JFK Assassination Forum
JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion & Debate => JFK Assassination Plus General Discussion And Debate => Topic started by: Fred Litwin on October 18, 2025, 02:59:53 PM
-
https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/soviet-file-given-to-luna-proves-a-kgb-operation
(https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/soviet-file-given-to-luna-proves-a-kgb-operation)
Soviet File Given to Luna Proves a KGB Operation
A letter written by Lee Harvey Oswald, contained in the Soviet file given to Congresswoman Luna, proves the KGB conducted an operation to influence American public opinion that the CIA was involved in the JFK assassination.
-
On the Belarus files: Norman Mailer was given access to some Belarus KGB files (he quotes from them in his book on Oswald) shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union but that they were less extensive than he hoped. Despite those limits he was able to interview some two dozen KGB agents including the ones in Minsk that monitored Oswald along with Oswald's friends and associates. His conclusion was there's nothing there, that the KGB didn't recruit or use Oswald. He was considered more of a distraction than a potential asset.
In fact, Oswald was viewed as an oddball (the suicide attempt most notably) and the Belarus KGB agents said they were happy to see him return to the US and no longer potentially cause an international incident. Which, after originally viewing him as a danger, a CIA agent, they were mostly worried about. Many of the agents were around during the Stalin/Beria era and they learned firsthand to not draw attention to yourself. They were worried that Oswald would do just that - cause attention to them - even though it was less harsh post-Stalin period.
Still, I'd like to see those files and it's not clear at this point why they - I assume the Belarus government still has them? Or would it be Moscow? - would still be holding them.
From Mailer's "Oswald's Tale".
(https://www.drivehq.com/file/DFPublishFile.aspx/FileID12889338594/Keytfc4h1m4726s/mailer belarus KGB.JPG)
-
Norman Mailer said he was given access to some Belarus KGB files shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union but that they were less extensive than he hoped. Still he said he was able to interview some two dozen KGB agents including the ones that monitored Oswald and his conclusion was there's nothing there. Oswald was viewed as an oddball and they were happy to see him return to the US and not potentially cause an international incident. Many of the agents were around during the Stalin era and they learned firsthand to not draw attention to yourself. They were worried that Oswald would do that.
From Mailer's "Oswald's Tale".
(https://www.drivehq.com/file/DFPublishFile.aspx/FileID12889338594/Keytfc4h1m4726s/mailer belarus KGB.JPG)
Dear Steve M.,
When one reads Masha Gessen's 2012 book, The Man Without a Face: The Unlikely Rise of Vladimir Putin, one realizes that in August of 1991 the KGB orchestrated a planned-to-fail "hardliner coup" so that power could be transferred from Gorbachev to Yeltsin with the unspoken understanding that Yeltsin was forever beholden to it and that it was still in control of everything.
Bottom line: Why would anyone believe what a bunch of current or "former" KGB officers said in the former USSR about the KGB's alleged non-involvement with a former Marine sharpshooter and U-2 radar operator during the two-and-one-half years he lived half-a-mile from a KGB school in Minsk, married a probable KGB informant (according to true defector Pyotr Deriabin) and then returned to the U.S. and 1) attempted to assassinate General Walker, 2) did assassinate JFK, and 3) murdered DPD officer Tippit?
All of which reminds me of KGB Colonel Oleg Nechiporenko's 1993 book, Passport to Assassination, in which he implausibly devotes fifty pages to extolling the alleged bona fides Yuri Nosenko and condemning the paranoiac, incompetent, and sadistic natures of his anti-Nosenko / pro-Golitsyn primary case officer, Tennent H. Bagley, and Bagley's anti-Nosenko / pro-Golitsyn colleagues.
And how, on 11/22/93, then-KGB General Nikolai Leonov (RIP; aka "The Blond Oswald in Mexico City), without mentioning Oswald's alleged weeping and revolver-brandishing meeting with Nechiporenko, Yatskov and Kostikov at the Consulate on Saturday, 9/28/63, told National Enquirer that Oswald interdicted him during volleyball warmups on SUNDAY, 9/29/63, and started ... yep ... weeping and brandishing his revolver in his Embassy office .
LOL!
-- Tom
PS Here's Bagley's free-to-read 2007 book, Spy Wars: Moles, Mysteries, and Deadly Games.
https://archive.org/details/SpyWarsMolesMysteriesAndDeadlyGames
-
SMG--
Why would anyone believe anything the CIA, or the Belarus KGB, said, regarding LHO?
