Bill Simpich's State Secret

[Larry Hancock]

Paul,  Morales/Robertson/Harvey and Roselli were all close, socially in Miami at some points and most importantly in the Castro assassination project...of course Morales worked for Shackley but apparently they were not close other than in a reporting sense and in pursuit of deniablity Morales had a lot of autonomy.   Phillips and Morales were close operationally in the sense that Morales JM/WAVE operations supported certain projects which also involved Mexico City...for example both men were involved, along with Tony Sforza, in a major ex-filtration project in November 1963 - apparently related to Castro's sister. That operation was real and sanctioned, whether or not its provided cover for something deeper is another story.

[Paul Trejo]

11 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

Paul,  Morales/Robertson/Harvey and Roselli were all close, socially in Miami at some points and most importantly in the Castro assassination project...of course Morales worked for Shackley but apparently they were not close other than in a reporting sense and in pursuit of deniablity Morales had a lot of autonomy.   Phillips and Morales were close operationally in the sense that Morales JM/WAVE operations supported certain projects which also involved Mexico City...for example both men were involved, along with Tony Sforza, in a major ex-filtration project in November 1963 - apparently related to Castro's sister. That operation was real and sanctioned, whether or not its provided cover for something deeper is another story.

Larry,

This is a useful portrait.  It apparently answers Tommy's question -- verifying that Bill Simpich didn't mean to suggest that David Morales as a "Mole" was a Mole for Russia.

Of course David Morales was never a Mole for Russia -- David Morales was a fanatic Anticommunist, and led countless assassinations in Latin America against the Communists.  It was this rabid Anticommunism that led David Morales to the next level -- beyond which higher-level CIA officials would never go -- namely, TREASON.

David Morales evidently worked with Frank Sturgis in this TREASON  -- and we know this because CIA agent E. Howard Hunt named Frank Sturgis as the man who invited him to the plot to assassinate JFK -- and Hunt accepted.

Frank Sturgis was not a CIA officer -- but only a hot-headed mercenary.  Frank Sturgis, furthermore, not only confessed to a role in the JFK assassination -- but he boasted about it.

You, Larry, have amply documented the role of other non-CIA operatives in the JFK assassination, namely, John Martino and Johnny Roselli, working out of Miami.  Yet we must be careful to recognize that they were not CIA agents, either.  Even though they were sometimes paid on a contract basis for paramilitary raids on Cuba (as were Interpen, Alpha 66, La Sambra and many other groups), they remained FREE, INDEPENDENT CIVILIANS..

It is this CIVILIAN status that interests me most, because according to Jeff Caufield's recent book, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: the Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015), the JFK assassination was a CIVILIAN plot.

We have evidence that Frank Sturgis seduced E. Howard Hunt to join the JFK plot -- so perhaps we might ask if Frank Sturgis also seduced David Morales to join the plot.   (Once Morales joined, Martino and Roselli would follow immediately, IMHO).

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited May 2, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Larry Hancock]

Evidence Paul, that Sturgis invited Hunt?  Other than Hunt's story passed to his son what evidence would you cite.  That evidence has been deconstructed in many places and I've done my own part in SWHT to show how questionable it is...beyond that we know from actual records that Morales did not trust Hunt and felt he could never keep his mouth shut, making it further unlikely he would involve him in anything operational.  So please cite the additional evidence that  you are referring to...as to Sturgis and Morales...that is simply laughable to anyone who really has researched both men,  Morales the ultimate dark operator and Sturgis, the guy always in the newspapers and talking to reporters, yeah, like that's going to happen...

Not to mention that we have Sturgis taped conversation with his lawyer which reveals he only talked about the JFK matter in hopes he could stimulate media and maybe stir up a libel suit. Debra played that one at a Lancer conference years ago.

[Paul Trejo]

Larry,

The death bed confession of E. Howard Hunt is anything but laughable.

That said, there is room for criticism of it.  Yet just because it isn't PERFECT, that doesn't mean that its NEGLIGIBLE.

For example, Howard Hunt drew a picture (not words) that placed LBJ at the top of his JFK plotting chart.

I interpret that to mean that Howard Hunt refused to regard himself as a TRAITOR, and instead regarded his TREASON as a patriotic act, because in his own mind he was really supporting LBJ.

