Marina, the Commission, and Mexico City

[David Josephs]

Quote

This is why I like the Lopez Report.  It relies on data and not assumptions.

Except for the assumption that the WCR got his travel to and from correctly so they did not even bother looking into it.

The one part of their investigation with physically altered evidence and a chain of info..  

My guess is even they had to be very careful with what was investigated about Mexico City.

Does the Lopez report offer any evidence of his actually being there?  (as I ran thru it all I see as proof is the transcriptions which had already been shown not to be Oswald's voice...

No photo, no direct corroboration that the person using the name was actually Oswald, in fact contradiction that it was Oswald while both Azcue and Duran state it was not the man Ruby killed at their office...

What part of the report proves he was there Jim?  Piccolo?

[James DiEugenio]

That is correct David.  And I agree with the implication that they were advised not to go into that aspect of the MC riddle.  

As per your question:  it is very hard to find any credible evidence that LHO was there.

The people who say he was there put forth the visa pic.  But the point is the FBI surveyed every passport photo shop in a five mile radius of either embassy and no one recalled him.  The other thing is Duran's name in his notebook.  But as Garrison pointed out, that is printed.

So if you balance that against what you have on the negative side, IMO, the weight of the evidence seems to indicate he was not there, and its not really close.

Edited March 15, 2017 by James DiEugenio

[David Josephs]

Quote

So if you balance that against what you have on the negative side, IMO, the weight of the evidence seems to indicate he was not there, and its not really close.

ok... well, that's 2 of us!

[Paul Trejo]

On 3/14/2017 at 1:23 PM, George Sawtelle said:

Paul T

Morales was afraid to sign out for the 201 file but the mole wasn´t? Makes a lot of sense.

How could the mole be working within CIA protocol if he was working alone unbeknownst to his boss?

You´re just singing to the choir with the rest of your info.

George,

There's no choir here, as my CT is in the minority.  Most readers here hold a CIA-did-it CT.

David Morales, the alleged Mole, had flunkies under him.  Whoever supplied FBI agent James Hosty with the October 18, 1963 memo linking Lee HENRY Oswald to KGB assassin Kostikov is a major suspect in my opinion.

Regards 

--Paul Trejo 

[Thomas Graves]

13 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

George,

There's no choir here, as my CT is in the minority.  Most readers here hold a CIA-did-it CT.

David Morales, the alleged Mole, had flunkies under him.  Whoever supplied FBI agent James Hosty with the October 18, 1963 memo linking Lee HENRY Oswald to KGB assassin Kostikov is a major suspect in my opinion.

Regards 

--Paul Trejo 

Dear Paul,

What, in your humble opinion, is the significance of the Lee HENRY Oswald in your scenario?

Evidence of a (piggybacked?) three-year-old mole hunt, or what?

--  Tommy

[David Josephs]

On 3/15/2017 at 4:04 PM, Paul Trejo said:

George,

There's no choir here, as my CT is in the minority.  Most readers here hold a CIA-did-it CT.

David Morales, the alleged Mole, had flunkies under him.  Whoever supplied FBI agent James Hosty with the October 18, 1963 memo linking Lee HENRY Oswald to KGB assassin Kostikov is a major suspect in my opinion.

Regards 

--Paul Trejo 

Hosty got it from his IN&S contact JAMES WOOSLEY, Paul...    If you took the time to read the work with the same attention to detail as you read Simpich, you may find out a few things that can help you come to supported conclusions...  

Rather than wildly guessing and making accusation based in nonsense.

You will find the FBI & IN&S are in one place while CIA and STATE are on another path - the one claiming the Castro connection.

Bill Simpich was amazingly helpful to me in pursuit of these docs with fewer and fewer redactions.  the I&NS cc is blacked out in most copies.

This letter is also the impetus for KOSTIKOV...  Win Scott takes what was said on one of the transcripts and concludes it was KOSTIKOV without proof or follow-up. I believe It was learned he was not there at all that weekend.  

 

 

Edited March 28, 2017 by David Josephs

[Thomas Graves]

15 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

Hosty got it from his IN&S contact JAMES WOOSLEY, Paul...    If you took the time to read the work with the same attention to detail as you read Simpich, you may find out a few things that can help you come to supported conclusions...  

Rather than wildly guessing and making accusation based in nonsense.

