Oswald had many more contacts with people in Mexico City who might have wanted to see JFK dead. The National Archives faces a 2017 deadline to release about 1,200 documents related to the assassination, many of them from the CIA, that still remain classified. While refusing to describe what is in the documents, CIA lawyers have acknowledged over the years that many of them are out of the files of agency employees who were stationed in the early 1960s in, of all places, Mexico City.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/03/jfk-assassination-lee-harvey-oswald-mexico-116195/
"It is clear from government files declassified in recent decades that Oswald’s six-day trip to Mexico was never adequately investigated by the CIA, the FBI and the State Department—"
Thee was no need to investigate Lee's trip to MC..... Hoover knew full well why Lee had been sent to Mexico....It was Hoover who was setting Lee Oswald up as a patsy in cahoots with Fidel Castro.....
-
"It is clear from government files declassified in recent decades that Oswald’s six-day trip to Mexico was never adequately investigated by the CIA, the FBI and the State Department—"
Thee was no need to investigate Lee's trip to MC..... Hoover knew full well why Lee had been sent to Mexico....It was Hoover who was setting Lee Oswald up as a patsy in cahoots with Fidel Castro.....
According to my information, It was CIA Director and KGB officer John McCone who pushed the Castro angle.
The Church Committee wrote, “For the first twenty-four hours after the assassination, the CIA’s attention focused primarily on Oswald’s September 27, 1963, visit to Mexico City,” and “on the morning of November 23,” McCone met with President Johnson and his National Security Advisor, McGeorge Bundy, to “brief them on the information CIA Headquarters had received from its Mexico City station.”
And there was no letting up in McCone’s efforts to have the President worry about Soviet and Cuban involvement and the possibility of a nuclear war. It was the on following day, November 24, that McCone informed Johnson of the CIA’s “plans against Cuba,” which included plans to assassinate Castro. Then, after his official morning meeting with the President, McCone met with President Johnson “in his private residence” and suggested that he get “an early briefing on the Soviet long-range striking capability” and Soviet “air defense posture.”
The FBI would not be investigating any possible Cuban involvement in the assassination, because the FBI’s investigation was extremely short lived.
At 9:20 p.m. on Friday, November 22, the FBI sent a message to all FBI field offices instructing them to “immediately contact all informants, security, racial and criminal, as well as other sources for information bearing on assassination of President Kennedy. All offices immediately establish whereabouts of bombing suspects, all known Klan and hate group members,” and “known racial extremists.”
Then, less than two hours later, at 11 p.m. the FBI sent a second message to its field offices, stating, “The Bureau is conducting an investigation to determine who is responsible for the assassination. You are therefore instructed to follow and resolve all allegations pertaining to the assassination. This matter is of utmost urgency.”
At 11:20 a.m. on Saturday, November 23, barely twelve hours after the second message of November 22, the FBI told its personnel to completely disregard the previous day’s messages and go back to what they were doing before the assassination.
The FBI sent a message to all FBI field offices stating, “Lee Harvey Oswald has been developed as the principal suspect in the assassination of President Kennedy . . . . All offices should resume normal contacts with informants and other sources.”
A memorandum to Assistant FBI Director Cartha DeLoach states, “The basic investigation showing how the assassination occurred was substantially completed by November 26, 1963,” and all FBI actions after that date were to “further verify the information developed up to November 26, 1963.”
The FBI, after quickly claiming that Oswald was the lone assassin, was clearly prevented from doing anything to either establish or refute a Cuban connection to the assassination. The CIA, which was overrun with the very KGB officers who had assassinated President Kennedy, would be conducting the investigation. The CIA alone was tasked with determining whether anyone else was involved in the assassination. The FBI would be doing nothing but seeking to “further verify the information developed up to November 26, 1963.”
It’s all in my book. Click the link.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
-
According to my information, It was CIA Director and KGB officer John McCone who pushed the Castro angle.
The Church Committee wrote, “For the first twenty-four hours after the assassination, the CIA’s attention focused primarily on Oswald’s September 27, 1963, visit to Mexico City,” and “on the morning of November 23,” McCone met with President Johnson and his National Security Advisor, McGeorge Bundy, to “brief them on the information CIA Headquarters had received from its Mexico City station.”
And there was no letting up in McCone’s efforts to have the President worry about Soviet and Cuban involvement and the possibility of a nuclear war. It was the on following day, November 24, that McCone informed Johnson of the CIA’s “plans against Cuba,” which included plans to assassinate Castro. Then, after his official morning meeting with the President, McCone met with President Johnson “in his private residence” and suggested that he get “an early briefing on the Soviet long-range striking capability” and Soviet “air defense posture.”
