TWO MARGUERITE OSWALDS -- NEW DETAILS

[Thomas Graves]

14 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

Dear James,

I'll make a deal with you.  I'll stop playing "the fool," as you so delicately put it, if you'll stop plating the jerk.  You say that's impossible?  LOL

 

Regardless, maybe you missed this?

 Blond-haired Nikolai Leonov, interpreting for  Fidel Castro in Moscow. Leonov was often in Mexico City.

 

--  Tommy

PS  Your washed-out (and therefore face "flattening") 1958 image on the far left looks like 17 or 18 year-old Oswald to me, complete with "jarhead" haircut and extra bulk an' muscles due to havin' to do all them pushups an' pull ups, and from havin' to eat all them meat an' tatters, too.

 

And hey! You don't suppose that third photo from the left could be of Soviet spy / "scientist" Yuri Moskalev, do you?

 

 

 

Bumped for "Dear James," who arrogantly ("Please stop playing the fool, Tommy") threw Armstrong's "four photos of 'Lee Harvey Oswald'" against the wall like a wad of smoking hot spaghetti, and now apparently doesn't want to deal with my responses to his lousy "cooking".

--  Tommy

PS  I guess the "Lee Oswald" who was photographically captured in Ruby's strip joint didn't like his mini pompadour hairstyle very much, seein's as how that's the only photo of "him" showing him wearing such long hair, huh.  Maybe he just grew it long for that one photo-op with "Pinky"?

LOL

Edited March 15, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Jim Hargrove]

On 3/14/2017 at 8:50 AM, Jim Hargrove said:

During the summer and fall of 1963, while HARVEY, Marina, and June Oswald were living in New Orleans, Jack Ruby and LEE Oswald were seen together by many people in and around Dallas. 

 

 

• In the summer of 1963 Dorothy Marcum was dating Ruby and her aunt worked for Ruby. Dorothy told the FBI that LEE Oswald worked for Ruby during June and July and the two men definitely knew each other.

• Ruby was interviewing Francis Irene Hise for a job as a waitress when a young man entered the Carousel Club and Ruby said “Hi, Ozzie” to the young man. After she was hired Miss Hise served drinks to “Ozzie," whom she recognized after the assassination as LHO.

• Another employee, Clyde Malcolm Limbough, worked for Ruby three years and saw Oswald in Ruby's office on several occasions.

• Helen Kay Smith (“Pixie Lynn”), who worked at the Carousel, told the Dallas Police that she saw Ruby and Oswald together on several occasions.

• Other employees of Ruby who saw Oswald in the Carousel Club were William Crowe, Wally Weston, Dixie Lynn, and Kathy Kay.

• Robert Roy was Ruby's auto mechanic and said that Oswald used to drop off Ruby's car for repairs. Roy then drove Oswald back to Ruby's “burlesque house.”

• Ruby parked his car at Gibbs Auto Service and occasionally allowed friends and associates to borrow his car. Leon Woods was the manager of Gibbs and kept a “check-in and check-out” book that listed the names of people who took Ruby's car from the garage. Mr. Woods gave the book to the FBI following the assassination of President Kennedy, which the FBI later denied.

• During the last week of July (1963) Western Union employee Marshall Hicks delivered several telegrams addressed to “LEE Harvey Oswald” at the Rotary Apartments, 1501-1503 W. 7th St. in Dallas (while HARVEY and Marina were living in New Orleans). The FBI made no attempt to locate copies of these telegrams.

• DPD Detective H.M. Hart, of the Criminal Intelligence Division, received information from a Dallas Police confidential informant who knew Ruby. The informant said that in September (1963) Ruby rented an apartment at 223 S. Ewing for LEE Oswald.

NOTE: Journalist Dorothy Kilgallen wrote in the New York Journal American (June 6, 1964): “It is known that 10 persons have signed sworn depositions to the Warren Commission that they knew Oswald and Ruby to have been acquainted.” 

--Above written by John Armstrong for our website....

If you want to read more about Ruby's inolvement with the JFK hit, see here, starting about halfway down the long page:

http://harveyandlee.net/Ruby/Ruby.html

And here's yet another opportunity for Tommy to stop whining about the photo and consider more of the evidence.  BTW, several people have told me in private the circled man at Ruby's looks like the guy in the inset.  And, of course, Tommy originally said the guy in the inset wasn't "Oswald."  Apparently he didn't even recognize the famous passport photo currently at the National Archives and copied all over the internet.

========================================================

On 3/14/2017 at 1:38 PM, Thomas Graves said:

Dear James,

That's not the Oswald in your photo inset at Rubys joint.  Different ears,

Unless of course you're talking about some different Oswald.

LOL

--  Tommy  

=========================================================

LOL!