If LHO was being run out of the Belarus KGB, and later perped the JFKA...you can rest assured the Belarus KGB files would be scrubbed.
This is worth nothing:
From CIA files:
“IJDECANTER (a CIA asset) knew Yurshak as Belorussian KGB in Minsk in the early 1980s. Yurshak was in his late 50s then. When asked if Yurshak was bragging, he said, "no...I think that 100 percent he was involved in this Oswald case...He was stuck to his one point of view. First, never had any kind of task for Oswald to kill Kennedy. Second, that he was actually recruited and he ran him. And third, Marina was our swallow and then she rejected cooperation.”
---30---
So the Belarus KGB'er said he recruited and was running LHO.
What does that mean? I don't know.
-
SMG--
Why would anyone believe anything the CIA, or the Belarus KGB, said, regarding LHO?
If LHO was being run out of the Belarus KGB, and later perped the JFKA...you can rest assured the Belarus KGB files would be scrubbed.
This is worth nothing:
From CIA files:
“IJDECANTER (a CIA asset) knew Yurshak as Belorussian KGB in Minsk in the early 1980s. Yurshak was in his late 50s then. When asked if Yurshak was bragging, he said, "no...I think that 100 percent he was involved in this Oswald case...He was stuck to his one point of view. First, never had any kind of task for Oswald to kill Kennedy. Second, that he was actually recruited and he ran him. And third, Marina was our swallow and then she rejected cooperation.”
---30---
So the Belarus KGB'er said he recruited and was running LHO.
What does that mean? I don't know.
FWIW, Sergei Papushin (IJDECANTER) was a Kremlin-loyal false defector.
Even "useful idiot" Milton Bearden and ditzy Nosenko/McCoy/Kisevalter-loving Sandra Grimes (who took seven years or so to uncover Aldrich Ames and who, along with Cynthia Hausman, was sent by probable mole Leonard V. McCoy to counterintelligence-hating James Geer to help him overturn the FBI's then-recent correct determination that FEDORA was a KGB plant), alluded as much in their books.
Unfortunately, John M. Newman lends Papushin a lot of credence in his 2022 book, Uncovering Popov's Mole.
-
SMG--
Why would anyone believe anything the CIA, or the Belarus KGB, said, regarding LHO?
If LHO was being run out of the Belarus KGB, and later perped the JFKA...you can rest assured the Belarus KGB files would be scrubbed.
This is worth nothing:
From CIA files:
“IJDECANTER (a CIA asset) knew Yurshak as Belorussian KGB in Minsk in the early 1980s. Yurshak was in his late 50s then. When asked if Yurshak was bragging, he said, "no...I think that 100 percent he was involved in this Oswald case...He was stuck to his one point of view. First, never had any kind of task for Oswald to kill Kennedy. Second, that he was actually recruited and he ran him. And third, Marina was our swallow and then she rejected cooperation.”
---30---
So the Belarus KGB'er said he recruited and was running LHO.
What does that mean? I don't know.
Okay, if you want to dismiss all of these (and other) files, the interviews with the agents, the interviews with Oswald's friends and associates, Oswald's very critical statements about the Soviet Union when he returned, his erratic behavior there, then what should we use to evaluate what happened in the Soviet Union?
If you think all of this was faked, orchestrated, the documents falsified, the agents all lied, the accounts by the people who knew Oswald staged then where can we go? No matter what evidence is produced can be dismissed as disinformation, as a sort of Potemkin Village account of what happened in Minsk. This is like the conspiracy Left arguing that all of the evidence he didn't work for the CIA is false, that he was a CIA agent or asset.
What are we supposed to use? We look at the evidence, weigh it, consider explanations and make judgments.
-
Okay, if you want to dismiss all of these (and other) files, the interviews with the agents, the interviews with Oswald's friends and associates, Oswald's very critical statements about the Soviet Union when he returned, his erratic behavior there, then what should we use to evaluate what happened in the Soviet Union?
If you think all of this was faked, orchestrated, the documents falsified, the agents all lied, the accounts by the people who knew Oswald staged then where can we go? No matter what evidence is produced can be dismissed as disinformation, as a sort of Potemkin Village account of what happened in Minsk. This is like the conspiracy Left arguing that all of the evidence he didn't work for the CIA is false, that he was a CIA agent or asset.
What are we supposed to use? We look at the evidence, weigh it, consider explanations and make judgments.
SMG--
Well, you ask some tough questions. I don't have a firm answer on when to believe JFKA evidence, documents and statements by witnesses or intel agencies.
