For Chris Newton, Larry Hancock, Tracy Parnell, and other Critically-Minded Members

[Sandy Larsen]

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

One of the more interesting aspects of Mexico City is GAUDET and the Mexican Tourist Visa

Turns out that the evidence mentions Oswald talking about only having so much time in Mexico due to the expiration of his 15 day visa.
GAUDET, a CIA asset, received the Visa that was next in the number sequence after Oswald's. GAUDET also confirms Oswald and Banister's "partnership"

Problem being the visa was for 6 months, not 90 days or 15 days in country.. and the presentation of the document in the report is even more strange...

One image is only the bottom of the page with his signature yet stops at the NAME field whereas the 2nd image only has the top of the form and stops at the signature.

Personally I do not buy that Oswald got this at that time...  And the relationship to Nagell's Sept 17-19 predictions should be noted.

DJ

David,

I believe that the CIA must have created evidence for a road trip to MC... for Oswald and a driver. (Perhaps others as well.) The evidence was meant to later be found in a real investigation by the FBI. What easier way to create this evidence than have real people with fake IDs actually take the trip. These would necessarily be CIA assets.

Either the real Oswald went on this trip, or a fake Oswald went in his place.

If the real Oswald went, then whatever they did in MC had nothing to do with the Cuban and Russian embassies or consulates. Another team performed the consulate functions there. (Pretending to be Oswald, etc.)

However, if a fake Oswald went, then it's possible he did the impersonating at the consulates as well. Not necessary, just possible.

But we need a driver for this scenario. Given that William Gaudet was the next person in line at the Cuban consulate in NO, he would be the most obvious candidate for that position. But only if he had a fake ID and used it to get his visa. (It wouldn't have been prudent to have a CIA agent take that trip. The CIA wanted no CIA footprints anywhere near the crime.)

I don't know anything about Gaudet, for example how information about his visa application came to light. Do you know if he used his real name on his visa application?

 

[David Josephs]

(I lost the reply I had been working on that equates PAZ to Alvarado as Phillips' assets)

16 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I don't know anything about Gaudet, for example how information about his visa application came to light. Do you know if he used his real name on his visa application?

Here was something I found on GAUDET as I was researching for my Mexico work.  Talk about being in the center of things....  It would be my assumption that Mr GAUDET here acquires both visa's and is completely unaware of the "LEE, Harvey Oswald" mistake.

At some point it would have been nice to have some of these key players sign Lee's name...  one of these players was forging his signature quite often.

 

 

16 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Either the real Oswald went on this trip, or a fake Oswald went in his place.

Before we determine if Oswald went or not.... let's agree that the explanation in the WCR related to his travel to and from Mexico City is complete BS.

So we either have "the" Oswald entering Mexico another way (car, plane, train) or not entering at all; IOW traveling to Dallas from New Orleans and stopping in Austin on the way.

Q1 - why would an Oswald impostor "sneak" into Mexico if the idea of an impostor is to leave evidence that places Oswald in and out of MC 
    unless this is what occurs (like Alvarado and PAZ stories) and then has to be cleaned up afterward to change it from a man with co-conspirators to the Lone Nut.

To me, the Tourist Visa that precedes Oswald's, William GAUDET of the CIA, and the timing of the dates related to the "15 days" seems to have someone within the cover-up artists confused.  If we take Sept 17th and add 15 days we get October 2nd... the day Oswald is supposed to have left... 15 days exactly.  Yet I show how the application is actually for 180 days from CE2481.  

Q2 - why and how would the DFS and/or Mexican Presidential Police know to go to 4 bus lines and "borrow" their records for specifically and only Sept 26/27 and Oct 2/3.. on the afternoon of the assassination... after which we come to learn that one of the bus line's manifests was added to by Arturo Bosch to change a Nov sheet to an October one while the FBI also places Oswald on Flecha Rojas and the ANATUAC lines coming into Mexico City...
 

Can we agree, if the REAL Oswald was in Mexico City it would be in the best interest of the CIA and FBI to show him actually there.  Turns out the only way they could do this was to use transcripts of calls for which the voice was not Oswald yet WAS the same a few days later.  The Visa photos were another dead-end (an innocent tourist goes to one of the placed Sylvia claims to have told this man and is easily found out by the FBI.)

Q3 - If Oswald was there and used the phone, why did the FBI say it was not him and why Lopez/Hardaway would also not confirm it was him after listening to the tape?
 

I think we can safely say that the man Ruby killed was not in Mexico City.  I think we can also safely say that IF an impostor was on this trip they did a crap job of leaving evidence of Oswald... The articles I wrote delves more deeply into the bus line problems and the problems with the Australian girls and McFarlands... Bowen/Osborne is another brick in the wall.  While the beginning of the trip is very detailed... the Monterrey to Laredo and Laredo to Dallas legs show a quick decline in follow-thru.