 

[Thomas Graves]

1 hour ago, Jim Hargrove said:

And here's yet another opportunity for Tommy to stop whining about the photo and consider more of the evidence.  BTW, several people have told me in private the circled man at Ruby's looks like the guy in the inset.  And, of course, Tommy originally said the guy in the inset wasn't "Oswald."  Apparently he didn't even recognize the famous passport photo currently at the National Archives and copied all over the internet.

========================================================

Dear James,

That's not the Oswald in your photo inset at Rubys joint.  Different ears,

Unless of course you're talking about some different Oswald.

LOL

--  Tommy  

..................................................................................................

[...]

 

Dear James,

When ya gonna throw some more shovelfuls of Armstrong's steaming-hot (like you-know-what) spaghetti from those 600-plus pages of misinterpreted, misquoted, and / or totally-botched "research findings" against the wall to totally blow us away with your and Armstrong's erudition, thoroughness, and critically-thinking, non-paranoiac ... minds?

Keep up the "good work",

--  Tommy

PS  Aren't you going to make any comments about blond Mexico-City denizen Nilolai Leonov, or that sneaky Ruskie "scientist", Yuri Moskalev?

Wazzamatter, James?

Cat got your tongue?

Edited March 15, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Jim Hargrove]

Hell, no, Tommy!  Let's talk photos.

 

 

It wasn't John or me who said the "Oswald" second from right was either Harvey or Lee.  It was your vaunted CIA who indicated it was LHO.  Real honest fellows, those guys.  The "Oswald" second from let, of course, was the fellow the Cuban government said caused that scene pretending to be LHO in the Cuban consulate in MC.  That leaves two people who really claimed to be Oswald in the photos above.

At far left is American-born LEE Harvey Oswald.  At far right is the Russian-speaking kid who shared the real Oswald's identity in an operation ultimately designed to send a young man with an American identity to spy in the Soviet Union, which is exactly what happened.  See the full story at....

HarveyandLee.net

If the relatively recent identifications of the Russian Embassy and Cuban Consulate "Oswalds" are correct, that's great!  But it doesn't leave the CIA off the hook for its treachery.

And by the way, don't feel too embarrassed that you didn't recognize "Oswald's" famous passport photo.  It was actually a picture of LEE put into Harvey's passport.  If you were thinking, "That ain't the guy killed by Jack Ruby" you were right!   

 

 

[Thomas Graves]

4 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Hell, no, Tommy!  Let's talk photos.

 

 

It wasn't John or me who said the "Oswald" second from right was either Harvey or Lee.  It was your vaunted CIA who indicated it was LHO.  Real honest fellows, those guys.  The "Oswald" second from let, of course, was the fellow the Cuban government said caused that scene pretending to be LHO in the Cuban consulate in MC.  That leaves two people who really claimed to be Oswald in the photos above.

At far left is American-born LEE Harvey Oswald.  At far right is the Russian-speaking kid who shared the real Oswald's identity in an operation ultimately designed to send a young man with an American identity to spy in the Soviet Union, which is exactly what happened.  See the full story at....

HarveyandLee.net

If the relatively recent identifications of the Russian Embassy and Cuban Consulate "Oswalds" are correct, that's great!  But it doesn't leave the CIA off the hook for its treachery.

And by the way, don't feel too embarrassed that you didn't recognize "Oswald's" famous passport photo.  It was actually a picture of LEE put into Harvey's passport.  If you were thinking, "That ain't the guy killed by Jack Ruby" you were right!   

 

 

Dear James,

Regarding the second photo from the right, Anne Goodpasture worded her cable very carefully so as to only suggest, by juxtaposition within the cable's text, that the "6-foot, athletic build, 35-year-old" man (who was photographed one day before (or after?) someone impersonated Oswald over the phone (by identifying himself as O-S-W-A-L-D) could possibly be ... Oswald.  In other words, CIA did not say this Mexico City Mystery Man was Oswald, but cleverly left it open as a dangling, "fishing" possibility.

As regards the Blond Oswald (second photo from left), you may not remember the highly-respected forum member James Richards.  Several years ago, he posted on the "Blond Oswald" thread, that he thought  that the HSCA had published this photo (of the blond guy I'm calling Leonov) in their report because they didn't know who it was (but knew that the photo had been taken by one of the CIA's secret cameras in Mexico City during the same period of time that LHO was allegedly there), and the HSCA was trying to solicit educated opinions from the report's readers as to who this character was.  Maybe I'm wrong, but there may have been some tentative "identification" or speculation that this was Oswald, or someone who was impersonating him in Mexico City, but as far as I know neither the CIA nor the HSCA ever said in a declarative manner, "That's Lee Harvey Oswald!" or "That's 'Lee Harvey Oswald'!", or "That's the short, blond dude who was impersonating Oswald!," or anything like that.