Ronald Reagan used to say, "Trust. But verify." Maybe "Do not trust, and verify double," is the catchword for JFKA research.
I will say that even Jeff Morley said the new Russian files are Putin propaganda.
Caveat emptor, and draw your own conclusions.
-
Okay, if you want to dismiss all of these (and other) files, the interviews with the agents, the interviews with Oswald's friends and associates, Oswald's very critical statements about the Soviet Union when he returned, his erratic behavior there, then what should we use to evaluate what happened in the Soviet Union?
If you think all of this was faked, orchestrated, the documents falsified, the agents all lied, the accounts by the people who knew Oswald staged then where can we go? No matter what evidence is produced can be dismissed as disinformation, as a sort of Potemkin Village account of what happened in Minsk. This is like the conspiracy Left arguing that all of the evidence he didn't work for the CIA is false, that he was a CIA agent or asset.
What are we supposed to use? We look at the evidence, weigh it, consider explanations and make judgments.
Dear Steve M.,
Even if the JFKA wasn't a Soviet plot, the Kremlin didn't (and still probably doesn't) want U.S. investigators to realize that a KGB "mole" in the CIA sent former U-2 radar operator Oswald to Moscow on a completely different mission -- to unwittingly protect said "mole" from being uncovered as the person who 1) betrayed CIA's spy, GRU Lt. Col. Pyotr Popov, in Washington, D.C., movie houses in early 1957, and 2) leaked the U-2's specifications to the KGB at some point before April 1958 (according to probable "mole" George Kisevalter -- Popov's CIA handler in West Berlin who sent an alarming cable to CIA headquarters -- and former high-level CIA officer Willian Hood in his 1982 book, "Mole").
-- Tom
-
I think the true nature of the "Oswald letter" is getting lost here. This is a hugely important discovery and validates Hunt's own belief that the KGB were trying to set him up as part of the assassination team. The reason that the letter appeared to be in Oswald's handwriting is BECAUSE it was actually his handwriting - just cleverly combined into a "new" fake letter.
-
I think the true nature of the "Oswald letter" is getting lost here. This is a hugely important discovery and validates Hunt's own belief that the KGB were trying to set him up as part of the assassination team. The reason that the letter appeared to be in Oswald's handwriting is BECAUSE it was actually his handwriting - just cleverly combined into a "new" fake letter.
Yes, we (led by me) got side-tracked to the Belarus/KGB files and whether Oswald was used as a KGB asset. I thought that the Hunt letter was shown to be a forgery about 20-30 years ago? Or dismissed as not reliable? Seems the conspiracy crowd ignored it and they have very low standards when it comes to evidence. At least evidence they like. In any case, this should close the question. That Paese Sera disinformation about Shaw can be the next nonsense to be tossed into the garbage.
One last (hah) post about Oswald and the KGB: We've had numerous sources - defections and reports - supporting the conclusion that the KGB didn't use Oswald, that they viewed him as too risky and unreliable (Q: Has Marina been lying all of these decades? She was a KGB "swallow"?). And that Nosenko for all of his problems *was* truthful when he said this. He may or may not have been a legitimate defector (I think the evidence at this point is he was); but he was truthful when he said the KGB didn't use Oswald.
Oleg Nechiporenko, one of the KGB officers who Oswald talked to in Mexico City, said he reviewed Oswald's file in Moscow and it showed that the KGB had no interest in using Oswald. Too unreliable. He also quoted in his book "Passport to Assassination" from a report that the then head of the KGB, Vladimir Semichastny, sent to the Politburo after the assassination saying the same thing: the KGB didn't recruit Oswald. Oleg Kalugin, the head of KGB counterintelligence, said Nosenko was legitimate (he was seen as a drunken, womanizing buffoon but he was indeed an agent) and the KGB didn't use Oswald. Vitaly Yurchenko, the agent who defected and then changed his mind, said the same thing. Et cetera, et cetera.
Quotes from Semichastny's memo are here: https://www.drivehq.com/file/DFPublishFile.aspx/FileID12897371455/Key2b656lhgowhe/nechiporenko%20and%20semichastny.JPG
If you want to believe they all lied - Semichastny lied to Khrushchev? - and that all of the files were whitewashed and everything was faked by the "inner" KGB as part of a "Monster Plot" then, well, there's nowhere to go. Whatever evidence that is produced that shows the KGB didn't use Oswald will be viewed as evidence that they did use him. This is the "CIA killed JFK" view where everything showing they didn't kill JFK is evidence they did. Since it's all faked.