 

 

They even mention the bus driver from San Antonio to Dallas, Ben Julian.... you suppose they ever got around to talking to him?

[Sandy Larsen]

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

(I lost the reply I had been working on that equates PAZ to Alvarado as Phillips' assets)

6 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I don't know anything about Gaudet, for example how information about his visa application came to light. Do you know if he used his real name on his visa application?

 

I've discovered more information about Gaudet, and now know that he did use his own name on the visa application. He clearly was CIA. So if the plan was to have Gaudet be Oswald's driver to Mexico, then surely the plan was to use Gaudet as a patsy too. I mean, surely the plotters wouldn't have wanted it discovered that a CIA asset was involved in the assassination.

And, as with Oswald, the plot would have required the killing of Gaudet.

So I'm inclined to believe that Gaudet's role was just one of facilitator. He got stuff done.

Apparently a good source of information on Gaudet is a book written by Martin Shackelford called Fair Play. David Reitzes wrote the following about Gaudet:

Shackelford [in his book, Fair Play] refers to a relationship between Shaw and William George Gaudet, something worthy of investigation. Gaudet published the Latin American Newsletter out of the rent-free office at the Trade Mart. Gaudet himself had been a CIA domestic contact until 1961, and told journalist Anthony Summers in 1978 that the Newsletter was a CIA front operation. This is not a charge that can be dismissed outright: Although the Newsletter's official sponsor was Standard Fruit, a company which did a tremendous amount of business in Latin America, a great deal of its funding came from New Orleans doctor Alton Ochsner, founder of the Ochsner Clinic, who had a long-standing relationship with the CIA that has not been adequately explained with regard to his anti-Communist activities in New Orleans over the years.

Gaudet himself plays a murky role in the story of Oswald's 1963 summer in New Orleans. He happened to be next in line to Oswald when Oswald applied for his Mexican tourist visa. Though the registry list was published by the Warren Commission, Gaudet's name was withheld from the public until it accidentally leaked out in 1975. Gaudet insisted he did not see Oswald that day and called the event a coincidence. He did say, however, that he'd seen Oswald around the Trade Mart and, most interestingly, he said he had witnessed Oswald conversing at length with New Orleans ultra right-wing extremist Guy Banister on several occasions.

Gaudet, who is now deceased, remains something of a mystery, though his relationship to the International Trade Mart may not prove especially noteworthy, since -- according to Garrison advocate Jim DiEugenio's Destiny Betrayed (p. 220) -- it was ITM employee Ted Brent, not Clay Shaw, who allowed Gaudet the use of ITM office space. As an institution prominently involved in facilitating trade with Latin America, the ITM could have had legitimate reasons for providing an office for the Latin American Newsletter. And if the Newsletter was indeed a front for a CIA operation, as Gaudet has stated, there are any number of explanations that don't require implicating anyone in high crimes or assassinations.

 

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Here was something I found on GAUDET as I was researching for my Mexico work.  Talk about being in the center of things....  It would be my assumption that Mr GAUDET here acquires both visa's and is completely unaware of the "LEE, Harvey Oswald" mistake.

At some point it would have been nice to have some of these key players sign Lee's name...  one of these players was forging his signature quite often.

 

 

6 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

Either the real Oswald went on this trip, or a fake Oswald went in his place.

Before we determine if Oswald went or not.... let's agree that the explanation in the WCR related to his travel to and from Mexico City is complete BS.

So we either have "the" Oswald entering Mexico another way (car, plane, train) or not entering at all; IOW traveling to Dallas from New Orleans and stopping in Austin on the way.

 

Yes, I agree that the WC explanation for "Oswald" travel within Mexico is bogus. That is to say, the bus story.

"Oswald" (real or fake) could have traveled by car, train, plane, or even by ship I suppose. The reason I always default to "by car" is because a car would require a driver, and this would imply conspiracy. Which would explain why the FBI fabricated the bus story.

But there is a possibility that "Oswald" traveled with an accomplice by other means. And that, while the FBI could have simply ignored any potential accomplice aboard the vessel (train, plane, boat) in their reporting, they chose to play it safe and go with the bus fabrication.

But don't be surprised if I always say it was a road trip.

 

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Q1 - why would an Oswald impostor "sneak" into Mexico if the idea of an impostor is to leave evidence that places Oswald in and out of MC 
    unless this is what occurs (like Alvarado and PAZ stories) and then has to be cleaned up afterward to change it from a man with co-conspirators to the Lone Nut.

 

Why do you say that "Oswald" SNEAKED into Mexico? Do you mean, if he went by car instead of a means that requires purchasing tickets that can be found? Yeah, I guess that going by car would be"sneaking" in, i.e. making it harder to trace.

I would just reply as follows: If the plotters wanted the trip to look real, all they needed to do is actually have a real trip. Whether by car, bus, train or whatever. It isn't necessarily important that the FBI actually be able to find the evidence. The important thing is that there be no holes discovered in the evidence. If a real trip occurred, there can be no holes that might be discovered.

