Jump to content
The Education Forum

Sylvia Odio, Lee Harvey Oswald and Harry Dean


Paul Trejo

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

yes Paul - but Morales was at the top of the operational CIA, the guy that got things done on the ground under orders. So because there is an apparent mole hunt (yes, apparent, and not conclusive at all re Phillips)  it must follow, according to your logic, that Morales, who has been elevated from just another person of interest (you've named a few dozen in the years I've been here) to an integral part of the plot, was involved outside of the chain of command and in league with Banister and Walker rather than with Phillips and Helms. And once again, no direct evidence that Morales knew your protagonists, versus was the top operational officer for the CIA brass. You use Phillips' book, a work of fiction, to support your claim of his non involvement. According to Veciana, who knew Phillips as Bishop, Phillips did not send Oswald to Mexico City so he could get into Cuba and assassinate Castro. The Oswald impersonator did try, successfully, to sheep dip Oswald, which when you think logically about it must have been Phillips' plan for Oswald in MC. And Phillips was in high gear immediately after the assassination, pushing his already in place false stories trying likewise to tie Oswald to Castro. For some illogical reason, you've assumed that the 'mole hunt' proves CIA innocence. Yet even you would admit that CIA had a lot more evidence than any of us have ever seen, such as pictures, voice recordings, close up records of the interrogation of Sylvia Duran - two actually. That is not the action of innocents, certainly not where Phillips is concerned. Yet Phillips enjoyed a long and successful career. What - no punishment for Phillips, no future demotion, when it was his operation that got out of his control? When LBJ and co. decided not to go with the story that Phillips pushed? 

At some point you'll include Phillips in your theory, and draw a new line in the sand between Phillips and the rest of the CIA. You almost have to. There is too much that points to Phillips, and as others have shown here, using a somewhat fictional book by a man who kept his secrets and was an expert first and foremost in propaganda, as proof of your line between Phillps and Morales, is folly. And Even Simpich had said, here, that he is not sure that the mole hunt exonerates Phillips. He is, if I understand him, exonerating Angleton. Of course I don't agree with this either, because I view CIA records as a hall of mirrors. There is no record of Angleton or anyone else saying to anyone that they didn't know who impersonated Oswald. Angleton did leave a small trail which suggests that they were trying to find out who the impersonator was. But this presupposes that they really didn't have pictures, and I think that is a very convenient lie. And Newman, who has spent way more hours and years on MC than Simpich, has not yet to my knowledge changed his view that the most likely candidate for running the show was Angleton. If one makes the logical assumption that pictures did exist of whoever went into the embassies, and phone records exist of all phone calls, and that the CIA kept much of this evidence hidden (still), it follows that records implying they didn't know who did the impersonation(s) were planted to support their own false history. 

Paul B.,

By the numbers:

(1) David Morales was not at the Top of CIA Operations.   He was a CIA Agent, and he was a successful field agent, but he was not as high up as James Jesus Angleton, or even David Atlee Phillips.   David Morales was lower in the hierarhcy, and more emotional -- even passionate -- about Anticommunism.  He personally supervised assassinations in Latin America.  That's not Top Level, that's ground level.

(2) There was a definite CIA Mole Hunt -- this was amply proved by Bill Simpich (2014) beyond any reasonable doubt.  

(3)  David Atlee Phillips was a part of the CIA Mole Hunt.  That's what Bill Simpich showed -- and therefore Phillips was blind to what David Morales had done.  Therefore, David Morales had gone off the reservation, and had joined a Civilian Plot to assassinate JFK.  That's what the evidence shows, in my reading.

(4) Richard Helms, same way.

(5) Howard Hunt joined David Morales in this rogue affair.  Frank Sturgis tempted him, and Hunt bit the apple.  Johnny Martino was also inside this plot.  But Howard Hunt was also nowhere near the Top of the CIA.

(6)  Tommy Graves shows good evidence that David Morales was in New Orleans, near Guy Banister's operation.  Joan Mellen wrote that Guy Banister's people knew about the Top Secret CIA info that JFK was seeking a back-door meeting with Fidel Castro.  David Morales had access to that CIA info.  

(7) Phillip's book, The AMLASH Legacy (1988) is indeed a novel, but when it comes to the CIA, the only books they were allowed to write were novels.  Phillips had this soul-torturing secret he had to share with the world.  I believe he shared it inside the pages of The AMLASH Legacy.

(8)  Antonio Veciana's sighting of Phillips in Dallas with Lee Harvey Oswald in the summer of 1963 remains for me a historical fact.   The context of that meeting was the assassination of Fidel Castro.  That's what Alpha 66 was set up to do.

(9)  The Oswald impersonator tried to link Oswald with Kostikov; and that was superfluous, after Oswald failed miserably to get his visa to Cuba.  It had nothing to do with Oswald's (and Phillip's) plan to get Oswald into Cuba.  It was much darker than the assassination of Fidel Castro.