NOT because LBJ asked for this (otherwise Hunt would have said so, in words).   But only because Hunt knew that every loyal CIA agent must act at the request of a US President.  That's the only reason that Howard Hunt drew the box with LBJ on his plot.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited May 3, 2017 by Paul Trejo
typos

[Paul Trejo]

On 5/1/2017 at 3:16 PM, Bill Simpich said:

Hi Paul,

My hypothesis that David  Morales was a mole stands.  You and I go to different places about what that means.   As it is a hypothesis, it could have been another AMOT, who reported to Morales.  Or the AMOT could have reported to someone else, although I think Morales was the most likely one to get the news. 

Furthermore, Morales and Gen. Walker were not close allies - Morales' allies were Bill Harvey, Rip Robertson, Clark Simmons...that path would lead to Mafia guys like wiretap expert Richard Cain.  Morales was buddies with Mafia guys who knew Cain (and Sam Giancana)...like Johnny Roselli.  Navy guys like Chuck Feeney.  I went to some length to say that's what I think...while staying open to new evidence because there are many other avenues of evidence to consider.  

I think it is more valuable to focus on the social relationships between the various individuals involved in the JFK story, because there is a great deal more that we can know and need to know.  If our investigation is built on marshy ground, it will lead to weak and unreliable results.

That is why I am more interested in light than heat.  What I see too often in the Education Forum - and especially on this thread - people forcefully fighting over their pet theories and not listening to one another.  I'm an attorney, I see this kind of thing every day, and don't think it's productive. 

I am calling for a spirit of cooperation where we listen to one another and don't respond in a heated fashion to items of evidence that challenge our own beliefs.   The cooler head prevails.

With that said, I'm all for the spirit of inquiry.  I agree that it is important to say what you think, and put together a hypothesis based on what you have learned. It's also important to treat each other with respect.  Especially our adversaries.

Bill

Hi Bill,

I agree with your thinking fully, and I positively respond to your call for a spirit of cooperation.

In that spirit, I will agree that you and Larry Hancock have analyzed the data about David Morales with a fine-toothed comb.

Your connection of David Morales with peers in the CIA, as well as with flunkies in the Mafia and dirty cops like Richard Cain -- is invaluable.

I agree with you solidly that there is not yet any direct link found between David Morales and General Walker.  Nothing direct.

Yet I will still seek this along with the recent work by Jeff Caufield, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy (2015).  I think that more research is warranted into the Underground Radical Right as centered around General Walker -- with hooks into the Minutemen, and therefore into Castro Raid groups like Interpen, Alpha 66 and La Sambra (to name just a few).

To repeat -- I agree with you today that I have no solid evidence today linking David Morales to General Walker.

I do expect to find some evidence in the future, however.  For example -- Tommy Graves proposes that David Morales was in New Orleans observing Lee Harvey Oswald (LHO).  Based on his novel, I believe that David Atlee Phillips (DAP) was also in New Orleans observing LHO. 

HOWEVER -- if you are correct, and David Morales was indeed the "Mole" in Mexico City, then (by my reading) even DAP didn't know that David Morales was involved in a plot to frame LHO for the forthcoming assassination of JFK.   DAP thought LHO was part of his plot to kill Fidel Castro.

If (and only if) David Morales was working with Guy Banister to frame LHO for a forthcoming assassination -- then we might find a linkage here -- where Jeff Caufield finds one -- the linkage between Guy Banister and General Walker.

Thanks, Bill, for your rational, level-headed response.   I respect your call for cooperation.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited May 2, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Thomas Graves]

On 11/1/2013 at 0:16 AM, Bill Simpich said:

LOL, Tommy. I noticed that the above-mentioned Chapter 10 I referred you to was posted elsewhere on this forum. I went there and the main response my article got was from you! And I never wrote you back. So let me thank you now for your feedback and your support.

Bill

You're welcome, Bill.

--  Toomby

[Thomas Graves]

On 11/1/2013 at 0:05 AM, Bill Simpich said:

On the Nagell question - I love Dick Russell's book, and think there's a lot to the story, I wonder if Nagell got arrested so he wouldn't be associated with Mexico City. But the documentary portion of Nagell's story doesn't mesh easily with the story I tell, so I left it out. I try to tell maybe a couple more stories than I should as it is.

