Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members

Author Topic: Silvia Duran and the CIA  (Read 3955 times)

Offline Steve M. Galbraith

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1450
Re: Silvia Duran and the CIA
« Reply #16 on: April 08, 2021, 04:04:03 PM »
Advertisement
Dan Hardaway on the Mexico City investigations:

https://aarclibrary.org/a-cruel-and-shocking-misinterpretation/
Hardway has stated (I'm not sure that he still believes this) that he believes the real Oswald did go to Mexico City but that he was ordered or instructed to do so by David Atlee Phillips. He argues that this was an effort by Phillips to "dangle" Oswald to the Cubans (for some unstated reason) but that he (Phillips) didn't know that two months later Oswald would be the accused assassin of the President.

However, Oswald's very odd behavior at both the Cuban consulate and Soviet Embassy weakens the "dangle" theory. Or does to me. Oswald acted so oddly and violently that the Cubans wanted nothing to do with him. In fact, Azcue said he thought Oswald was perhaps a provocateur. And the Soviets thought he was having some sort of nervous breakdown. This isn't the type of behavior, I don't think, you would engage in if you're trying to convince people that you're someone that can help them.

Hardway explained this in his review of the Veciana book: https://aarclibrary.org/a-professional-conspirator-questions-about-antonio-veciana-and-his-book-trained-to-kill/

Yes, he no longer believes, as he once did, that Veciana was truthful about seeing Phillips with Oswald (as he says in the above review). So I have no idea how he connects Phillips to Oswald. He does repeat the argument that the CIA was trying to discredit the FPCC and that Oswald may have been either a witting or unwitting participant in some sort of operation. It's all unclear to me what he believes. If Phillips ordered Oswald to MC then he wasn't an unwitting asset right? Frankly, he throws out a lot of claims - he clearly believes the CIA (or elements) were involved in the assassination - but his evidence for this is, for me, extremely weak.

The Contreras claims have been, in my view, completely disproven. As in: Contreras spoke no English; Oswald spoke little Spanish so how did they communicate? Furthermore, Contreras said in one interview that the meeting occurred in 1959 or 1969 1960 which was impossible because Oswald was still in the Soviet Union at that time. And Contreras said he wasn't living in Mexico City in 1963.

At to Duran: Duran said that she worked one week - the week of Oswald's visit - at the Cuban consulate. She had replaced the previous secretary who had been killed in a car accident and that she was a temporary replacement until the new replacement arrived from Cuban. The Friday that she met Oswald (I think it was definitely Oswald) was she said the last day she worked in that capacity. That's a helluva week of work. I hope she got a bonus. After 50 plus years there's been nothing for me indicating that she worked for the CIA.

« Last Edit: April 08, 2021, 06:47:30 PM by Steve M. Galbraith »

JFK Assassination Forum

Re: Silvia Duran and the CIA
« Reply #16 on: April 08, 2021, 04:04:03 PM »


Offline Jon Banks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1205
Re: Silvia Duran and the CIA
« Reply #17 on: April 08, 2021, 06:37:58 PM »
Hardway has stated (I'm not sure that he still believes this) that he believes the real Oswald did go to Mexico City but that he was ordered or instructed to do so by David Atlee Phillips. He argues that this was an effort by Phillips to "dangle" Oswald to the Cubans (for some unstated reason) but that he (Phillips) didn't know that two months later Oswald would be the accused assassin of the President. However, Oswald's very odd behavior at both the Cuban consulate and Soviet Embassy weakens that theory. Or does to me. Oswald acted so oddly and violently that the Cubans wanted nothing to do with him. Perhaps he wasn't following the script but I don't think you're going to act like that if you want to establish a relationship with them.

Oswald's mission was intended to fail. Who goes to an embassy on a weekend? Whomever Oswald was working with wanted the intelligence agencies in Mexico City to know he was there. That was the goal, not getting to Cuba.

He may have been an unwitting actor but I find it difficult to believe that he wouldn't have caught on to the possibility that he was being manipulated by his handlers.

Hardway explained this in his review of the Veciana book: https://aarclibrary.org/a-professional-conspirator-questions-about-antonio-veciana-and-his-book-trained-to-kill/

Yes, he no longer believes, as he once did, that Veciana was truthful about seeing Phillips with Oswald (as he says in the above review). So I have no idea how he connects Phillips to Oswald. He does repeat the argument that the CIA was trying to discredit the FPCC and that Oswald may have been either a witting or unwitting participant in some sort of operation. It's all unclear to me what he believes. If Phillips ordered Oswald to MC then he wasn't an unwitting asset right? Frankly, he throws out a lot of claims - he clearly believes the CIA (or elements) were involved in the assassination - but his evidence for this is, for me, extremely weak.

The attempts to discredit the FPCC did in fact happen and it's plausible that Oswald's weird FPCC/DRE stuff in the summer of 1963 was related to that program.

It's very plausible that both in 1959 and 1963, LHO had a relationship with US intelligence.

However, it's not clear that the New Orleans/Mexico City stuff was directly related to JFK's assassination.

It's just as plausible that Oswald both worked with Intelligence agents on some stuff but acted alone in JFK's assassination.


The attempts to paint Oswald as a deranged lunatic just don't match up with his behavior in Dallas.

For some reason, he decided to draw attention to himself while in Russia, New Orleans, and Mexico but almost always kept a low profile in Dallas. An unhinged lunatic wouldn't have that kind of discipline.
« Last Edit: April 08, 2021, 06:38:29 PM by Jon Banks »