The FBI would not be investigating any possible Cuban involvement in the assassination, because the FBI’s investigation was extremely short lived.
At 9:20 p.m. on Friday, November 22, the FBI sent a message to all FBI field offices instructing them to “immediately contact all informants, security, racial and criminal, as well as other sources for information bearing on assassination of President Kennedy. All offices immediately establish whereabouts of bombing suspects, all known Klan and hate group members,” and “known racial extremists.”
Then, less than two hours later, at 11 p.m. the FBI sent a second message to its field offices, stating, “The Bureau is conducting an investigation to determine who is responsible for the assassination. You are therefore instructed to follow and resolve all allegations pertaining to the assassination. This matter is of utmost urgency.”
At 11:20 a.m. on Saturday, November 23, barely twelve hours after the second message of November 22, the FBI told its personnel to completely disregard the previous day’s messages and go back to what they were doing before the assassination.
The FBI sent a message to all FBI field offices stating, “Lee Harvey Oswald has been developed as the principal suspect in the assassination of President Kennedy . . . . All offices should resume normal contacts with informants and other sources.”
A memorandum to Assistant FBI Director Cartha DeLoach states, “The basic investigation showing how the assassination occurred was substantially completed by November 26, 1963,” and all FBI actions after that date were to “further verify the information developed up to November 26, 1963.”
The FBI, after quickly claiming that Oswald was the lone assassin, was clearly prevented from doing anything to either establish or refute a Cuban connection to the assassination. The CIA, which was overrun with the very KGB officers who had assassinated President Kennedy, would be conducting the investigation. The CIA alone was tasked with determining whether anyone else was involved in the assassination. The FBI would be doing nothing but seeking to “further verify the information developed up to November 26, 1963.”
It’s all in my book. Click the link.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
To be perfectly frank, I believe that you're deluding yourself and looking for a "boggie man" that you can be comfortable in blaming for the murder which was nothing but an old fashioned coup d'etat ...... The person responsible for the murder was right there behind JFK and immediately grabbed the reins. The culprits were LBJ, and JEH..... No foreign power had the ability to manipulate the bothched farce of an autopsy, nor could a foreign power have controlled the " Special Blue Ribbon Investigation"( the WC) .....Only LBJ and Hoover had that power....
-
To be perfectly frank, I believe that you're deluding yourself and looking for a "boggie man" that you can be comfortable in blaming for the murder which was nothing but an old fashioned coup d'etat ...... The person responsible for the murder was right there behind JFK and immediately grabbed the reins. The culprits were LBJ, and JEH..... No foreign power had the ability to manipulate the bothched farce of an autopsy, nor could a foreign power have controlled the " Special Blue Ribbon Investigation"( the WC) .....Only LBJ and Hoover had that power....
If you do not want to believe that I exposed KGB infiltration of the CIA in 1984 or that CIA Director John McCone was one of the KGB officers, that’s fine. If you do not want to believe there were any KGB officers inside the CIA, that’s fine.
But the documented evidence that the CIA controlled the Warren Commission investigation is irrefutable.
On January 23, 1964, as the cover-up plan proceeded, “The Warren Commission began requesting information from the CIA.”
The Church Committee reported that the Warren Commission staff “was given access to CIA files on the assassination, including material obtained from sensitive sources and methods.” The CIA gave the Warren Commission “all significant information CIA investigators had.”
The Warren Commission instructed the FBI and the Secret Service to send all their information to the CIA. An internal Warren Commission document states that on March 12, 1964, the CIA confirmed that “the FBI and the Secret Service were continuing to forward materials to the CIA as the Commission had previously requested.”
On April 6, 1964, a CIA cable made reference to “three members of Warren Commission legal staff” who would be going to Mexico as part of the investigation, and it states, “All have studied our reports in detail.”
CIA Director John McCone made it clear that the CIA handled the Warren Commission investigation. He sent a letter to his cover-up man, Nicholas Katzenbach, in February 1965 stating that CIA operatives were in “close contact” with Warren Commission General Counsel Lee Rankin and the Warren Commission staff “throughout the existence of the President’s Commission.”
McCone’s letter also states that CIA personnel “were instructed by me to cooperate fully with the President’s Commission and to withhold nothing from its scrutiny.”
A 1971 CIA memorandum confirms that “CIA did not withhold any information from the Warren Commission.” CIA Director John McCone and Deputy Director for Plans Richard Helms “extended to the Commission full access to the Agency’s most sensitive information and the sources and methods involved.”
Raymond G. Rocca, Chief of Research & Analysis in the CIA’s Counterintelligence division, wrote a Memorandum in 1975 marked “Eyes Only” in which he stated that the CIA’s “line of reporting” to the Warren Commission had “multiple” levels. Rocca also stated that “on sensitive matters of concern,” Deputy Director for Plans Richard Helms and the CIA’s Soviet Russia Chief, David Murphy, “dealt directly with the Commission.”