--  Tommy

Edited March 16, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Sandy Larsen]

On 3/14/2017 at 7:15 PM, Jim Hargrove said:

And BTW, doesn't ANYONE want to discuss the evidence that LEE Oswald and Jack Ruby worked together?

Jim,

Isn't it true that in any of those cases a skeptic could simply claim it was a case of mistaken identity? Or that the evidence is hearsay?

I for one would be interested in such cases if you have documentary evidence to back up the claim.

I am also interested in seeing further evidence of Oswald or Marguerite being in two places at once.

 

 

[Thomas Graves]

4 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

Dear James,

Regarding the second photo from the right, Anne Goodpasture in Mexico City worded her cable very carefully so as to only suggest, by juxtaposition within the cable's text, that the "6-foot, athletic build, 35-year-old" man who was photographed one day before (or after?) someone impersonated Oswald over the phone (by actually identifying himself as O-S-W-A-L-D could possibly be ... Oswald.  In other words, CIA did not say this person who eventually came to be known to assassination students and researchers as the "Mexico City Mystery Man" was Oswald, but cleverly left that "identification" open as a dangling, fishing (mole hunting?) possibility.

As regards one of the two photographic candidates for Sylvia Duran's so-called "Blond Oswald" (second photo from left), you may not remember the highly-respected forum member James Richards. Several years ago, he posted on the "Blond Oswald" thread, that he thought  that the HSCA had published this photo (of the blond guy I'm calling Leonov) in their report because they didn't know who it was (but knew that the photo had been taken by one of the CIA's secret cameras in Mexico City during the same period of time that LHO was allegedly there), and the HSCA was trying to solicit educated opinions from the report's readers as to who this character was.  Maybe I'm wrong, but there may have been some tentative "identification" or speculation that this was Oswald, or someone who was impersonating him in Mexico City, but as far as I know neither the CIA nor the HSCA ever said in a declarative manner, "That's Lee Harvey Oswald!" or "That's 'Lee Harvey Oswald'!", or "That's the short, blond dude who was impersonating Oswald!," or anything like that.

--  Tommy

edited and bumped

Edited March 16, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Jim Hargrove]

11 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Jim,

Isn't it true that in any of those cases a skeptic could simply claim it was a case of mistaken identity? Or that the evidence is hearsay?

I for one would be interested in such cases if you have documentary evidence to back up the claim.

I am also interested in seeing further evidence of Oswald or Marguerite being in two places at once.

 

 

Mistaken identifications are always a possibility and a few of the reports, if memory serves, do involve  hearsay.  But in the case of the hearsay evidence you have to ask, Why didn’t the FBI follow up on such a dramatic lead?  If Mr. X says Mr. Y told him he shot JFK, and you don’t interview Mr. Y, what kind of investigation is that and what conclusions might we draw from the lack of follow-up?

It is often helpful to keep the Big Picture in mind when examining the details.  Without trying to prove it right now, Jack Ruby’s role in the assassination appears to be much deeper than we previously thought.  And, while Harvey Oswald was working or otherwise accounted for, someone identifying himself as LHO was traveling all over the Dallas area in the weeks before the assassination doing incriminating things suggestive of a fellow getting ready to shoot the president.  The old movie “Executive Action” (it was Robert Ryan’s last picture, I think, and Burt Lancaster was in it), has a number of scenes showing the set-up of LHO) by a fellow who looked somewhat like him.

And so if you’re sitting at the Seat of Government (as Hoover called his outfit) and you know you have lots of reports about Ruby and Oswald together, and you don’t follow those leads, what are we to make of that?  Could it possibly be a cover-up?  I’ll try to dig up some of the docs on this subject.
 

[Jim Hargrove]

15 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

Dear James,

Regarding the second photo from the right, Anne Goodpasture worded her cable very carefully so as to only suggest, by juxtaposition within the cable's text, that the "6-foot, athletic build, 35-year-old" man (who was photographed one day before (or after?) someone impersonated Oswald over the phone (by identifying himself as O-S-W-A-L-D) could possibly be ... Oswald.  In other words, CIA did not say this Mexico City Mystery Man was Oswald, but cleverly left it open as a dangling, "fishing" possibility.

As regards the Blond Oswald (second photo from left), you may not remember the highly-respected forum member James Richards.  Several years ago, he posted on the "Blond Oswald" thread, that he thought  that the HSCA had published this photo (of the blond guy I'm calling Leonov) in their report because they didn't know who it was (but knew that the photo had been taken by one of the CIA's secret cameras in Mexico City during the same period of time that LHO was allegedly there), and the HSCA was trying to solicit educated opinions from the report's readers as to who this character was.  Maybe I'm wrong, but there may have been some tentative "identification" or speculation that this was Oswald, or someone who was impersonating him in Mexico City, but as far as I know neither the CIA nor the HSCA ever said in a declarative manner, "That's Lee Harvey Oswald!" or "That's 'Lee Harvey Oswald'!", or "That's the short, blond dude who was impersonating Oswald!," or anything like that.

