Jefferson Morley

First of all, thanks to all for these informative posts. AMHINT was the name given to the leaders of the DRE; AMSPELL was the cryptonym for the CIA's relationship with the DRE. AMSPELL files refer to the group and its activities; AMHINT files refer to the individuals. Document # 104-10015-10108 has been released. The Pfeiffer report is the only documented instance I know of connecting AMSPELL to a Castro assassination plot. Former DRE leaders disclaim such knowledge, either out of embarassment or forgetfulness. I don't judge. My sense is that these were half-assed plots that Agency people quickly realized were half-assed. Out chauvinism if not racism, CIA men thought it would be easy to get to Castro and kill him. Until they tried. Then the CIA plotters moved from talking to the likes of the DRE boys to talking to the Mafiosos. They needed real heavies. What new any and all this says about JFK and the events of 1963 is not clear to me. It is true that the AMHINTs were trusted agency assets in 1963. More than one of them had Provisional Operational Approval from the agency, a standard designation for a cooperative agent. At least one AMHINT (Salvat) went to Dallas in October 1963 but disclaims any connection with Oswald or the assassination. I have no reason not to believe him. Other AMHINTS were in contact with the House Un-American Activities Committee in September 1963 and right after the assassination. On 11/29/63, the AMHINTs backed out of an invitation to testify to HUAC about Oswald and several of them left the country at that time. What, if anything, case officer Joannides knew about Salvat's trip to Dallas is unknown. What he knew about HUAC's invitation to the DRE leaders to testify about Oswald is unknown. I am fairly sure (but cannot prove) that Joannides knew about the AMHINTs travelling outside of the country after 11/22. Beyond that lies mostly speculation, fun and often interesting but ultimately pointless. The significance of the story, insofar as it can be learned 46 years later, is in the Joannides files. Please help force the release of those files by joining this Facebook cause. http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=646...amp;ref=profile thanks, Jeff

I know she said that but I don't believe it. Azcue said the man was Oswald. The photo on the visa application was Oswald.

We don't know that Mystery Man also visited the Cuban Embassy. I think the nationality identification was based on clothing, not a perfect indicator for distinguishing between Americans and Russians but a pretty good one given the very different clothing styles of the two countries. There were efforts made to identify him but none was successful

No. LIENVOY tapped into about 30 lines into various embassies and political figures. It could not identify the phone number or the source of the incoming call. Yes. I think "probable" is the right word. I cannot prove it. I don't think so. I do not believe the Mexican security services were not part of any operation involving Oswald or creating propaganda around him, if that is your question. It is possible but I doubt it.

I only came across Alberu in the context of the story of the alleged Oswald-Duran affair. Yes. Sylvia Duran is still alive. I'm referring to the wound in Kennedy's back. "Back" would have been a better term upon reflection. Yes, I plan to do another book, possibly about the results of the lawsuit. Not much. I would have preferred to name every source. I wished I had done more research in Mexico. The books scants the Mexican side of Win's life. Sure. The Post name opens a lot of doors. That makes life easy. On the other hand, I like what I'm doing now much more than what I was doing at the Post. Well, until I did this book I didn't have any conclusions about the Oswald and the CIA and Mexico City. I wrote the book so that I could really think my way through to the conclusions. Working with Michael made me look at the story very sympatheticially (to Win Scott). My journalism background made me look at it very objectively. I came away certain that Win Scott knew the CIA's official story on Oswald was b.s., that something had gone very wrong around Oswald's contacts in Mexico City, that there had been, at a minimum, an intelligence failure around Oswald, and that he, Win, wanted to protect himself from the possible consequences of that failure. Certainly, the question of Oswald's Cuban contacts was—and is-- a supremely sensitive one in the CIA. David Phillips' actions became clearer and more curious to me. James Angleton's role grew larger. Not much. I spoke on the phone with him a few times. I did rely heavily on his epic report about Oswald in Mexico City.

Joannides didn't know Scott, as far as I know. I'm pretty sure Joannides knew Phillips though we don't yet have a piece of paper that says so. Think about it. Phillips was running anti-Castro covert operations out of the Embassy in Mexico City. Joannides was brought in, an up and comer from Athens, for his first front-line position, actually managing agents on the "outside." He was the chief of the Psychological Warfare branch in Miami. He had a staff of 24 and a budget of $1.2 million. Phillips visited Miami frequently while pursuing his own psychological warfare operations. Phillips had helped nurture the DRE from the start. Joannides was handling them. Joannides was probably--don't quote me on this--Phillips' field man. I would put it like this. Three counterintelligence operations overseen by David Phillips picked up on Oswald as he made his was from New Orleans to Mexico City to Dallas. * Philip's allies in the DRE ran into Oswald in New Orleans. * His cameras watched the entrance to the Cuban consulate where Oswald came and went. * After Kennedy was killed, he vouched for his reliable informant from Nicaragua who had an Oswald story. Each of these operations was authorized by Philips and his superiors. Obviously, they culminated in disaster whether or not there were two gunmen in Dealey Plaza. Phillips's performance was an intelligence failure that had to be hid. There was either a cosmic intelligence failure. ("This guy Oswald walked through our most sensitive and effective surveillance schemes, we lost track of him and he whacked Jack") or a counterintelligence operation. I lean toward the latter. The October 10, 1963 cable is clear evidence that Oswald was getting sustained, coordinated attention at the top of the CIA. The commentary of Jane Roman and Bill Hood, quoted in "Our Man in Mexico," indicates to me that there was a closely held operation around Oswald, though neither of them cared to admit it.

