William Kelly

Bill Simpich's State Secret

308 posts in this topic

9 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

I assume that it was the Soviet Embassy's phone that was tapped in this instance, not the Cuban Consulate's phone?

(Yes, I do realize that the phone call was allegedly made from the Cuban Consulate to the Soviet Embassy.)

--  Tommy :sun

Tommy,

Although Simpich does say that the Soviet phones were the main target -- he asks the question about the Cuban consulate telephones being tapped in the context of the so-called program, LI-FEAT.  This was a top-secret operation by Win Scott and Anne Goodpasture, and they regularly lied about it to everybody who asked -- including the US Congress.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

16 hours ago, B. A. Copeland said:

My goodness are you serious...?

B.A. Copeland,

Well, serious is a weird word when speaking about Oswald's Marine buddy, Kerry Thornley.  

Have you seen the worthwhile entry in Wikipedia about Kerry Thornley?

Here's the Wikipedia link:   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerry_Wendell_Thornley

It's the right starting point.  From there, review his WC testimony.  He's a colorful character.

Here's the WC testimony linkhttp://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/thornley.htm

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

B.A. Copeland,

Well, serious is a weird word when speaking about Oswald's Marine buddy, Kerry Thornley.  

Have you seen the worthwhile entry in Wikipedia about Kerry Thornley?

Here's the Wikipedia link:   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerry_Wendell_Thornley

It's the right starting point.  From there, review his WC testimony.  He's a colorful character.

Here's the WC testimony linkhttp://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/testimony/thornley.htm

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Trust me, I know of Thornley and I never trusted him, I don't like him and he should've been cross examined and thrown into jail. I smell "CIA" all over him as most likely an important asset even behind the strange counterculture posing. Garrison (of course) was onto him...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, B. A. Copeland said:

Trust me, I know of Thornley and I never trusted him, I don't like him and he should've been cross examined and thrown into jail. I smell "CIA" all over him as most likely an important asset even behind the strange counterculture posing. Garrison (of course) was onto him...

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On April 15, 1978, Garrison won election, for Louisiana's 4th Circuit Court of Appeal judgeship, a position for which he was later reelected and which he held until his death

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 4/17/2017 at 5:04 PM, Larry Hancock said:

Bill did look into it and I assisted; the answer depends on where the call was recorded. There were two options, one at the local safehouse doing the routine phone tap operation or off the consolidated system at the telephone central office where arrangements had been made for bulk tap recording.  The CIA recorded tapes at both locations. The CIA itself would have quickly determined which of the two knowing where the tape was recorded.  As I recall we felt that it was most likely the tape was from the local monitoring unit...which means the call was either made from inside the building...or actually from the safehouse itself using the bridge tap on the phone line.  Unfortunately there was no way to be absolutely certain; however as I said, the CIA might well have determined that it was one of their own people or a contract employee who had done it based on the source of the tape.

Thanks Larry.

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

--  Tommy :sun

PS  I wonder if Bill Bright was involved, somehow.

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Newbies, of course, will probably not realize that CIA officer Bright was instrumental in making Lee Harvey Oswald appear, in the CIA's computerized Biographical Registry data base, to have the same physical attributes as another "defector", 165 lb.- Robert E. Webster, when he (Bright) apparently collaborated in early 1960 with the Marguerite-Oswald-interviewing FBI agent John Fain to do so, and that Bright was, in September-October, 1963, a rather recently-arrived "floating helper" at the Mexico City CIA Station.

--  Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Bright is important.  Whether or not Oswald was a spy - and I think he was, at least in his own mind - Marina and June got to go to the USA with him, while the State Dept lent him some money, and meanwhile the military took away his honorable discharge so he was broke and completely manipulable - the CI crowd was manipulating his records.  From Chapter 1 of my book:

"WB" (William Bright) told the registry to "index page 7", which is the page in the Fain memo that has an inaccurate hand-written description of Oswald as “CIT: USSR, Res. Moscow, USSR, ex-U.S. Marine, who upon his discharge from Marine Corps, Sept 59 traveled to USSR and renounced his U.S. citizenship.” Marguerite Oswald never said that Oswald was a Soviet citizen – only that Oswald had “apparently sought Soviet citizenship”.

See how these notes from Fain’s memo were preserved on this index card; however the clerk accurately fixed the writing to say that Oswald traveled “to renounce his US citizenship” rather than “renounced his US citizenship”. The claim that Oswald was a Soviet citizen, however, was not corrected. Did Bright write the note himself? Based on a quick review of the meager amount of Bright’s handwriting that is available, I can’t rule it out yet.

This inaccurate handwritten description was on the same page as the physical description as "5 foot 10, 165 lbs, light brown wavy hair, blue eyes".[ 27 ] Now, if anyone turned from the index card to page 7 of Fain’s memo, the reader would immediately see Oswald’s inaccurate physical description.

The FBI’s version of page 7 does not include the handwritten description. It’s also possible that page 7 was indexed specifically for the “5 foot 10, 165 pounds” description, the handwriting was added later, and the index card was created last.

In either case, Bright had now successfully shoehorned the Webster-like description of Oswald into the CIA’s indexing system. Thanks to Bright focusing on this particular page to be indexed – rather than another page that did accurately describe Oswald’s citizenship status - the CIA now had quick access to an inaccurate description of Oswald’s citizenship status and an inaccurate physical description of Oswald."

Although I appreciate that Paul Trejo likes my hypothesis, I should add that we don't agree on a host of issues and Paul's views are frequently not mine.  For example, I don't think that Morales "went rogue".  Secondly, whether Morales was even involved with Mexico City is simply a hypothesis.  I based it on the likelihood that it would have been an AMOT inside the intercept station that manipulated the "voice of Oswald and Duran", or the transcript itself.  If the Oswald character actually spoke terrible Russian and terrible English as a couple of the records indicate, the one who did the impersonation was probably a native Spanish speaker.  Again, just a hypothesis.

I think a better conversation is whether there was a split (based on social class and personal ideologies) between Angleton, Scott, Goodpasture and Phillips on one hand, and Harvey,  Morales, Rip Robertson, and their Mafia buddies on the other.  If Carl Oglesby was here, he would describe Dick Helms and Allen Dulles as "the Yankees", and what I've described below as a "split within the Cowboys". 

Resolving my question about a possible split doesn't resolve who led the forces against JFK, but this type of discussion sheds more light than heat.

Bill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now