You will find the FBI & IN&S are in one place while CIA and STATE are on another path - the one claiming the Castro connection.

Bill Simpich was amazingly helpful to me in pursuit of these docs with fewer and fewer redactions.  the I&NS cc is blacked out in most copies.

This letter is also the impetus for KOSTIKOV...  Win Scott takes what was said on one of the transcripts and concludes it was KOSTIKOV without proof or follow-up. I believe It was learned he was not there at all that weekend.  

 

Dear David,

Read all 600-plus mish-mashed pages of misinterpreted, misquoted, and spun "evidence" which "clearly proves" the Harvey and Lee and two Marguerites theory?

Heck, even Dawn isn't willing to do that, last I heard.

--  Tommy

By contrast, State Secret is not only relatively short and credible, it's readable, too.  Simpich doesn't have to use Armstrong's "shovelfuls-of-hot-stinking-spaghetti-thrown-against-the-wall" approach to try to be ... convincing. 

Now for a question:  What are the differences between the documents that were on those two different paths you enumerated?  Any "barium meal" type differences?

Edited March 15, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas Graves]

A question for David Josephs:

James P. Hosty got the "Lee HENRY Oswald" document from (former CIA director) James Woolsey, or 1963 Dallas I.N.S. clerk / agent / officer Jeff Woolsey?  (Wow, you really are fixated on the CIA, aren't you?)

 

Scroll down to the bottom of the third page.  http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/FBI Records Files/105-82555/105-82555 Section 001/105-82555 001c.pdf

 

--  Tommy

PS --  See how easy it is to make mistakes, David?  Your buddy, Armstrong, and the "witnesses" he spoke to (or read about) made lots and lots of them.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Paul Trejo]

1 hour ago, Thomas Graves said:

Dear David,

Read all 600-plus mish-mashed pages of misinterpreted, misquoted, and spun "evidence" which "clearly proves" the Harvey and Lee and two Marguerites theory?

Heck, even Dawn isn't willing to do that, last I heard.

--  Tommy

By contrast, State Secret is not only relatively short and credible, it's readable, too.  Simpich doesn't have to use Armstrong's "shovelfuls-of-hot-stinking-spaghetti-thrown-against-the-wall" approach to try to be ... convincing... 

Hear, hear!

[Paul Trejo]

2 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Hosty got it from his IN&S contact JAMES WOOSLEY, Paul...    If you took the time to read the work with the same attention to detail as you read Simpich, you may find out a few things that can help you come to supported conclusions...  

Rather than wildly guessing and making accusation based in nonsense.

You will find the FBI & IN&S are in one place while CIA and STATE are on another path - the one claiming the Castro connection.

Bill Simpich was amazingly helpful to me in pursuit of these docs with fewer and fewer redactions.  the I&NS cc is blacked out in most copies.

This letter is also the impetus for KOSTIKOV...  Win Scott takes what was said on one of the transcripts and concludes it was KOSTIKOV without proof or follow-up. I believe It was learned he was not there at all that weekend.  

David.

You misunderstand me again.

Jeff Woolsey from the INS, was only the person who told James Hosty about this CIA memo, but Woolsey did not write it -- nor did Woolsey even hand it to Hosty.  

After Woolsey told Hosty about it, Hosty said, "Can I see the communication?"   Woolsey replied, "I can't.  Sorry Jim."  This is according to Hosty himself, in his book, Assignment Oswald (1996),  on page 48.

No, David; the person I have in mind is the CIA agent who wrote that CIA memo.  

That person was a CIA insider, because that person had access to Oswald's 201 File -- which had already been deliberately falsified by the CIA high-command in conjunction with the CIA Mole-Hunt as exposed by the JFK researcher genius, Bill Simpich.

Regards, 
--Paul Trejo

Edited March 16, 2017 by Paul Trejo
JEFF Woolsey

[Thomas Graves]

16 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

You misunderstood me yet again, David.

James Woolsey (not Woosley, as you wrote David) from the INS, was only the person who told James Hosty about this CIA memo, but Woolsey did not write it -- nor did Woolsey even hand it to Hosty.  After he told Hosty about it, Hosty said, "Can I see the communication?"   Woolsey replied, "I can't.  Sorry Jim."

This is according to Hosty himself, in his book, Assignment Oswald (1996),  on page 48.