 

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

To me, the Tourist Visa that precedes Oswald's, William GAUDET of the CIA, and the timing of the dates related to the "15 days" seems to have someone within the cover-up artists confused.  If we take Sept 17th and add 15 days we get October 2nd... the day Oswald is supposed to have left... 15 days exactly.  Yet I show how the application is actually for 180 days from CE2481.

 

That does seem to have been a mistake made. And then it looks like somebody tried to correct it by typing "VALIDA POR 15 DIAS" below the application number. Which the WC ignored ended up ignoring.

I'm not surprised by this. Mistakes are made, even in masterful plots.

 

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Q2 - why and how would the DFS and/or Mexican Presidential Police know to go to 4 bus lines and "borrow" their records for specifically and only Sept 26/27 and Oct 2/3.. on the afternoon of the assassination... after which we come to learn that one of the bus line's manifests was added to by Arturo Bosch to change a Nov sheet to an October one while the FBI also places Oswald on Flecha Rojas and the ANATUAC lines coming into Mexico City...
 

 

Are you questioning how it was the DFS became aware of the Oswald trip to MC so quickly? Or just the part about specifically checking 9/26, 9/27, and 10/3 records only?

They could have known about Oswald's trip to Mexico so quickly because of the wires being sent from Mexico City CIA station to the FBI about Oswald's being there. The telephone intercepts with Oswald naming himself. It is hard to believe that the U.S. authorities figured out so quickly the dates Oswald arrived and left MC. Of course, David Philips may have fed the dates to the FBI.. and DFS. And it's hard to believe that a cover up (alteration of bus records) was already in the works on 11/22.

BTW are you sure that the DFS got the bus records only for those particular dates? Are you sure that they got the us records on the day of the assassination?

 

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Can we agree, if the REAL Oswald was in Mexico City it would be in the best interest of the CIA and FBI to show him actually there.

 

Actually I have at times wondered why the FBI didn't just cover up the who Mexico trip.

But I guess they had no choice but to reveal the story. Presumably it was in the news that Sylvia Duran and Azcue were in police custody. That needed explaining. And who knows what else came out or may have come out. So, yes, I guess it was in the FBI and CIA's best interest to show that Oswald was actually there. In fact, even if Oswald wasn't there and it was an imposter, it was still in their best interest to show that Oswald had been there. Otherwise how could they explain away the fact that there was an Oswald imposter going to the consulates in MC?

 

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Can we agree, if the REAL Oswald was in Mexico City it would be in the best interest of the CIA and FBI to show him actually there. Turns out the only way they could do this was to use transcripts of calls for which the voice was not Oswald yet WAS the same a few days later.  The Visa photos were another dead-end (an innocent tourist goes to one of the placed Sylvia claims to have told this man and is easily found out by the FBI.)

 

What is that about the voice actually being Oswald's "a few days later?" I'd never heard that before. Did I understand you correctly?

 

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Q3 - If Oswald was there and used the phone, why did the FBI say it was not him and why Lopez/Hardaway would also not confirm it was him after listening to the tape?
 

 

Well, I for one don't believe Oswald had anything to do with the consulate visits or phone calls. If he did go to Mexico, he did so only to create a record of him going there. If he did go to Mexico, he did something other than visiting and calling consulates. Maybe he went there ostensibly for FPCC business. I mean, that may have been what he thought he was doing there.

 

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

I think we can safely say that the man Ruby killed was not in Mexico City.

That's probably true. And even if he did go there, that would make little difference in our analysis given that he didn't do anything of substance there. (According to what I believe.)

 

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

 I think we can also safely say that IF an impostor was on this trip they did a crap job of leaving evidence of Oswald...

 

According  to my theory, the imposter did NOT do a crappy job. He actually traveled by car to Mexico City. Any trail he left (for example, stopping off at a bar somewhere or whatever) was real and by definition cannot be crappy.

The crappy job was by the coverup artists. They had no interest in investigating a road trip, given that Oswald could not drive and a road trip meant that he had to have had a driver, and such a thing would begin to look like a conspiracy. So the coverup artists had to fabricate the bus ride where Oswald supposedly traveled solo.

The assassination plotters wanted to show a conspiracy. The cover up artists wanted to show a lone gunman.

 

5 hours ago, David Josephs said:

The articles I wrote delves more deeply into the bus line problems and the problems with the Australian girls and McFarlands... Bowen/Osborne is another brick in the wall.  While the beginning of the trip is very detailed... the Monterrey to Laredo and Laredo to Dallas legs show a quick decline in follow-thru.

 

 

They even mention the bus driver from San Antonio to Dallas, Ben Julian.... you suppose they ever got around to talking to him?