(10)  The CIA Mole Hunt absolutely proves CIA innocence in the plot to link Oswald with Kostikov -- which, if successful, woudl have led to the invasion of Cuba after the JFK assassination -- at the very least.

(11) The interrogation of Sylvia Duran was a diversion by the Mexican government; not a CIA plot.  

(12) I used to suspect David Atlee Phillips, just as I used to suspect General Edware Lansdale -- but I don't anymore.  Until and unless somebody gives me some material evidence -- instead of just blindly blaming the CIA -- then I will continue to stand by their innocence in the JFK assassination. 

(13) As for Bill Simpich, I have been extolling my interpration of his brilliant book for two years now -- and inviting him to discuss it with me.  I'm still waiting.

(14) Just because the CIA keeps secrets is no reason to blame them for everything and anything.   We still need to see something material.  You don't have it.  You want me to present solid evidence, but the CIA-did-it CT continually fails to present solid evidence.     

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
emphasis.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 246
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Jeez - Paul - Morales was the can do guy, that's what operational means.

there is evidence everywhere you look, including, for gosh sakes, Morales, and Phillips, in Simpich's book. What the ....are you talking about? It's obvious you never watched the one hour interview with Veciana.

Edited by Paul Brancato
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎12‎/‎3‎/‎2016 at 0:42 AM, Paul Brancato said:

Jeez - Paul - Morales was the can do guy, that's what operational means.

there is evidence everywhere you look, including, for gosh sakes, Morales, and Phillips, in Simpich's book. What the ....are you talking about? It's obvious you never watched the one hour interview with Veciana.

Paul B.,

Just because David Morales was a can-do field operative for the CIA, and personally supervised dozens of assassinations in Latin America -- that by itself doesn't demonstrate the David Morales was part of the CIA high-command.   On the contrary -- he was a field worker.  The very opposite.

As for the interview with Alpha 66 leader, Antonio Veciana, his famous video only names CIA people in the context of the Fidel Castro assassination plots.  Veciana himself knew utterly and absolutely nothing about any JFK assassination plot. 

Bill Simpich, IMHO, totally proves that the CIA high-command were baffled by the Wiretapping in Mexico City -- the impersonation of LHO calling Kostikov.  Pure genius.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Just because David Morales was a can-do field operative for the CIA, and personally supervised dozens of assassinations in Latin America -- that by itself doesn't demonstrate the David Morales was part of the CIA high-command.   On the contrary -- he was a field worker.  The very opposite.

 

Do we have any evidence that David Morales assassinated anyone?

Just to head this possible thread off - It was Felix Rodriguez that hunted down Che.

Edited by Chris Newton
whatever
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes - well - Felix R. was so proud of this he pretty much admitted it - when he testified to Congress during the Iran Contra hearings he was wearing Che's watch! Good question about Morales though. 

Paul - where do you get the term 'field worker'? 

Veciana said quite clearly that Phillips did not send Oswald to MC in order to get him into Cuba, that Phillips knew he would never get into Cuba. I never said Veciana knew anything about the JFK plot. I mentioned this because I think your theory about Oswald's involvement with a plan to assassinate Castro is nonsense. I'm sure Veciana would agree with that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Veciana said quite clearly that Phillips did not send Oswald to MC in order to get him into Cuba, that Phillips knew he would never get into Cuba. I never said Veciana knew anything about the JFK plot. I mentioned this because I think your theory about Oswald's involvement with a plan to assassinate Castro is nonsense. I'm sure Veciana would agree with that. 

Paul B.

Please quote the sentence by Veciana in which is "said quite clearly" that DAP didn't sent LHO into MC to go to Cuba.   DAP himself said clearly that he did.

The reason that Veciana knew nothing about the JFK plot is because the only plot on Veciana's radar was the plot against Fidel Castro.  Alpha 66 had no other purpose.

Your CT jumps to a conclusion about DAP -- but the proper context for DAP is Alpha 66, and you're ignoring it for your CT.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul - I've never seen a written version of Veciana's appearance, I think 2013, at one of the researcher symposiums. Someone here posted a link and I watched the whole thing - about an hour. This was the well known day that he finally said that Phillips was Bishop. He had an interpreter and spoke in Spanish. I'll try to fine the link.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Paul - I've never seen a written version of Veciana's appearance, I think 2013, at one of the researcher symposiums. Someone here posted a link and I watched the whole thing - about an hour. This was the well known day that he finally said that Phillips was Bishop. He had an interpreter and spoke in Spanish. I'll try to fine the link.

Paul,

There's a signed statement from Veciana. It's really short, not more than a couple of sentences. Marie Fonzi gave me a copy and I'll try to hunt it down.

I haven't seen a transcript of the presentation that was given but my understanding is that you are correct about what Veciana knew of LHO's activities. Since we don't have any idea what project/operation DAP had Oswald on then there is no way for us to judge what Mr. Veciana, could of - would of - or - should of known.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul B.,

Thanks for sharing the video of Antonio Veciana's hour-long interview.   Very interesting.   Here's my take on it.