No, no, no, David.  The person I have in mind is the CIA agent who WROTE that CIA memo.  That person is a CIA insider, because that person had access to Oswald's 201 File -- which had already been deliberately falsified by the CIA high-command in conjunction with the CIA Mole-Hunt as exposed by the JFK researcher genius, Bill Simpich.

Regards, 
--Paul Trejo

Dear Paul,

James Woolsey or Jeff Woolsey?

 

FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

[...]

DL [Dallas] 100-10461

"DETAILS: 

At Dallas, Texas 

The following investigation was conducted by SA JAMES P. HOSTY, JR.:

On July 12, 1962, MR. JEFF WOOLSEY, Supervisory Clerk, INS, Dallas, Texas, made available their file A12530645 on MARINA NIKOLAEVNA OSWALD, nee PRUSAKOVA. This file reflects that MRS. OSWALD was born July 17, 1941, in Severodvinsk (formerly Molotovsk) Arkhangeskaya District, USSR. She was destined for her husband, LEE HARVEY OSWALD, 7313 Davenport, Fort Worth, Texas. The person furnishing the affidavit of support for MRS. OSWALD was BYRON PHILLIPS of Vernon, Milbarger County, Texas (no street address even). PHILLIPS furnished an affidavit of support on March 15, 1962. MRS. OSWALD listed her occupation as pharmacist. "

 

--  Tommy

Edited March 16, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Paul Trejo]

2 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

Dear Paul,

What, in your humble opinion, is the significance of the Lee HENRY Oswald in your scenario?

Evidence of a (piggybacked?) three-year-old mole hunt, or what?

--  Tommy

Tommy,

In my humble opinion, the significance of the name, Lee HENRY Oswald in the CIA memo of October 18, 1963, which was for some reason seen by INS agent Jeff Woolsey, who told FBI agent James Hosty about it in late October, 1963, is enormous.

Yes, I am definitely piggy-backing on the three-year-old Simpich Mole Hunt (2014) which IMHO is a flash of uncanny genius in solving the JFK assassination.

According to Bill Simpich, the CIA tippy-top command started a Mole Hunt on October 1, 1963, because they realized that SOME INSIDER had just impersonated Lee HarveY Oswald over the telephone in Mexico City at the Cuban Embassy, calling the USSR Embassy -- which was the single most wire-tapped phone in the world at the time.

The CIA Mexico Desk Director demanded all calls over that phone on his desk WITHIN 15 MINUTES.  That Mole Hunt started within ONE HOUR of the Impersonation.

Part of that Mole Hunt was to replace Oswald's photographs in his 201 file.  Another part of that Mole Hunt was to change Oswald's middle name to "Henry."

IIRC, the method of the Mole Hunt was as follows.  Nobody except the CIA high-command knew about these changes.  Then, the Oswald 201 File be placed in high-security clearance only.

Now -- one possible scenario is that an authorized CIA agent who took Oswald's 201 file after that point would start spreading the false data.  That's my current theory. Whoever write that CIA memo spread the wrong name because that CIA agent was acting in discord with the CIA top-command.  So -- who was that?

Regards, 
--Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

17 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

Dear Paul,

James Woolsey or Jeff Woolsey?

 

"DETAILS: 

At Dallas, Texas 

The following investigation was conducted by SA JAMES P. HOSTY, JR.:

On July 12, 1962, MR. JEFF WOOLSEY, Supervisory Clerk, INS, Dallas, Texas, made available their file A12530645 on MARINA NIKOLAEVNA OSWALD, nee PRUSAKOVA. This file reflects that MRS. OSWALD was born July 17, 1941, in Severodvinsk (formerly Molotovsk) Arkhangeskaya District, USSR. She was destined for her husband, [...]"

 

--  Tommy

Tommy,

Right, my speed-typing typo.   I corrected it.   But my point was that JEFF Woolsey did not supply to JAMES Hosty that CIA memo that calls LHO Lee HENRY Oswald.  

So David Josephs was mistaken -- again.

Thanks, 
--Paul Trejo

Edited March 16, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Thomas Graves]

25 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Tommy,

In my humble opinion, the significance of the name, Lee HENRY Oswald in the CIA memo of October 18, 1963, which was for some reason seen by INS agent Jeff Woolsey, who told FBI agent James Hosty about it in late October, 1963, is enormous.