--  Tommy

The CIA came up with the photo second from right in the four mugshots above they day after the assassination, in direct response to calls for images of “LHO” at the Russian Embassy in Mexico City.  Even though Hoover heard audio tapes of an Oswald impostor in MC, CIA claimed the tapes had been “routinely erased.”  CIA’s David Atlee Phillips perjured himself by claiming the cameras (and back-up cameras) trained on the embassy front doors weren’t working that day, although the HSCA  eventually uncovered his lie.  Whatever weasel words Goodpasture and others may have used about the “evidence” hoping to protect themselves from future indictments, the CIA’s treachery on the MC charade is more than clear.

And then there are the actions by both the CIA and the FBI immediately after that are even worse!  Since the 1959 “defection,” the FBI had “Lee Harvey Oswald” on a watch list, essentially requiring him to be kept under close scrutiny by federal authorities.  In an operations started less than one week after the MC nonsense, the “flash” watch was cancelled.

 

One single day after the FBI started taking “Lee Harvey Oswald” off the watch list, the CIA starting doing something very similar. Responding to a query from the Mexico City station, four CIA officers signed a cable giving lots of accurate biographical data on our boy but calling him “Lee Henry Oswald.” The three page cable expressed no security concerns whatsoever about Oswald and, in fact, indicated the Moscow embassy felt “life in the Soviet Union had clearly had maturing effect on Oswald.” Nothing to worry about here!

This cable was signed by Jane Roman (Angleton’s assistant), William Hood (also close to Angleton),Thomas Karamessines (assistant to Helms) and John Whitten who, according to Jefferson Morley, was the only CIA officer of the four signers who suffered any adverse consequences for this troubling cable. John Armstrong believes that Angleton ran the “Harvey and Lee” Oswald project.

Are we to believe that these two events, occurring at almost exactly the same time, are coincidences?  Whether CIA folks were conducting a mole hunt is irrelevant to me.  Simultaneous actions by the FBI and the CIA clearly made it appear that “Lee Harvey Oswald” may have once been a dangerous man, but no longer was so.

[Sandy Larsen]

Jim,

There are cases of mistaken identities, and then there are cases where the person (such as LHO) identifies himself. The former case happens all the time. The latter doesn't and certainly carries a lot more weight. If a person says that Oswald identified himself, then that person is an eyewitness and should be given the same level of trust as any other eyewitness.

I am interested in hearing about those situations. But, of course, the documented cases will naturally be more convincing.

[David Josephs]

1 hour ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Jim,

There are cases of mistaken identities, and then there are cases where the person (such as LHO) identifies himself. The former case happens all the time. The latter doesn't and certainly carries a lot more weight. If a person says that Oswald identified himself, then that person is an eyewitness and should be given the same level of trust as any other eyewitness.

I am interested in hearing about those situations. But, of course, the documented cases will naturally be more convincing.

You know Sandy, it's interesting you should say that:  "cases where the person identifies himself".  In most cases where there are conflicts showing Oswald being here and there at the same time...  many of these examples occur when Oswald is in Russia so the witnesses dates and even years are called into question since he couldn't possibly be in Russia and the US at the same time - unless someone was playing the Oswald part here...

Here are a few conflicts from the Russia time period.

Anna Lewis' video telling of meeting Oswald between Jan-Apr 1962, with Judy Baker in the room, and with multiple camera stops and no correction is the tip of the iceberg.  Any one instance alone may be a coincidence but when more and more tell a story of meeting LEE HARVEY OSWALD in the US while he's in Russia we might take notice.  Or maybe long time friends of LEE's mother seeing her in New Orleans while Marge is in Texas...

Another question to ask yourself is whether you believe Marita Lorenz's story... according to her "OSWALD" was in a safehouse in Miami in Sept 1960.

1961	3	17		Harvey meets Marina
1961	3	24		Hospital records show that Harvey "Alik" Oswald was admitted to the Fourth Clinical Hospital in Minsk at 10:00 am on T hursday, March 30, 1961. From this date we learn that Oswald and Marina probably met the previous Friday, March 24, at the Palace of Trade Unions (instead of March 4th or 17th as claimed by Marina)
1961	3	25		Priscilla Johnson wrote in her book, "Marina and Lee," that Oswald and Marina met on March 17, 1961 and a few days later, on March 25, she received a call to visit him at the hospital because he was sick. But Marina could not have  received such a call from Oswald on March 25, because he has not admitted to the hospital until March 30.
1961	4	10		NOTE: The date of their meeting and the phone call from Oswald in the hospital may seem trivial, except when one realizes that two weeks later (April 30), without every having a single date or being alone together, these two cold-war spies agreed to marry.