I found out that Morales was a contact officer in the DRE/AMSPELL project. I saw no evidence that he came to Mexico City during Scott's tenure. Manuel Artime and Howard Hunt did go to Mexico City in summer of 1963. Under oath Hunt lied about these trips.

Thanks for your kind words. Three people suggested that Scott had not died a natural death: Clare Petty, Tom Mann, and Fergie Dempster. The first two did not live in Mexico City at the time of Scott's death. Dempster, a British intelligence officer, did not credit the reports, only say that the had heard them from others. All in all, I didn't see evidence. I don't rule out the possibility. We don't know what the Mexican security services made of Scott's death.

I think we'll get something and hope it is of interest. We may get stonewalled. We will get an explanation of the missing 17 monthly progress reports on the DRE/AMSPELL program during Joannides handling of the group, whether they exist or whether they have been destroyed. We will get some sense of the size of the Joannides' operational file. We might get some declassified documents out of the file. Those could be important or trivial. We'll learn if there are any Joannides records in the 1,100 JFK records that have been classified until 2017. I hope for more clarity on the Phillips-Joannides relationship and Joannides' movements in 1963. If Joannides travelled to New Orleans in the summer of 1963, that would be newsworthy.

I think we'll get something and hope it is of interest. We may get stonewalled. We will get an explanation of the missing 17 monthly progress reports on the DRE/AMSPELL program during Joannides handling of the group, whether they exist or whether they have been destroyed. We will get some sense of the size of the Joannides' operational file. We might get some declassified documents out of the file. Those could be important or trivial. We'll learn if there are any Joannides records in the 1,100 JFK records that have been classified until 2017. I hope for more clarity on the Phillips-Joannides relationship and Joannides' movements in 1963. If Joannides travelled to New Orleans in the summer of 1963, that would be newsworthy.

Joannides didn't know Scott, as far as I know. I'm pretty sure Joannides knew Phillips though we don't yet have a piece of paper that says so. Think about it. Phillips was running anti-Castro covert operations out of the Embassy in Mexico City. Joannides was brought in, an up and comer from Athens, for his first front-line position, actually managing agents on the "outside." He was the chief of the Psychological Warfare branch in Miami. He had a staff of 24 and a budget of $1.2 million. Phillips visited Miami frequently while pursuing his own psychological warfare operations. Phillips had helped nurture the DRE from the start. Joannides was handling them. Joannides was probably--don't quote me on this--Phillips' field man.

I would put it like this. Three counterintelligence operations overseen by David Phillips picked up on Oswald as he made his was from New Orleans to Mexico City to Dallas. * Philip's allies in the DRE ran into Oswald in New Orleans. * His cameras watched the entrance to the Cuban consulate where Oswald came and went. * After Kennedy was killed, he vouched for his reliable informant from Nicaragua who had an Oswald story. Each of these operations was authorized by Philips and his superiors. Obviously, they culminated in disaster whether or not there were two gunmen in Dealey Plaza. Phillips's performance was an intelligence failure that had to be hid. There was either a cosmic intelligence failure. ("This guy Oswald walked through our most sensitive and effective surveillance schemes, we lost track of him and he whacked Jack") or a counterintelligence operation. I lean toward the latter. The October 10, 1963 cable is clear evidence that Oswald was getting sustained, coordinated attention at the top of the CIA. The commentary of Jane Roman and Bill Hood, quoted in "Our Man in Mexico," indicates to me that there was a closely held operation around Oswald, though neither of them cared to admit it.

I found out that Morales was a contact officer in the DRE/AMSPELL project. I saw no evidence that he came to Mexico City during Scott's tenure. Manuel Artime and Howard Hunt did go to Mexico City in summer of 1963. Under oath Hunt lied about these trips.

Thanks for your kind words. Three people suggested that Scott had not died a natural death: Clare Petty, Tom Mann, and Fergie Dempster. The first two did not live in Mexico City at the time of Scott's death. Dempster, a British intelligence officer, did not credit the reports, only say that the had heard them from others. All in all, I didn't see evidence. I don't rule out the possibility. We don't know what the Mexican security services made of Scott's death.