Up is down and down is up and we'll just go in circles.
-
If you want to believe they all lied - Semichastny lied to Khrushchev? - and that all of the files were whitewashed and everything was faked by the "inner" KGB as part of a "Monster Plot" then, well, there's nowhere to go. Whatever evidence that is produced that shows the KGB didn't use Oswald will be viewed as evidence that they did use him. This is the "CIA killed JFK" view where everything showing they didn't kill JFK is evidence they did. Since it's all faked.
Up is down and down is up and we'll just go in circles.
Excellent point, Steve. I have rarely, if ever, met a JFK conspiracy theorist who is willing to admit when they're wrong and that the evidence does not support their claims. This is another example of how an entire line of thinking could easily be tossed in the trash forever, but the nutjobs at the JFK Education Forum will spin it backwards in a way they think proves their nutty beliefs.
-
Yes, we (led by me) got side-tracked to the Belarus/KGB files and whether Oswald was used as a KGB asset. I thought that the Hunt letter was shown to be a forgery about 20-30 years ago? Or dismissed as not reliable? Seems the conspiracy crowd ignored it and they have very low standards when it comes to evidence. At least evidence they like. In any case, this should close the question. That Paese Sera disinformation about Shaw can be the next nonsense to be tossed into the garbage.
One last (hah) post about Oswald and the KGB: We've had numerous sources - defections and reports - supporting the conclusion that the KGB didn't use Oswald, that they viewed him as too risky and unreliable (Q: Has Marina been lying all of these decades? She was a KGB "swallow"?). And that Nosenko for all of his problems *was* truthful when he said this. He may or may not have been a legitimate defector (I think the evidence at this point is he was); but he was truthful when he said the KGB didn't use Oswald.
Oleg Nechiporenko, one of the KGB officers who Oswald talked to in Mexico City, said he reviewed Oswald's file in Moscow and it showed that the KGB had no interest in using Oswald. Too unreliable. He also quoted in his book "Passport to Assassination" from a report that the then head of the KGB, Vladimir Semichastny, sent to the Politburo after the assassination saying the same thing: the KGB didn't recruit Oswald. Oleg Kalugin, the head of KGB counterintelligence, said Nosenko was legitimate (he was seen as a drunken, womanizing buffoon but he was indeed an agent) and the KGB didn't use Oswald. Vitaly Yurchenko, the agent who defected and then changed his mind, said the same thing. Et cetera, et cetera.
Quotes from Semichastny's memo are here: https://www.drivehq.com/file/DFPublishFile.aspx/FileID12897371455/Key2b656lhgowhe/nechiporenko%20and%20semichastny.JPG
If you want to believe they all lied - Semichastny lied to Khrushchev? - and that all of the files were whitewashed and everything was faked by the "inner" KGB as part of a "Monster Plot" then, well, there's nowhere to go. Whatever evidence that is produced that shows the KGB didn't use Oswald will be viewed as evidence that they did use him. This is the "CIA killed JFK" view where everything showing they didn't kill JFK is evidence they did. Since it's all faked.
Up is down and down is up and we'll just go in circles.
Dear Steve M.,
You're naive if you believe Yuri Nosenko was a true defector-in-place in Geneva in June 1962 and a true physical defector to the U.S. in February 1964 (News Flash: He was either STILL a false defector or had "gone rogue" and got himself to The Land of Milk and Honey (the U.S.) with the "The KGB Had Absolutely Nothing To Do With Former Sharpshooting U-2 Radar Operator LHO In The USSR" disinfo Gribanov had sent him back to Geneva to "lay on" Bagley and (probable mole) Kisevalter), that Aleksei Kulak (FEDORA) really did spy for the FBI -- LOL!, that Igor Kochnov really did collude with the CIA and the FBI, and that Vitaliy Yurchenko was a true "but very, very homesick" defector in 1985, etc., etc., etc.
LOL!
When are you going to get around to reading Bagley's book, "Spy Wars," his 35-page follow-up article, "Ghosts of the Spy Wars," and the parts about Nosenko in John M. Newman's book, "Uncovering Popov's Mole" (which he dedicated to Bagley)?
Here's my Wikipedia article on Bagley.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tennent_H._Bagley
-- Tom
-
https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/soviet-file-given-to-luna-proves-a-kgb-operation
(https://www.onthetrailofdelusion.com/post/soviet-file-given-to-luna-proves-a-kgb-operation)
Soviet File Given to Luna Proves a KGB Operation
A letter written by Lee Harvey Oswald, contained in the Soviet file given to Congresswoman Luna, proves the KGB conducted an operation to influence American public opinion that the CIA was involved in the JFK assassination.