Good question on Goodpasture - no I don't think she knew about [Robert E.] Webster. But Egerter did - she helped create the two letters of Oct 10. Letter one to Mexico City provided the Mystery Man description of LHO - the one they knew. Letter two to FBI, State and Navy provided the Webster-like description of LHO - the one they had known since 1960.

Why? It was a molehunt, described in the upcoming Chapter 5 of State Secret. If you want an advance look at my hypothesis, go to Oped News and see the Twelve Who Built the Oswald Legend, Chapter 10.

Is this the one you're talkin' about, Bill?

--  Toomby

Edited May 16, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas Graves]

On 4/18/2017 at 11:58 PM, Thomas Graves said:

Thanks Larry.

I'm glad I just now noticed this informative post of yours.

--  Tommy

PS  I wonder if Bill Bright was involved, somehow.

bumped

click on the curved "go back arrow" lurking in the upper right-hand corner by the "share" icon to see the post it's replying to

Edited May 20, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas Graves]

On 5/1/2017 at 8:22 PM, Larry Hancock said:

[...] Morales/Robertson/Harvey and Roselli were all close, socially in Miami at some points and most importantly in the Castro assassination project...of course Morales worked for Shackley but apparently they were not close other than in a reporting sense and in pursuit of deniability. Morales had a lot of autonomy.   Phillips and Morales were close operationally in the sense that Morales' JM/WAVE operations supported certain projects which also involved Mexico City...for example both men were involved, along with Tony Sforza, in a major ex-filtration project in November 1963 - apparently related to Castro's sister. That operation was real and sanctioned, whether or not its provided cover for something deeper is another story.

bumped

I still think "Neck Scratcher" Morales was captured in James Doyle's film while monitoring (or mentoring?) LHO in New Orleans on 8/09/63.

Comments?

--  Tommy

PS  Too bad Bill looked at the wrong guy when I tried to point him out to him in the video.

I don't see what's so hard about it.  After all, there's only one guy in the film who's scratching his neck, and right in front of the camera!

Edited January 23, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Paul Trejo]

On 8/26/2014 at 6:43 PM, Paul Brancato said:

...I hope Bill Simpich checks in here once in a while, as I mainly want to ask him to clarify and possibly debate his point that Morales ran the assassination without the knowledge of Harvey, Shackley, Phillips, and others higher in the chain of command of CIA like King, Angleton, Dulles, etc.

if I understand Simpich correctly, he thinks that were Phillips involved in hijacking Oswald from covert anti-FPCC operations, and helping to set him up as the patsy, he would have taken more precautions after the assassination, as he left plenty of clues that might have made him a suspect.

Simpich also claimed that In his opinion the most likely suspect to have hijacked Oswald and set him up was Morales, claiming that Morales was experienced enough to know that CIA would cover his tracks rather than risk exposing Mexico City covert surveillance and wiretapping of the Cuban and Soviet embassies and their staffs.

I would argue that if anyone knew how to play the system it was Phillips. Wouldn't he likewise have known that he was in no danger of exposure for the same reasons as Morales?

...Simpich has made a very good case for the direct involvement of a cast of CIA and Mafia characters directly related to Operation 40, but seems to think that the operation was basically rogue.

...Not finding adequate proof of orders from Shackley or Harvey or Dulles or Helms, and finding plenty of reasons to doubt their involvement, doesn't prove, at least to me, that they weren't involved.

Paul B., 

It seems to me that you and I see the work of Bill Simpich through the same lens here. 

I think that the next step is to combine the work of Bill Simpich with the work of Jim Garrison.  How can it be possible that Guy Banister of 544 Camp Street could be involved with CIA rogues in Mexico City?  I think that's the new question.

I don't see Guy Banister as merely trying to "discredit" the FPCC, or even trying to "infiltrate" the FPCC.   Instead, Banister used LHO to create a Fake FPCC, which had only one member -- LHO.

Then, Guy Banister used David Ferrie, Clay Shaw, Ed Butler, Carlos Bringuier, Jack S. Martin, Fred Crisman and Tommy Beckham to frame LHO to look like a real FPCC officer.  This had no impact on the FPCC, so why would the FBI or CIA high-command be interested in Banister's Fake FPCC?