 

[David Josephs]

11 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

I've discovered more information about Gaudet, and now know that he did use his own name on the visa application. He clearly was CIA. So if the plan was to have Gaudet be Oswald's driver to Mexico, then surely the plan was to use Gaudet as a patsy too. I mean, surely the plotters wouldn't have wanted it discovered that a CIA asset was involved in the assassination.

And, as with Oswald, the plot would have required the killing of Gaudet.

So I'm inclined to believe that Gaudet's role was just one of facilitator. He got stuff done.

Apparently a good source of information on Gaudet is a book written by Martin Shackelford called Fair Play. David Reitzes wrote the following about Gaudet:

Shackelford [in his book, Fair Play] refers to a relationship between Shaw and William George Gaudet, something worthy of investigation. Gaudet published the Latin American Newsletter out of the rent-free office at the Trade Mart. Gaudet himself had been a CIA domestic contact until 1961, and told journalist Anthony Summers in 1978 that the Newsletter was a CIA front operation. This is not a charge that can be dismissed outright: Although the Newsletter's official sponsor was Standard Fruit, a company which did a tremendous amount of business in Latin America, a great deal of its funding came from New Orleans doctor Alton Ochsner, founder of the Ochsner Clinic, who had a long-standing relationship with the CIA that has not been adequately explained with regard to his anti-Communist activities in New Orleans over the years.

Gaudet himself plays a murky role in the story of Oswald's 1963 summer in New Orleans. He happened to be next in line to Oswald when Oswald applied for his Mexican tourist visa. Though the registry list was published by the Warren Commission, Gaudet's name was withheld from the public until it accidentally leaked out in 1975. Gaudet insisted he did not see Oswald that day and called the event a coincidence. He did say, however, that he'd seen Oswald around the Trade Mart and, most interestingly, he said he had witnessed Oswald conversing at length with New Orleans ultra right-wing extremist Guy Banister on several occasions.

Gaudet, who is now deceased, remains something of a mystery, though his relationship to the International Trade Mart may not prove especially noteworthy, since -- according to Garrison advocate Jim DiEugenio's Destiny Betrayed (p. 220) -- it was ITM employee Ted Brent, not Clay Shaw, who allowed Gaudet the use of ITM office space. As an institution prominently involved in facilitating trade with Latin America, the ITM could have had legitimate reasons for providing an office for the Latin American Newsletter. And if the Newsletter was indeed a front for a CIA operation, as Gaudet has stated, there are any number of explanations that don't require implicating anyone in high crimes or assassinations.

 

 

Yes, I agree that the WC explanation for "Oswald" travel within Mexico is bogus. That is to say, the bus story.

"Oswald" (real or fake) could have traveled by car, train, plane, or even by ship I suppose. The reason I always default to "by car" is because a car would require a driver, and this would imply conspiracy. Which would explain why the FBI fabricated the bus story.

But there is a possibility that "Oswald" traveled with an accomplice by other means. And that, while the FBI could have simply ignored any potential accomplice aboard the vessel (train, plane, boat) in their reporting, they chose to play it safe and go with the bus fabrication.

But don't be surprised if I always say it was a road trip.

 

 

Why do you say that "Oswald" SNEAKED into Mexico? Do you mean, if he went by car instead of a means that requires purchasing tickets that can be found? Yeah, I guess that going by car would be"sneaking" in, i.e. making it harder to trace.

I would just reply as follows: If the plotters wanted the trip to look real, all they needed to do is actually have a real trip. Whether by car, bus, train or whatever. It isn't necessarily important that the FBI actually be able to find the evidence. The important thing is that there be no holes discovered in the evidence. If a real trip occurred, there can be no holes that might be discovered.

Let's see if I can address the highlighted topics starting with "SNEAKED IN"....  All an Oswald impostor needed to do to establish this trip was to buy a 4 part ticket to and from Mexico City, while in New Orleans.  I say "sneaked" as opposed to the kind of attention he worked to get by being loud and contrary as well as a bit Commie.

Given how easy it would have been, the fact that the evidence does no bear this out suggests to me the trip was created rather than experienced.  The WCR nor the FBI could figure out how Oswald gets from New Orleans to Houston... and by adding in the phone call that night that comes well before a bus arrives.  

This call establishes that someone named Oswald claimed to be flying into Mexico City was trying to reach Horace Twiford of the Socialist Labor Party.

*AFFIDAVIT(only relevant portions)

2. ….. He also said that he had hoped to discuss ideas with my husband for a few hours before he flew down to Mexico. He said he only had a few hours. I assume he was calling from the Houston area since he did not, to my knowledge, place a long distance call. However, he did not specifically say that he was in Houston. I have no information concerning his whereabouts when this call was placed. I told him if he desired to correspond with my husband, he could direct a letter to 7018 Schley Street, Houston, Texas, and I would see that my husband received it.
3. I cannot recall the date of the call, but I think it occurred during the week prior to the weekend my husband flew home to visit me from New Orleans where his ship was docked. I recall, my husband had shipped out the weekend prior to the call.
4. I cannot recall the exact time he called, but I think that it was in the evening, sometime between 7:00 and 10:00 o'clock. I was not working during this period.