To put it another way, the KGB was aware that rogue CIA elements played a role in JFK's death and sought to bring this fact to the attention of the American people in response to right-wing efforts to blame the Soviet Union for JFK's murder.
This Soviet file provides substantial indirect confirmation of Richard Case Nagell's claims. We know that Nagell was deeply involved in the U.S. intelligence long after he left the Army because he had the real names of several counter-intel CIA officers in his notebook. As I have told you before, Fred, go ask anyone with a TS/SCI clearance how abjectly impossible it would be for a non-intel person to know the real names of several counter-intel CIA personnel. Only someone who had the required clearance and access could know such information.
-
To put it another way, the KGB was aware that rogue CIA elements played a role in JFK's death and sought to bring this fact to the attention of the American people in response to right-wing efforts to blame the Soviet Union for JFK's murder.
This Soviet file provides substantial indirect confirmation of Richard Case Nagell's claims. We know that Nagell was deeply involved in the U.S. intelligence long after he left the Army because he had the real names of several counter-intel CIA officers in his notebook. As I have told you before, Fred, go ask anyone with a TS/SCI clearance how abjectly impossible it would be for a non-intel person to know the real names of several counter-intel CIA personnel. Only someone who had the required clearance and access could know such information.
Dear Comrade Griffith,
"Rogue elements," or KGB "moles"?
Regardless, please tell me, again, how many bad guys and bad gals were involved altogether in the planning, the "patsy-ing," the planting of evidence, the shooting, the getting-away, the altering of photos, films and x-rays, and creating other aspects of the all-important (and evidently ongoing!!!) cover-up?
Just twenty to thirty?
LOL!
-- Tom
PS Your buddy, Putin, says "Keep up the good work!"
-
Yes, we (led by me) got side-tracked to the Belarus/KGB files and whether Oswald was used as a KGB asset. I thought that the Hunt letter was shown to be a forgery about 20-30 years ago? Or dismissed as not reliable? Seems the conspiracy crowd ignored it and they have very low standards when it comes to evidence. At least evidence they like. In any case, this should close the question. That Paese Sera disinformation about Shaw can be the next nonsense to be tossed into the garbage.
One last (hah) post about Oswald and the KGB: We've had numerous sources - defections and reports - supporting the conclusion that the KGB didn't use Oswald, that they viewed him as too risky and unreliable (Q: Has Marina been lying all of these decades? She was a KGB "swallow"?). And that Nosenko for all of his problems *was* truthful when he said this. He may or may not have been a legitimate defector (I think the evidence at this point is he was); but he was truthful when he said the KGB didn't use Oswald.
Oleg Nechiporenko, one of the KGB officers who Oswald talked to in Mexico City, said he reviewed Oswald's file in Moscow and it showed that the KGB had no interest in using Oswald. Too unreliable. He also quoted in his book "Passport to Assassination" from a report that the then head of the KGB, Vladimir Semichastny, sent to the Politburo after the assassination saying the same thing: the KGB didn't recruit Oswald. Oleg Kalugin, the head of KGB counterintelligence, said Nosenko was legitimate (he was seen as a drunken, womanizing buffoon but he was indeed an agent) and the KGB didn't use Oswald. Vitaly Yurchenko, the agent who defected and then changed his mind, said the same thing. Et cetera, et cetera.
Quotes from Semichastny's memo are here: https://www.drivehq.com/file/DFPublishFile.aspx/FileID12897371455/Key2b656lhgowhe/nechiporenko%20and%20semichastny.JPG
If you want to believe they all lied - Semichastny lied to Khrushchev? - and that all of the files were whitewashed and everything was faked by the "inner" KGB as part of a "Monster Plot" then, well, there's nowhere to go. Whatever evidence that is produced that shows the KGB didn't use Oswald will be viewed as evidence that they did use him. This is the "CIA killed JFK" view where everything showing they didn't kill JFK is evidence they did. Since it's all faked.
Up is down and down is up and we'll just go in circles.
Right, because intel agencies would never, ever cover up illegal and/or controversial operations by destroying files, creating fake paper trails, planting false leads, etc., etc. Oh, no! Never!
The degree of gullibility and naivete in the lone-gunman camp is a sight to behold.