(1) Antonio Veciana shows no more knowledge of the JFK assassination than the standard, 20th century CIA-did-it CT.  He comes to the table late. 

(2) His main contribution to history is that he positively affirms that Maurice Bishop was certainly David Atlee Phillips.   

(3) Veciana admits that his main orientation was the ruination of Fidel Castro.

(4) Veciana's arguments include the falsity of the SBT, the death of George De Mohrenschildt and other witnesses, and the silence of RFK.

(5) It has been 50 years since the JFK assassination, and Antonio Veciana finally "reveals" that it was obvious that LHO could never get into Cuba through Mexico City based on his paltry, Fake FPCC resume.

(5.1) Yet that is his own surmise, and actually some of us had realized that as early as 2007 on our own.  IMHO, the MC failure was clearly planned, (probably by Guy Banister and David Ferrie).  

While it is possible that David Atlee Phillips might have also been part of this plan of failure in MC -- Veciana only guesses at it.  We need more material evidence.

The fact that Antonio Veciana comes around to a standard CIA-did-it theory a half-century later does not impress me.  As for the connection of David Atlee Phillips to Lee Harvey Oswald -- that is no longer a revelation, since in 1988 Phillips himself admitted the connection.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Phillips admitted his connection to LHO? 

Veciana clearly states that DAP knew LHO would never get into Cuba through MC. Therefore there was another purpose to the visit to the embassies, if LHO was there at all. Can you just stick to that one fact? And can you stop using DAP fictional account as reality?

leaving aside your assumptions about my theory, Phillips was involved in the smearing of FPCC. So was LHO. So the most 'innocent' view of their connection is that one, not the assassination of Castro. The other not so innocent possibility is that Phillips was involved in sheep dipping Oswald, which would put Phillips in the middle of the Dallas conspiracy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The evidence against David Atlee Phillips as a planner of JFK’s assassination is pretty substantial.  He was responsible for much of the bs. coming out of Mexico City attempting to link “Oswald” with Castro and thus use the alleged assassin to provoke an invasion of Cuba. Dan Hardway said, "I'm firmly convinced that he [Phillips] ran the red-herring, disinformation aspects of the plot. The thing that got him so nervous was when I started mentioning all the anti-Castro Cubans who were in reports filed with the FBI for the Warren Commission and every one of them had a tie I could trace back to him.''

His meeting with “Oswald” witnessed by Mr. Veciana is pretty well known to everyone.  

What few people consider, though, is the frequent communication (including on November 22, 1963) between Jack Ruby and Gordon McLendon of KLIF in Dallas.  McLendon was a life-long friend and associate of Phillips.  

Add Phillips’ name to the likes of Hunt, Sturgis, Angleton, and probably Shackley, Harvey, and even, perhaps, Helms and Dulles, and you have quite a little collection of CIA folks who seem to be involved in the whole sordid mess.  I suspect some military people and a handful of civilians were involved as well, but the links are harder to find.  Others here know more about that than I do.  Mr. Trejo will undoubtedly explain how I, like Dan Hardway and so many others, are completely confused about the fine people in the CIA in 1963.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

What few people consider, though, is the frequent communication (including on November 22, 1963) between Jack Ruby and Gordon McLendon of KLIF in Dallas.  McLendon was a life-long friend and associate of Phillips.  

yep. how interesting... 

"interrelationships..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Phillips admitted his connection to LHO? 

Veciana clearly states that DAP knew LHO would never get into Cuba through MC. Therefore there was another purpose to the visit to the embassies, if LHO was there at all. Can you just stick to that one fact? And can you stop using DAP fictional account as reality?

leaving aside your assumptions about my theory, Phillips was involved in the smearing of FPCC. So was LHO. So the most 'innocent' view of their connection is that one, not the assassination of Castro. The other not so innocent possibility is that Phillips was involved in sheep dipping Oswald, which would put Phillips in the middle of the Dallas conspiracy. 

Paul B., 

Phillips admitted his connection to LHO in his manuscript, The AMLASH Legacy (1988).

Antonio Veciana, leader of Alpha 66, the Fidel Castro assassination group, did not "clearly state" that DAP knew LHO would never get into Cuba through MC until a half-century after the JFK assassination -- and I myself probably wrote that speculation somewhere on the Internet before Veciana stated it.

As for the FPCC, everybody in the FBI, CIA and Right-wing in the USA was involved in smearing the FPCC.  It's a leap to use that to accuse DAP.  We need harder evidence.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:

everybody in the FBI, CIA and Right-wing in the USA was involved in smearing the FPCC

really?

everybody? 

as in, 100%?

90%?

how about 50%...?

what about something that doesn't make you sound "melodramatic," like, "many in the FBI, CIA, etc etc..."...

Paul, you seem to know so much more than everybody else on the planet. Wish the rest of us had your sources...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...