Mr. Fithian. This was prior to the Bay of Pigs.
Mrs. Lorenz. Yes.
Mr. Fithian. It was?
Mrs. Lorenz. April 1961 was the Bay of Pigs.
Mr. Fithian. And you are sure you saw him (LEE) before April 1961?
Mrs. Lorenz. Yes, because Alex (Rorke) took the pictures.

Mr. Fithian. "All right. Now I want to be sure that I have your dates correct. You said the first meeting of Lee Harvey Oswald, the first time you saw him, was at a Safehouse in Miami in 1960.
Marita Lorenz. "Yes."

-----

While Harvey Oswald was still living in Minsk with his wife and daughter, Lee
Oswald apparently applied for work at the Texas Employment Commission in Fort Worth and was given a series of General Aptitude Test Batteries (GATB tests). NOTE: In October 1962 counselors at the TEC office in Dallas reviewed Lee Oswald's file from Fort Worth and wrote his GATB test scores from April 1962 under the heading "Test Results (Volume XIX, p. 399)." 62-03

-----

Lynn Davis Curry lived in Augusta, Georgia and drove a cab for the Dixie Cab
Company in the early 1960's. During the month of November 1962 Curry picked up a white male at the intersection of 8th Street and Broad who was about twenty five years old and wearing a black jacket. T he young man introduced himself as "Lee Oswald" and then began to talk about himself. Oswald told Curry that he served in the Marine Corps, traveled to Russia, married a Russian girl, supported Fidel Castro , and was traveling to New Orleans. Curry let the man off at the corner of 5th and Watkins Street where his car was parked. Before leaving the cab the young man insisted that Curry write down his name, "Lee Oswald," and said that Curry would be hearing his name again in the future. Curry wrote the name "Lee Oswald" on his daily trip sheet and  remembered his name on November 22, 1963.

------

Sheriff Thompson, of Monroe County (Key West), Florida, recalled that "Lee Harvey Oswald" fueled up his boat in Key West shortly after the Bay of Pigs (April '61, They return to USA in June 1962 ). Oswald didn't have the funds to pay for the fuel and telephoned someone in Dallas, Texas. Within two hours a man named "Ruben" arrived and paid for the fuel.136  William Huffman was the attendant on duty when Lee Oswald, accompanied by 4 or 5 Cubans, docked at the Sands Marine Fueling Station at Stock Island, Key West, Florida in a 43-foot Chris Craft diesel boat.  

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=11349&relPageId=2 

The real Marguerite Oswald, the tall, nice-looking mother of John, Robert and Lee Harvey, had been living in New Orleans for the past year where she was employed in her usual occupation of selling clothes. Mrs. Logan Magruder, a resident of Covington, Louisiana who had known her since the 1940's, saw Marguerite working in the ladies lingerie department at Krieger's Department Store and spoke with her. 53 Mrs. Oris Duane, who had known Marguerite Oswald since the 1940's, told the FBI that Marguerite Oswald visited her at Lady Oris Hosiery in 1960. Mrs. Oswald told her that she was working for Goldrings's Department Store on Canal Street selling dresses on the second floor." 54

MO Moves again  On September 1, (1960) the short, dumpy, heavy-set "Marguerite Oswald" impostor moved from 1407 8th Avenue in Fort Worth to Boyd, Texas, a small community 35 miles northwest of Fort Worth. This was the community in which Robert Oswald's wife previously lived and in which her parents owned a farm. "Marguerite" opened an account with the Continental State Bank on September 22nd and began operating a small variety shop on Main Street where she sold thread and fabrics throughout the remainder of 1960.

http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10672#relPageId=275&tab=page

 

 

 

[Thomas Graves]

7 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

The CIA came up with the photo second from right in the four mugshots above they day after the assassination, in direct response to calls for images of “LHO” at the Russian Embassy in Mexico City.  Even though Hoover heard audio tapes of an Oswald impostor in MC, CIA claimed the tapes had been “routinely erased.”  CIA’s David Atlee Phillips perjured himself by claiming the cameras (and back-up cameras) trained on the embassy front doors weren’t working that day, although the HSCA  eventually uncovered his lie.  Whatever weasel words Goodpasture and others may have used about the “evidence” hoping to protect themselves from future indictments, the CIA’s treachery on the MC charade is more than clear.

And then there are the actions by both the CIA and the FBI immediately after that are even worse!  Since the 1959 “defection,” the FBI had “Lee Harvey Oswald” on a watch list, essentially requiring him to be kept under close scrutiny by federal authorities.  In an operations started less than one week after the MC nonsense, the “flash” watch was cancelled.