And, no, the "Dear Mr. Hunt" note has not been proven to be a forgery. In 1977, the Dallas Morning News had the note analyzed by three handwriting experts, and all three concluded the handwriting was Oswald's (Henry Hurt, Reasonable Doubt, pp. 235-236; Dallas Morning News, February 6, 1977, April 2, 6, 1977, September 26, 1978).
The HSCA handwriting experts were "unable to come to any firm conclusion regarding this particular document," were not able "to accurately determine that it is specifically a forgery and at the same time not able to accurately determine whether or not it corresponds to all of the other writings that we have identified" (4 HSCA 359).
However, speaking for the handwriting panel, Joseph McNally acknowledged that "the writing pattern or the overall letter designs are consistent with those as written" on the other Oswald documents" but that the handwriting in the note "is much more precisely and much more carefully written" than most of Oswald's other writings (4 HSCA 358).
McNally admitted that this precision was not markedly out of the ordinary from other Oswald documents but only "a little bit out of the ordinary," and that the note showed "no great deviation" from Oswald's handwriting in letter design forms:
There is no great deviation from the writing of Oswald insofar as individual letter design forms are concerned. However, it is the method of writing that is so precise and so careful, it is a little bit out of the ordinary from most of the writing that I have seen. (4 HSCA 358)
Let's remember that in that note, Oswald asks a "Mr. Hunt" for information on his next "assignment," and that Jack Ruby visited one of the offices owned by oil billionaire and ardent right-winger H. L. Hunt the day before the assassination. The Hunts were known virulent Kennedy haters. H. L. and his sons Lamar and Nelson paid for a large anti-Kennedy ad in the Dallas Morning News on the day of the assassination that accused JFK of aiding the Communist cause and of being dangerously soft on the Soviet Union and Cuba. I can hear you folks now: "This is all just an incredible, cosmic coincidence! Such wildly unlikely and seemingly mind-boggling coincidences happen all the time! Nothing to see here!"
Finally, it bears repeating that you guys are the ones who are in the decided minority on the JFK case, and that those who reject your lone-gunman fantasy in this forum are among those in the 2/3 to 3/4 majority of the Western world who believe JFK was killed by a conspiracy--not to mention the fact that the percentage of people who agree with you is not very much larger than the percentage of people who believe 9/11 was an inside job.
You guys talk like you're in the mainstream majority, when in fact you're in the decided minority. When a political candidate loses an election and gets only 1/4 to 1/3 of the votes, he is viewed as having lost in a "landslide." If he had any sense, he wouldn't go around talking like he had barely lost, much less like he had won.
-
Right, because intel agencies would never, ever cover up illegal and/or controversial operations by destroying files, creating fake paper trails, planting false leads, etc., etc. Oh, no! Never!
Dear Comrade Griffith,
I'm sure your beloved KGB* would never do that sort of thing.
*Today's SVR and FSB
-- Tom
-
And, no, the "Dear Mr. Hunt" note has not been proven to be a forgery. In 1977, the Dallas Morning News had the note analyzed by three handwriting experts, and all three concluded the handwriting was Oswald's (Henry Hurt, Reasonable Doubt, pp. 235-236; Dallas Morning News, February 6, 1977, April 2, 6, 1977, September 26, 1978).
The HSCA handwriting experts were "unable to come to any firm conclusion regarding this particular document," were not able "to accurately determine that it is specifically a forgery and at the same time not able to accurately determine whether or not it corresponds to all of the other writings that we have identified" (4 HSCA 359).
If you had bothered to read Fred Litwin's original blog post, you'd know that the printed text of the "Mr. Hunt" letter was cleverly copied and pasted directly from a real letter Oswald tried to mail while living in Russia, which the KGB intercepted and NEVER shared until now. So, yes, it's Oswald's handwriting, but made to look like a fake letter he never actually wrote. Do you get it now?
-
If you had bothered to read Fred Litwin's original blog post, you'd know that the printed text of the "Mr. Hunt" letter was cleverly copied and pasted directly from a real letter Oswald tried to mail while living in Russia, which the KGB intercepted and NEVER shared until now. So, yes, it's Oswald's handwriting, but made to look like a fake letter he never actually wrote. Do you get it now?
John M. Newman, in his 1995/2008 book, Oswald and the CIA, took Oswald's alluding in a letter to an earlier letter he had sent to the U.S. Embassy about returning to the U.S. (which first letter the Embassy never received) as an indication that the KGB had intercepted it.
This recent revelation corroborates his theory by telling us that the text and actual handwriting of the first letter was used by the KGB to create the fake "Dear Mr. Hunt" letter.