Signed this 2d day of July 1964.
(S) Mrs. Estelle Twiford,
Mrs. ESTELLE TWIFORD

That does seem to have been a mistake made. And then it looks like somebody tried to correct it by typing "VALIDA POR 15 DIAS" below the application number. Which the WC ignored ended up ignoring.

I'm not surprised by this. Mistakes are made, even in masterful plots.

I'm not sure they ignored it as much as simply accepted it without question despite the evidence used to substantiate it, the application, is clearly marked as a FM-5, 180 day visa.  It was this Visa with "LEE, HARVEY OSWALD = H.O. LEE" and the hotel registry signed in the same exact incorrect manner...  and it is obviously different than the signature on the Duran application.  It seems the same person signs the Hotel and Tourist Visa but not the Duran application...

 

Are you questioning how it was the DFS became aware of the Oswald trip to MC so quickly? Or just the part about specifically checking 9/26, 9/27, and 10/3 records only?

They could have known about Oswald's trip to Mexico so quickly because of the wires being sent from Mexico City CIA station to the FBI about Oswald's being there. The telephone intercepts with Oswald naming himself. It is hard to believe that the U.S. authorities figured out so quickly the dates Oswald arrived and left MC. Of course, David Philips may have fed the dates to the FBI.. and DFS. And it's hard to believe that a cover up (alteration of bus records) was already in the works on 11/22.

BTW are you sure that the DFS got the bus records only for those particular dates? Are you sure that they got the us records on the day of the assassination?

WCD 1084 starting at page 105 or 6 relays the information from Alejandro SAUCEDO regarding the specifics of who showed up, when and where as well as where they had already been.  There are only 4 bus lines: Del Norte, Flecha Rojas, Frontera & ANAHUAC (the line the FBI keeps adding into the mix as an option for how Oswald arrived)...  I also learned that records were sent away from Monterrey - where Oswald would have stopped and where the Aussie girls get on - to yet another border crossing town further north.   Literally the morning of the 22nd things started to happen related to bus line documents being seized.  Here are the most relevant chapters.
https://kennedysandking.com/content/mexico-city-part-2-the-trip-down-part-1
https://kennedysandking.com/content/mexico-city-part-3-the-trip-down-part-2

 

Actually I have at times wondered why the FBI didn't just cover up the who Mexico trip.

But I guess they had no choice but to reveal the story. Presumably it was in the news that Sylvia Duran and Azcue were in police custody. That needed explaining. And who knows what else came out or may have come out. So, yes, I guess it was in the FBI and CIA's best interest to show that Oswald was actually there. In fact, even if Oswald wasn't there and it was an imposter, it was still in their best interest to show that Oswald had been there. Otherwise how could they explain away the fact that there was an Oswald imposter going to the consulates in MC?

How could they "cover it up" when by Oct 10th the ONI and STATE dept are aware, while the Oct 16 memo from Win Scott to Amb Mann is cc'd to I&NS where Jeff Woosley (not Woolsey) who in turn tells Hosty.  The 16th memo has reference to KOSTIKOV which only the pre Oct 10th memo from MX to CIA HQ mentions. So while the 10/10 memo is markedly different from the original note to CIA HQ, FBI learns from their own sources about what the CIA seems to be doing.  

As I've mentioned in the past, if he wasn't there he had to be somewhere else.  A trip to Dallas via Austin with "cuban comrades", a visit to Odio and sister - the FBI/WCR handling of which gives strength to the conclusion it was Oswald at the Odio door.  And finally Oswald in Dallas on the 3rd of Oct, stays at a YMCA and goes home the next day.  Oswald had been doing work for the FBI yet the FBI could not admit to this or JFK's assassin would be connected to Hoover's FBI... no chance.

And I think Hoover knew it from the very second he is aware of the 10/10 cable about Lee Henry and had no choice but to back the CIA or risk exposure.
I think this relates to Hoover's notes on a Jan 1964 document calling out the CIA's double dealing with regards to Oswald in Mexico

 

What is that about the voice actually being Oswald's "a few days later?" I'd never heard that before. Did I understand you correctly?

I believe what was said was that the voice on Oct 1 is the same as the voice from Oct 27/28.  here is the report with that at the top of the page:

 

 

 

 

Well, I for one don't believe Oswald had anything to do with the consulate visits or phone calls. If he did go to Mexico, he did so only to create a record of him going there. If he did go to Mexico, he did something other than visiting and calling consulates. Maybe he went there ostensibly for FPCC business. I mean, that may have been what he thought he was doing there.