Yes, I am definitely piggy-backing on the three-year-old Simpich Mole Hunt (2014) which IMHO is a flash of uncanny genius in solving the JFK assassination.

According to Bill Simpich, the CIA tippy-top command started a Mole Hunt on October 1, 1963, because they realized that SOME INSIDER had just impersonated Lee HarveY Oswald over the telephone in Mexico City at the Cuban Embassy, calling the USSR Embassy -- which was the single most wire-tapped phone in the world at the time.

The CIA Mexico Desk Director demanded all calls over that phone on his desk WITHIN 15 MINUTES.  That Mole Hunt started within ONE HOUR of the Impersonation.

Part of that Mole Hunt was to replace Oswald's photographs in his 201 file.  Another part of that Mole Hunt was to change Oswald's middle name to "Henry."

IIRC, the method of the Mole Hunt was as follows.  Nobody except the CIA high-command knew about these changes.  Then, the Oswald 201 File be placed in high-security clearance only.

Now -- one possible scenario is that an authorized CIA agent who took Oswald's 201 file after that point would start spreading the false data.  That's my current theory. Whoever write that CIA memo spread the wrong name because that CIA agent was acting in discord with the CIA top-command.  So -- who was that?

Regards, 
--Paul Trejo

"write, wrote, written"

Regardless.

So, ...  in October, 1963, Mexico City and Headquarters started a new mole hunt and unwittingly (wittingly ???) used "barium mean" misinformation about Oswald (in this case his middle name) from the 1959-1960 "Popov's Mole" mole hunt, yes?

--  Tommy

Edited March 16, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[David Josephs]

It was me who accidentally replaced Jeff with James, your obsession over H&L appears to have made you ill Tommy...  take a breath. 

The work on Mexico has nothing to do with Harvey and Lee...  I refer to the book for further study where I do mention it and state that some believe it was LEE on these buses  

At 6 parts and about 300 pages, more than half of which are images since they are the point of the work, I'm sure it needs work...

The first significantly long research paper I've written...
It started in one spot and grew...  editing and updating is on the calendar for some day...  doesn't change the fact I spent a year combing thru thousands of documents
and can make spelling mistakes with the best of them.  

at least I posted the excerpt.   Here's the Doc...  WOOSLEY was correct, Who's SAC, DALLAS Paul?  and yes, FBI agents did have informants and contacts in other areas of government... kinda obvious.

Here are just some of the available docs that I put in chrono order cross-checked against available indices of produced docs by organization.

Anyway, for those not looking to fight, I compiled and presented my case for an FBI snow storm orchestrated to cover for Oswald in Dallas via Odio when the CIA claimed he was in Mexico.  Philips & Goodpasture at it's core.  

 

Stating that "HENRY" initiated in Mexico when we all know it was from the 201 file back in 1960 
  you think Mexico '63 is related to opening this 201 file ?

 

On 3/15/2017 at 6:31 PM, Thomas Graves said:

 Another part of that Mole Hunt was to change Oswald's middle name to "Henry."

Simply not true Paul...Tommy

 

 

 

As to HENRY in that letter...  that's what's in para 1 of the 10/10 cable #74830  HENRY comes from CIA HQ.. C BUSTOS

https://books.google.com/books?id=SC-wBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA221&lpg=PA221&dq=was+jane+roman+C+BUSTOS&source=bl&ots=ee0R3uJGMq&sig=1Pl1H9BKAyM3FV3iVCwmZB8fYdw&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwil5tir-dnSAhUMxGMKHWMmDHUQ6AEIMjAE#v=onepage&q=was jane roman C BUSTOS&f=false

Is a page from Matrix for Assassination stating that Jane Roman was involved with this memo drafted by C Bustos aka Elsie Scaletti, Mexico Desk at HQ.
From what I could find there is no mention of Harvey until 10/22.

There was no reason to call him anything else...   

 

 

Up to 10/15 and thru 10/16 when Scott tells Mann about LEE HENRY... the name HARVEY had not yet been mentioned.

Chrono;
Lee Henry Oswald
(New"P")                                                                         P-7573

 

It's not until 10/22 that HENRY is realized as HARVEY

 

 

 

Edited September 1, 2017 by David Josephs