 

One single day after the FBI started taking “Lee Harvey Oswald” off the watch list, the CIA starting doing something very similar. Responding to a query from the Mexico City station, four CIA officers signed a cable giving lots of accurate biographical data on our boy but calling him “Lee Henry Oswald.” The three page cable expressed no security concerns whatsoever about Oswald and, in fact, indicated the Moscow embassy felt “life in the Soviet Union had clearly had maturing effect on Oswald.” Nothing to worry about here!

This cable was signed by Jane Roman (Angleton’s assistant), William Hood (also close to Angleton),Thomas Karamessines (assistant to Helms) and John Whitten who, according to Jefferson Morley, was the only CIA officer of the four signers who suffered any adverse consequences for this troubling cable. John Armstrong believes that Angleton ran the “Harvey and Lee” Oswald project.

Are we to believe that these two events, occurring at almost exactly the same time, are coincidences?  Whether CIA folks were conducting a mole hunt is irrelevant to me.  Simultaneous actions by the FBI and the CIA clearly made it appear that “Lee Harvey Oswald” may have once been a dangerous man, but no longer was so.

"Dear James"

I haven't read your long, hot-steaming-spaghetti post yet, but I thought I'd mention that former U.S. Army intelligence officer Jon G. Tidd has opined on this forum that he believes James Jesus Angleton ran an ostensibly-Mexico City-based, October, 1963,  mole hunt  (which intentionally incorporated phony information about Lee Harvey Oswald) because he (Angleton) was trying to figure out who the heck was manipulating Oswald.

Me?  I'm starting to believe that a CIA-type who was privy to this mole hunt was the mole / manipulator.

Bill Harvey? , David Phillips? , David Sanchez Morales? , XXXXX?

I know, I know, I know.  That's not broad-brushed enough.  You and your Harvey and Lee and the Two Marguerites buddies (including Julian Assanage, Vladimir Putin, Steve Bannon, and Guccifer 2.0 ? ) would much rather implicate the whole evil, evil, evil Agency, wouldn't you.

 

 

Edited March 16, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Jim Hargrove]

9 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

The CIA came up with the photo second from right in the four mugshots above they day after the assassination, in direct response to calls for images of “LHO” at the Russian Embassy in Mexico City.  Even though Hoover heard audio tapes of an Oswald impostor in MC, CIA claimed the tapes had been “routinely erased.”  CIA’s David Atlee Phillips perjured himself by claiming the cameras (and back-up cameras) trained on the embassy front doors weren’t working that day, although the HSCA  eventually uncovered his lie.  Whatever weasel words Goodpasture and others may have used about the “evidence” hoping to protect themselves from future indictments, the CIA’s treachery on the MC charade is more than clear.

And then there are the actions by both the CIA and the FBI immediately after that are even worse!  Since the 1959 “defection,” the FBI had “Lee Harvey Oswald” on a watch list, essentially requiring him to be kept under close scrutiny by federal authorities.  In an operations started less than one week after the MC nonsense, the “flash” watch was cancelled.

 

One single day after the FBI started taking “Lee Harvey Oswald” off the watch list, the CIA starting doing something very similar. Responding to a query from the Mexico City station, four CIA officers signed a cable giving lots of accurate biographical data on our boy but calling him “Lee Henry Oswald.” The three page cable expressed no security concerns whatsoever about Oswald and, in fact, indicated the Moscow embassy felt “life in the Soviet Union had clearly had maturing effect on Oswald.” Nothing to worry about here!

This cable was signed by Jane Roman (Angleton’s assistant), William Hood (also close to Angleton),Thomas Karamessines (assistant to Helms) and John Whitten who, according to Jefferson Morley, was the only CIA officer of the four signers who suffered any adverse consequences for this troubling cable. John Armstrong believes that Angleton ran the “Harvey and Lee” Oswald project.

Are we to believe that these two events, occurring at almost exactly the same time, are coincidences?  Whether CIA folks were conducting a mole hunt is irrelevant to me.  Simultaneous actions by the FBI and the CIA clearly made it appear that “Lee Harvey Oswald” may have once been a dangerous man, but no longer was so.

Probably in response to my post above,  Thomas Graves has resurrected an old EF thread called “Lee Henry Oswald.”  It has excellent posts by Robert Charles Dunne and especially Bill Simpich, who, as in his recent book,  makes an excellent case that  Ann Egerter and her boss James J. Angleton and others were putting out “marked cards” with disinformation on “Lee Harvey Oswald” as part of  a mole hunt.  Mr. Simpich makes his case admirably.

But in the Roman/Hood/Karamessines/Whitten cable of 10/10/63 the individual misidentified as “Lee Henry Oswald” suddenly becomes the “Lee Oswald who called sovemb 1 Oct,” in other words, the patsy-to-be: “Lee Harvey Oswald.”  That Oswald is described as “FIVE FEET TEN INCHES, ONE HUNDRED SIXTY FIVE POUNDS” may appear to be disinformation, and may be, but it is also close to the description from his Marine Corps records of American-born LEE Harvey Oswald, who was about two inches taller and somewhat huskier than Russian-speaking Harvey Oswald.  More importantly, this is the cable that connects "Lee Henry Oswald" with the "Oswald" allegedly at the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City, and it attempts to rehabilitate “Oswald’s” reputation. 
 