One of the possibilities of "placing" Oswald at the Cuban and Russia consulates might be to give his "Cuban" credibility some Bona fides...  In early October Arthur Vallee is still on the table... every activity attributed to Oswald in the year prior to 11/22 were not all assassination-patsy-related... but assassination-patsy--ready

That's probably true. And even if he did go there, that would make little difference in our analysis given that he didn't do anything of substance there. (According to what I believe.)

From the totality of the evidence I've seen, an innocent man, innocently traveling to Mexico by bus would not have left the trail of evidence we find.  Nothing about this evidence is kosher...   the only purpose for Oswald in Mexico City is to cause Hoover problems when 11/22 arrives.  Regarding Bill Simpich's work... you'll have to read and decide for yourself.

 

According  to my theory, the imposter did NOT do a crappy job. He actually traveled by car to Mexico City. Any trail he left (for example, stopping off at a bar somewhere or whatever) was real and by definition cannot be crappy.

We are to remember that Phase 1 of the assassination cover-up was to blame Oswald/Castro/Cuba so that any "conspiracy evidence" would be skewed that way...until PHASE 2 which was Oswald the Lone Nut.  There is obviously some evidence related to Oswald entering by car with others...  and since the investigation into those "others" turned up very interesting data...   "The only young american couple...."

"At 2:05 pm, 11/27/63, while talking to Inspector Don Moore of Division 5 .... . I read to him an article from The Houston Press, dated 11/27/63, which was telephonically furnished to this office ..... in which article stated Oswald left the US by private car, ownership unknown, and returned on 10/3/63, through Laredo, Texas. He advised that Oswald did travel by car and did return to the US through Laredo, Texas on 10/3/63." (FBI memorandum from ASAS J.T. Sylvester, Jr., to SAC New Orleans, 11/27/63.)

 

The crappy job was by the coverup artists. They had no interest in investigating a road trip, given that Oswald could not drive and a road trip meant that he had to have had a driver, and such a thing would begin to look like a conspiracy. So the coverup artists had to fabricate the bus ride where Oswald supposedly traveled solo.

The assassination plotters wanted to show a conspiracy. The cover up artists wanted to show a lone gunman.

A very interesting sentence Sandy...

 

 

[Thomas Graves]

On 5/22/2017 at 5:48 AM, Larry Hancock said:

At this point in time my "opinion" is that Oswald did go to Mexico City and that the CIA was aware of it at the time - however my guess is that all the aspects of his time there certainly don't match the record constructed after the fact. A number of things bother me about his purported visits to the Cuban facilities, less to the Russian.  The passport photo thing is a real problem, also the fact that Phillips also told the FBI in a memo that as of early 64 the CIA still had photos of everyone entering the Cuban facility  at the time Oswald was being reported to have met with an individual the FBI was checking out (they were trying to check some of the many claims about Oswald contacts there) and the individual in question had not entered the building  at that time. The period in question covered Oswald's reported appearances meaning that the CIA should have had Oswald's photo - which suggests they may have had a photo of someone impersonating Oswald. I'm also struck by the Hosty's story that his FBI friends in MC had Oswald under surveillance around the city. After talking to Hosty over time I believe he was sincere about that and operationally there would be every reason for both the FBI and CIA to be monitoring Oswald if he was there - we know from earlier incidents that the first thing the CIA did if they monitored a suspicious American contacting the Cubans was to hand it off to the FBI and Americans were tracked and detained for making offers of information to the Cubans, even in 1963.  We also know that MC station had an AMOT trained mobile surveillance team, given the flap over unknown American contacting the Cubans (and that was a big deal; Phillips lied in his book) its hard to think that nobody went looking for him.  Bottom line is that I'm afraid its much like the shooting in DP, we have bits and pieces and we lack other bits and pieces and we try to get really specific about exactly what did happen. But the bottom line is that, as with many other things, events in MC got "spun" to fit the lone nut story line after the fact and while we can poke holes in it that doesn't mean we can reconstruct what actually went down.

Larry,

How about the idea that those "passport photos" were taken of the one-and-only Lee Harvey Oswald while same was still in the USSR?

Could the Ruskies have been trying to frame Fidel Castro for the assassination?

--  Tommy 

Edited February 1, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Larry Hancock]

Tommy,  I pretty much agree with everything in your post. I don't think much of the official story or evidence regarding his trip hangs together other than to contain a larger story that probably is related to the trip - or at least the agencies knowledge of it.  We always have to remember that the CIA in particular was and is always dedicated to making sure as few of their overall operations are exposed - including sources and methods. Its way to tempting to think that everything they do is to cover up some type of conspiracy when in reality its just SOP.  The same is true for the FBI, even more so in MC where their foreign charter was longer than the CIA's and their operations in Mexico extensive in regard to targeting Americans in Mexico, especially those suspected of being Communists or having Communist connections. They closely monitored American ex-pats - and we have the memos showing how dedicated they were to helping the CIA protect camera and other surveillance activities.  As with the tactical aspects of the attack in Dallas, we always try to reverse engineer these things - but with no idea of all that may have been in play.   As to your question,  no I don't think the Russians were trying to frame Castro, and for that matter we don't really have a detailed record of all the local photo shops the FBI checked after the fact and the fact that some Mexican citizen might not want to have admitted that he took the photos - bringing the DFS down on his head for extreme interrogation  as with Duran - is always a possibility .