A CIA memorandum concerning a March 12 meeting that Helms and unnamed CIA “staff officers” had with the Warren Commission staff states, “The purpose of this meeting was to discuss the current status of the CIA contribution to the work of the Warren Commission.”
The Warren Commission lavished praise on the CIA just two months after it began “requesting information from the CIA.” Raymond G. Rocca had a meeting with a Warren Commission staff member on March 27, 1963, after which Rocca wrote a Memorandum stating that the staff member had told him, “The Agency handling of the information in the Oswald case was unique among what the Commission had found had happened in every other agency.”
Rocca wrote that the Warren Commission staff member “stated flatly that no Federal component, except CIA, had been able to show the Commission hard documentation which indicated there had been immediate action on field reported information by headquarters, and full interaction by headquarters with the field on file trace data and instructions for follow-up.”
Another CIA memorandum shows that on April 16, 1964, four weeks before CIA Director John McCone’s testimony, Chief Justice Earl Warren and another Warren Commission member, Senator John Sherman Cooper, met with McCone at CIA Headquarters.
McCone and Deputy Director for Plans Richard Helms testified before the Warren Commission on May 14, 1964, forty-eight days after the Warren Commission staff member praised the CIA for being so helpful, and Helms wrote a chronology of other meetings that he and an unidentified CIA official had with the Warren Commission.
Helms stated he met with the Warren Commission twice in January, twice in March, and again on June 24.
Helms wrote that the chronology of meetings “does not include the score of telephone calls I had with Mr. Rankin and the Commission staff.”
In addition to all the high-level meetings and the “multiple” levels of contact, the House Select Committee on Assassinations reported that the CIA provided the Warren Commission with “twelve full-time and part-time professionals. They also provided secretarial and clerical assistance.”
The CIA easily controlled the WC investigation.
The JFK assassination was part of the CIA’s quest to control the government. No surprise that they controlled the investigation.
It’s all in my book. Click the link.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
-
After I exposed KGB infiltration of the CIA in 1984, one of the KGB officers admitted to impersonating Oswald at the Soviet and Cuban Embassies. His face perfectly matched the photograph taken at the Soviet Embassy on October 1, 1963, but he was completely bald by 1984. He also admitted to being one of the two KGB officers who assassinated President Kennedy. The third assassin was a CIA “double agent,” who knowingly and willingly worked for the KGB.
Warren Commission Exhibit 237, the Mexico City “unidentified mystery man,” is a photograph of one of President Kennedy’s three assassins.
(https://www.wnd.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/warren-commission-photo-oswald.jpg)
It’s all in my book. Click the link.
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V9JT65Y
-
Mr Frank,
You may find it useful to review my prior X postings, as I knew and worked with all of the Mexico City KGB officers. In a future article, I will discuss the identity of the "Mystery Man" - whom Kostikov informed me of at one of my many evening dinners with him in Autumn of 1993.
https://twitter.com/bdlitman (https://twitter.com/bdlitman)
Best, BDL
-
You are quite correct.
You may find useful my recent postings on the topic owing to my personal association with the involved KGB officers.
https://tinyurl.com/2x66af7k (https://tinyurl.com/2x66af7k)
-BDL
-
See any logical inconsistency yet between suggesting that Oswald's visit to Mexico City was fabricated to implicate Cuba in the crime but complaining that the authorities ignored evidence of the involvement of anyone else and placed all the blame on Oswald? Those nutty conspirators. First, they want to start a war. But then they decided to blame it all on Oswald to avoid the war.
-
See any logical inconsistency yet between suggesting that Oswald's visit to Mexico City was fabricated to implicate Cuba in the crime but complaining that the authorities ignored evidence of the involvement of anyone else and placed all the blame on Oswald? Those nutty conspirators. First, they want to start a war. But then they decided to blame it all on Oswald to avoid the war.
"They" framed a Castroite in order to justify a war to remove Castro - Operation Northwoods and all of that - and then "they" conducted an investigation that cleared Cuba/Castro of any role. All of those allegations by people that Oswald met with Cuban agents - the "Twist Party" et cetera - were knocked down by the CIA. Oswald acted alone "they" said.
Yes, the same CIA that killed JFK and supposedly framed Oswald to justify removing Castro then helped exonerate Castro. Why would they do that? In conspiracy world all of these contradictions are fine as long as it helps promote a conspiracy.
-
Maybe they expected Lyndon to be more of a warmonger than he was. They would have to wait for Vietnam for that.