In reference to FBI supervisor Marvin Gheesling’s removal from the watch list, Mr. Simpich concludes with this chilling paragraph:

Gheesling's decision to take Oswald off the watch list effectively dimmed the lights around Oswald. It meant that Oswald would not be watched in Dallas with close scrutiny in situations involving national security, such as when JFK came to town in a motorcade. If Gheesling had waited another day, Oswald would have been in the spotlight. Dallas agents would have been on him like white on rice.

So was all this just a couple of ghastly errors that helped unknown bad players make a patsy out of “Oswald,” or was it something even more sinister?  The answers to that question came fast starting on November 23, 1963, when David Atlee Phillips and several other CIA personnel start making every effort they can to connect “Lee Harvey Oswald” with the Cuban government, undoubtedly hoping to blame the assassination on Castro and ultimately provoke a U.S. invasion of Cuba.

For example, on November 25 Phillips' associate Gilberta Alvarado Ugarte walked into the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City and claimed he had been in the Cuban Embassy in MC on September 18, 1963. He told officials that he witnessed Oswald receive $6500 in cash from a "Negro with red hair" inside the Cuban consulate to kill President Kennedy.

Alvarado’s date was wrong, and his entire story was bs, but Phillips backed up Alvarado’s character and claims in a half dozen or so CIA cables, several written under false names.  There are other examples of this subterfuge, including Phillips’ own vicious attempts to have Cuban Consulate employee Silvia Duran forced by Mexican DFS to confess to a sexual relationship with “Lee Harvey Oswald” and portray it all as part of a communist conspiracy organized Cuba.  

From American-born LEE Oswald’s meeting in Dallas in August ‘63 with Maurice Bishop/David Phillips (while HARVEY Oswald was still in New Orleans) to the endless lies the CIA issued immediately after the assassination and for decades later (George Joannides, anyone?) you ain’t gonna explain Oswald and the CIA as just a mole hunt to me, despite Bill Simpich’s excellent work.  Richard Case Nagell may have been one weird guy, but he clearly had foreknowledge  about the plot to kill JFK, and the CIA clearly ignored his warnings. 

And don’t forget that the Kennedy Administration and the CIA were clearly at war just weeks before the assassination, as shown in the infamous Arthur Krock defense of the Agency in the Oct. 3, 1963 New York Times.

 

[Jim Hargrove]

7 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Jim,

There are cases of mistaken identities, and then there are cases where the person (such as LHO) identifies himself. The former case happens all the time. The latter doesn't and certainly carries a lot more weight. If a person says that Oswald identified himself, then that person is an eyewitness and should be given the same level of trust as any other eyewitness.

I am interested in hearing about those situations. But, of course, the documented cases will naturally be more convincing.

I see DJ has already given you one of his patented 150 mph tours of a couple of aspects of the evidence for Harvey and Lee.  He’s younger and faster than me, and so I like to slow things down to a comfortable geriatric pace and look at things leisurely.

You’ll probably eventually see that the majority of John Armstrong’s Harvey and Lee evidence goes beyond merely pointing to a feller or two who thought he maybe saw someone who looked like “Oswald.”  It usually goes deeper, and here’s a link below to a good example.

Nearly 20 years ago now, a fellow named Chris Courtwright wrote a piece about a strange series of events in and around Alice, TX.  It was short, you can read it in five minutes, but influential enough to put John McAdams on High Alert.  Chris didn’t include the documents, but if you bother to research it, you’ll see his story matches the reports available.

During all the sightings Chris describes, Lee HARVEY Oswald was demonstrably somewhere else.

READ IT HERE

What do you think?  Sometimes it's hard to separate solid witnesses from the sketchy ones, but looking at the whole story usually helps.

[Thomas Graves]

15 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

The CIA came up with the photo second from right in the four mugshots above they day after the assassination, in direct response to calls for images of “LHO” at the Russian Embassy in Mexico City.  Even though Hoover heard audio tapes of an Oswald impostor in MC, CIA claimed the tapes had been “routinely erased.”  CIA’s David Atlee Phillips perjured himself by claiming the cameras (and back-up cameras) trained on the embassy front doors weren’t working that day, although the HSCA  eventually uncovered his lie.  Whatever weasel words Goodpasture and others may have used about the “evidence” hoping to protect themselves from future indictments, the CIA’s treachery on the MC charade is more than clear.