[Thomas Graves]

21 minutes ago, Larry Hancock said:

Tommy,  I pretty much agree with everything in your post. I don't think much of the official story or evidence regarding his trip hangs together other than to contain a larger story that probably is related to the trip - or at least the agencies knowledge of it.  We always have to remember that the CIA in particular was and is always dedicated to making sure as few of their overall operations are exposed - including sources and methods. Its way to tempting to think that everything they do is to cover up some type of conspiracy when in reality its just SOP.  The same is true for the FBI, even more so in MC where their foreign charter was longer than the CIA's and their operations in Mexico extensive in regard to targeting Americans in Mexico, especially those suspected of being Communists or having Communist connections. They closely monitored American ex-pats - and we have the memos showing how dedicated they were to helping the CIA protect camera and other surveillance activities.  As with the tactical aspects of the attack in Dallas, we always try to reverse engineer these things - but with no idea of all that may have been in play.   As to your question,  no I don't think the Russians were trying to frame Castro, and for that matter we don't really have a detailed record of all the local photo shops the FBI checked after the fact and the fact that some Mexican citizen might not want to have admitted that he took the photos - bringing the DFS down on his head for extreme interrogation  as with Duran - is always a possibility .

Larry,

With all due respect, you pretty much agree with everything I said or quoted in WHICH post?

One on this thread?

(LOL)

--  Tommy 

PS  Someone told me recently that Castro was, like, REALLY P.O.-ed at Khrushchev after the Cuban Missile Crisis.  Is that true?  If so, maybe they became bosom buddies again before 11/22/63?

PPS  Is it possible that the "KGB" could have been almost as clever and devious and evil as the evil, evil, evil CIA, seein' as how the CHEKA was founded about 20 years before the OSS was, and itself had sprung out of a pretty gosh-darn efficient Tsarist "National Security State" police/intelligence service?

You know, with very efficient "active measures" counterintelligence operations beginning way back in 1921 with "Operation Trust" and "Sindikat-2"?

In short, you don't think the KGB was clever enough to assassinate JFK and pin it on their beloved Cuban friends, or even better, the evil, evil CIA?

Edited February 1, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Larry Hancock]

Tommy, it would be the post on this thread immediately above my reply.   Do I think the KGB was clever enough to conduct assassinations and try to place the blame on someone else,  yes I think so.  On the other hand I absolutely know that Harvey was not only clever enough to do that but described exactly that practice in his strategy notes about ZR RIFLE.  

[Thomas Graves]

58 minutes ago, Larry Hancock said:

Tommy, it would be the post on this thread immediately above my reply.   Do I think the KGB was clever enough to conduct assassinations and try to place the blame on someone else,  yes I think so.  On the other hand I absolutely know that Harvey was not only clever enough to do that but described exactly that practice in his strategy notes about ZR RIFLE.  

Larry,

But you DON'T think KGB/GRU had the expertise or the wherewithal (enough penetration agents and moles in the right places) to be able to highjack or piggyback a CIA operation like that?

Only if JJA, himself, was a mole?

(LOL)

--  Tommy 

PS  When you said you agreed, were you talking about my short post in which I postulated that the KGB had provided those passport sized photos to Duran?

You've really got me confused, now.

What have I said in any and all of my posts on this thread that you actually agree with?

It would undoubtedly be music to my ears...

 

 

Edited February 1, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Larry Hancock]

Sorry Tommy, now that I look more closely at the quotes and excerpts I find that I was agreeing with David...my apologies.

As to your last question: 

"But you DON'T think KGB/GRU had the expertise or the wherewithal (enough penetration agents and moles in the right places) to be able to highjack or piggyback a CIA operation like that?

Only if JJA, himself, was a mole?"

My answer is that I see no signs of that happening, as with any speculation I can't say its impossible but I also fail to understand the motive - and I don't think JJA was a mole, I think he ultimately became clinically paranoid. 

 

[Thomas Graves]

23 minutes ago, Larry Hancock said:

Sorry Tommy, now that I look more closely at the quotes and excerpts I find that I was agreeing with David...my apologies.

As to your last question: 

"But you DON'T think KGB/GRU had the expertise or the wherewithal (enough penetration agents and moles in the right places) to be able to highjack or piggyback a CIA operation like that?

Only if JJA, himself, was a mole?"

My answer is that I see no signs of that happening, as with any speculation I can't say its impossible but I also fail to understand the motive - and I don't think JJA was a mole, I think he ultimately became clinically paranoid. 