Now -- here is another point -- I'd like to ask your opinion: Marina Oswald testified that LHO took all these New Orleans newspaper clippings to Mexico City, to present himself as a Fake FPCC officer.  This also matches the Lopez Report (2003) which actually prints those newspaper clippings, along with the result of LHO's Fake FPCC resume which he showed to Sylvia Duran (complete with photographs) and to Eusebio Azcue.

Marina Oswald agrees with the CIA on this point.   Do you suspect that Marina Oswald was working with the CIA?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited May 22, 2017 by Paul Trejo
typos

[B. A. Copeland]

On 4/18/2017 at 4:01 PM, Paul Trejo said:

Yet this is only your subjective feeling, sir.  What about something solid?

As for Jim Garrison, he pushed as hard as he could and found nothing.

That's saying a lot in my book.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Subjective? No lol. On what basis? I've read up much and just feel that, he too, has the fingerprints of intel. all over him.

[Thomas Graves]

On 5/20/2017 at 7:49 AM, Thomas Graves said:

[...]

I still think Dave "Neck Scratcher" Morales was captured in James Doyle's film while monitoring (or mentoring?) LHO in New Orleans on 8/09/63.

Comments?

--  Tommy

PS  Too bad Bill Simpich looked at the wrong guy when I tried to point Morales (imho) out to him in the "Black Op Radio, episode #04" video.

I don't see what's so hard about it.  After all, there's only one guy in the film who's scratching his neck, and right in front of the camera!

--  Tommy 

Edited a teensy weensy bit and bumped.

-- 

[Thomas Graves]

On 5/20/2017 at 7:49 AM, Thomas Graves said:

On 5/01/2017 at 8:22 PM, Larry Hancock said: 

"[...] Morales/Robertson/Harvey and Roselli were all close, socially in Miami at some points and most importantly in the Castro assassination project...of course Morales worked for Shackley but apparently they were not close other than in a reporting sense and in pursuit of deniability. Morales had a lot of autonomy.   Phillips and Morales were close operationally in the sense that Morales' JM/WAVE operations supported certain projects which also involved Mexico City...for example both men were involved, along with Tony Sforza, in a major ex-filtration project in November 1963 - apparently related to Castro's sister. That operation was real and sanctioned, whether or not its provided cover for something deeper is another story."

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

I replied: 

"I still think 'Neck Scratcher' David Sanchez Morales was captured in James Doyle's film while monitoring (or mentoring?) LHO in New Orleans on 8/09/63.

Comments?

--  Tommy

PS  Too bad Bill Simpich looked at the wrong guy when I tried to point him out to him in the video.

I don't see what's so hard about it, really.  After all, there's only one guy in the film who's scratching his neck, and right in front of the camera, too!"

 

edited a teensy weensy bit and bumped, with this addition:

 

Neck Scratcher (Morales?) can be seen ... uh ... scratching his neck ... at 3:57 of this Black Op Radio video.  ( Hint:  He's the only guy scratching his neck.  At ... uh ... 3:57 )

 

--  Tommy  

Edited February 24, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas Graves]

On 2/26/2014 at 9:25 PM, Tony Goin said:

.......

(Bill Simpich had written:)

 

Soviet Union section

  (xxxxxxx)

 

C/SR/CI Pete Bagley (19)62- (Angleton's man)

 

......

 

A question for Bill Simpich.

Bill, why do you say "Soviet Union (sic) section (sic), Pete Bagley -- Angleton's man" ?

Do you not realize that CIA's Soviet Russia Division-Counterintelligence department was independent of Angleton's Counterintelligence Staff?

Do you not realize that Angleton and Bagley disagreed from time to time?

Have you not read Bagleys 2007 book "Spy Wars" (nor his follow-up PDF, "Ghosts of the Spy Wars" (2015))?

 

--  Tommy 

Edited March 5, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Michael Clark]

Question for Bill Simpich...

I don't expect you to be able to answer, but it is worth a shot. Earlier in this thread you posted some links. One link is noted in relationship to James McCord Jr.. yet, I don't see any mention or relationship with Mr. McCord. If you can fill-out the relationship or significance I would apreciate it.

James McCord  DD/P/SR 59  CI/LS 59-63

SRS  CIOPS 63 64