And then there are the actions by both the CIA and the FBI immediately after that are even worse!  Since the 1959 “defection,” the FBI had “Lee Harvey Oswald” on a watch list, essentially requiring him to be kept under close scrutiny by federal authorities.  In an operations started less than one week after the MC nonsense, the “flash” watch was cancelled.

 

One single day after the FBI started taking “Lee Harvey Oswald” off the watch list, the CIA starting doing something very similar. Responding to a query from the Mexico City station, four CIA officers signed a cable giving lots of accurate biographical data on our boy but calling him “Lee Henry Oswald.” The three page cable expressed no security concerns whatsoever about Oswald and, in fact, indicated the Moscow embassy felt “life in the Soviet Union had clearly had maturing effect on Oswald.” Nothing to worry about here!

This cable was signed by Jane Roman (Angleton’s assistant), William Hood (also close to Angleton),Thomas Karamessines (assistant to Helms) and John Whitten who, according to Jefferson Morley, was the only CIA officer of the four signers who suffered any adverse consequences for this troubling cable. John Armstrong believes that Angleton ran the “Harvey and Lee” Oswald project.

Are we to believe that these two events, occurring at almost exactly the same time, are coincidences?  Whether CIA folks were conducting a mole hunt is irrelevant to me.  Simultaneous actions by the FBI and the CIA clearly made it appear that “Lee Harvey Oswald” may have once been a dangerous man, but no longer was so.

"Dear James"

It seems to me you didn't really address the point I spent so much time and effort trying to make, above.

So, let me try again:

No one in the CIA directly claimed that the husky-looking fellow (known to assassination researchers as the "Mexico City Mystery Man") in the October 2, 1963, photograph(s) was Oswald; Anne Goodpasture in Mexico City and Charlotte Bustos in Washington D.C. only kinda alluded to the possibility that it was.  And why did they do that?  Because the CIA people in possession of the wrong-day photograph(s) of Mystery Man and the pertinent 9/28/63 and 10/01/63 phone taps knew it wasn't Oswald, and since they were trying to figure out who had impersonated Oswald twice over the phone, they intentionally threw this Mystery Man's  (possibly KGB agent Yuri Moskalev) photo into "the mix," probably because this dude was the only captured-on-film, casually-dressed American-looking guy who was not only reasonably close in height and weight to that of Robert E. Webster,  Oswald's fellow 1960 defector (whose biometrics of 5'10", 165 pounds had been "given" to Oswald by FBI Agent Fain for use in the 1960 Popov's Mole mole hunt), but also who was caught on film by the CIA's Mexico City cameras very close to the same day (October 1) when the impersonator had identified himself as "Oswald; O-S-W-A-L-D" over the phone and elicited from the Russian on the other end that he had met with the sometime-alleged KGB director of assassinations in the Western Hemisphere, Valiery Kostikov, a few days earlier. Goodpasture and Bustos did this, or made reference to it, in the hope that it would trip up the Intell "insiders" who must have been impersonating and / or manipulating Oswald, and that the bad guys would sooner later show their (marked) cards to the mole hunters.

--  Tommy

PS  You say that "the" cable which you posted, above (actually there were two similar but-critically-different batches of outgoing-from-headquarters cables written by Bustos on 10/10/63) "Had a lot of accurate biographical details about Oswald" in it.  LOL! Only a true believer in the Harvey & Lee and Two Marguerites theory could say that with a straight face, James.  

The one-and-only Oswald's weight at autopsy was 131 pounds, and his own mother said he never weighed more than 150 pounds in his life, yet the CIA headquarters cable you posted above has him at a Robert E. Webster-like 5'10" and 165 pounds. (Ya think maybe because FBI agent John Fain had sneakily attributed Webster's biometrics to Oswald in early 1960, and they in turn had been incorporated into Oswald's computerized CIA files by a Russia Division Counter-Espionage officer, Bill Bright, back in the day?  Hmmm?) 

I could go on and on about the fantastic "biographical accuracy" of the 10/10/63 CIA cable you posted, above.  But I'm getting tired now, so suffice it to say that Angleton's right-had gal, Ann Egerter, had given Lee Harvey Oswald the name "Lee Henry Oswald" when she finally opened a 201 File on him way back in on December 9, 1960, https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=112083&relPageId=2  more than a year after the one-and-only Lee Harvey Oswald had shown up in Moscow.

For another thing, did you know that  Marina's maiden name (taken from her uncle) was Prusakova, not Pusakova?  LOL

There are so many inaccuracies in the cable you posted above, it's not even funny.  Yet you probably take them as "hard evidence" of an elaborate 10-plus year-old Harvey and Lee "Oswald Doppelganger Project" rather than what they really were -- "barium meal" / "marked card" intentional inaccuracies that were put into Oswald's files and cables over the years for use in at least two different mole hunts. 

--  Tommy

Edited March 17, 2017 by Thomas Graves