 

Larry,

With all due respect, how do you think we ended up with a Russian mobbed-up, pro-Putin, anti-NATO, anti-EU president?

You do believe that "Cozy Bear," and "Fancy Bear," and Guccifer 2.0 (not to mention Putin's legions of professional trolls in Saint Petersburg, and his social media bots) are Russian state operatives, don't you?

Or do you prefer to believe Binney when he says, in so many words, that the hack of DNC's and Podesta's e-mails was an "inside job"?

Or maybe that evil, evil George Soros ....

Anyone but the Ruskies?

LOL

Regardless, what if the JFK assassination was a Soviet job, and all of the conspiracy theories and books and movies and scholarly panels and websites it spawned led to more and more distrust of our own government and institutions, and then along came Rush, and Breitbart, and Roger Ailes, and Alex Jones, and the next thing you know .... "Boom goes the dynamite!"

--  Tommy 

PS  I thought ZRRIFLE was basically against Castro, no?

Have you found any documents yet that pretty much say, " We're gonna hit POTUS," or is it all pretty much still just kinda a mix of circumstantial evidence and conjecture?

Edited February 1, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Larry Hancock]

Tommy, I'll answer those questions later this year with a book scheduled for Fall release - the working title is Creating Chaos; American and Russian political warfare into the 21st Century.   It will be as balanced as possible and equally hard on both America and Russia (old and new) .  And that's all I'm going to say about that for the next few months...grin.

Edited February 1, 2018 by Larry Hancock

[David Josephs]

On ‎6‎/‎26‎/‎2017 at 2:25 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

Either the real Oswald went on this trip, or a fake Oswald went in his place.

That is simply not what the evidence bears out...

What I've been trying to say from the start is if ANYONE wanted to leave breadcrumbs for a simple Oswald trip to Mexico City... it was easily done with a 4 part ticket from New Orleans... that did not happen.

At every checkpoint along the way the EVIDENCE painstakingly shoe horns Oswald into some strange process to get him from point A to B.

It is becoming apparent to me that not only was an Oswald not on any of these buses...  no car, train or plane either.

Basically every single day from 11/23 on the evidence for the trip morphs and accommodates the places we are sure Oswald popped up...

----------

One of the most secret of assets (despite Luis ECHEVARRIA also being an asset within the Gobernacion) provides every item of Mexican evidence to the FBI after many of them are secured by "Presidential staff" within hours of the assassination.  This "staff" goes immediately to the 4 bus lines and "borrows" the manifests and paperwork for Sept 26 - Oct 3.... 

In this FBI asset's hands is the Oswald tourist card, altered FM-11, Hotel Registry, Frontera manifest that BOSCH altered, manifest for delo Norte, ANAHUAC and Flecha Rojas....   I have yet to find his name in the NEW RELEASE...  but I will de writing about him and what he perpetrated for the FBI...

Column 16 is the notes section... the image I have of it does not yet have the comments... 

 

Worse yet is HARVEY CASH of the State Dept who sends off info on the 23rd of Nov seems to be aware of every aspect of the evidence as dictated by the FM-11 - which, as I just mentioned, was "altered" for clarity and assistance by our FBI asset...

At this point Sandy - it's very hard to attach the evidence offered to a real person...  there is NO United States EVIDENCE of this trip...  yet they were able to find virtually every other person who traveled in and out of Mexico those days... except Oswald...

[Larry Hancock]

Heaven only knows, first off I've never been happy with the existence of an absolutely concrete timeline of the Odio incident so I don't know that it was not Oswald and given that his travel there most likely was not per the official story that complicates matters more.  I've also become open to the thought that Odio may well have had prior contact with Oswald and that the visitor story is only part of the full picture.  Clearly Odio was very emotionally affected after the assassination and a five minute doorway encounter may not fully explain that even if she was stressed by an apparently  unwanted pregnancy. .

At this point I do think that Oswald himself was known to Odio, whether in that brief time at the door or otherwise, and that Odio was contacted by people trying to leverage that for their own purposes.  I also belive that Oswald did spend some time in MC although certainly not as represented in the WC report. What I think I've learned is that all this is far more complex than it appeared at first blush and that while we can pick holes in the official story, reverse engineering what actually did happen "on the ground" in Mexico City is still largely speculative. 

[David Andrews]

LOL

Regardless, what if the JFK assassination was a Soviet job, and all of the conspiracy theories and books and movies and scholarly panels and websites it spawned led to more and more distrust of our own government and institutions, and then along came Rush, and Breitbart, and Roger Ailes, and Alex Jones, and the next thing you know .... "Boom goes the dynamite!"

What a long and uncertain game that would have been.

We should have a thread showing how events in the cover-up, plus the general "tone" of the assassination and cover-up, point right back to the perps in the US.  We've done this from post to post, but not really on a grander scale.  Stuff like Len Osanic's "50 Reasons" videos was a step toward it.

Edited February 1, 2018 by David Andrews