Jump to content
The Education Forum

Bill Simpich on the framing of Lee Harvey Oswald


Recommended Posts

Bill Simpich on the Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald

Published September 14, 2014

Douglas,

Thank you for posting this very informative interview!

Interviewer Alan Dale is very well informed and asks Simpich some excellent questions.

Simpich says he thinks that "Bill Harvey's circle" outmaneuvered "Angleton's circle" in Mexico City, and that Harvey's "pals" killed JFK.

He says that Angleton set up a mole hunt in response to what Bill Harvey's circle had done to implement the telephonic impersonation of Oswald in Mexico City, and this mole hunt by Angleton later precluded Angleton from doing an effective investigation of the JFK assassination.

He says JMWAVE was cut out of Mexico City's CIA Station's most important communications because Mexico City CIA thought it had been penetrated by a mole from Miami.

He also believes that Dallas police officers William R. Westbrook and Paul Bentley were "in on the assassination".

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've listened to the first hour and will get to the second soon. I agree it is a fascinating interview. Thanks for the summary. It's hard to get my head around why the mole hunt would have stymied Angleton later on from doing an investigation. Presumably, even if he did not provide what he knew to the WC he certainly investigated, and if Harvey and Morales, with or without Phillips, had been guilty as charged of the Oswald impersonation surely Angleton discovered that.

It feels to me like Simpich has furthered the research done by the MC investigators like Fonzi, Peter Dale Scott, and Newman. I think it is time for Scott, Newman, and Simpich to hold an event and seriously compare notes and see if they cannot come to a joint resolution of some kind. Newman is still working on this as his recent Cspan presentation shows, and his discoveries regarding cover names, aliases, etc are groundbreaking. For the first time I feel like we are on the verge of a real breakthrough.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've listened to the first hour and will get to the second soon. I agree it is a fascinating interview. Thanks for the summary. It's hard to get my head around why the mole hunt would have stymied Angleton later on from doing an investigation. Presumably, even if he did not provide what he knew to the WC he certainly investigated, and if Harvey and Morales, with or without Phillips, had been guilty as charged of the Oswald impersonation surely Angleton discovered that.

It feels to me like Simpich has furthered the research done by the MC investigators like Fonzi, Peter Dale Scott, and Newman. I think it is time for Scott, Newman, and Simpich to hold an event and seriously compare notes and see if they cannot come to a joint resolution of some kind. Newman is still working on this as his recent Cspan presentation shows, and his discoveries regarding cover names, aliases, etc are groundbreaking. For the first time I feel like we are on the verge of a real breakthrough.

Paul,

Yes, it would be nice if they could get together and have a meeting of the minds.

--Tommy :sun

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Bill Simpich on the Framing of Lee Harvey Oswald

Published September 14, 2014

Douglas,

Thank you for posting this very informative interview!

Interviewer Alan Dale is very well informed and asks Simpich some excellent questions.

Simpich says he thinks that "Bill Harvey's circle" outmaneuvered "Angleton's circle" in Mexico City, and that Harvey's "pals" killed JFK.

He says that Angleton set up a mole hunt in response to what Bill Harvey's circle had done to implement the telephonic impersonation of Oswald in Mexico City, and this mole hunt by Angleton later precluded Angleton from doing an effective investigation of the JFK assassination.

He says JMWAVE was cut out of Mexico City's CIA Station's most important communications because Mexico City CIA thought it had been penetrated by a mole from Miami.

He also believes that Dallas police officers William R. Westbrook and Paul Bentley were "in on the assassination".

--Tommy :sun

bumped

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To understand the framing of Oswald is to orient correctly one's thinking about the assassination.

Why did the plotters choose Oswald of all people to frame? Answer: The plotters didn't want an investigation that would uncover their plot. Such an investigation would be carried out by the FBI with help from the CIA. Framing Oswald was framing a guy known to both the FBI and the CIA. Neither the CIA nor the FBI wanted to open itself to questions about its operations. Framing Oswald guaranteed the FBI and CIA would cover up what they knew about Oswald, thereby precluding an investigation that would reveal the plotters and their motive for killing JFK.

J. Edgar Hoover figured this out pretty quickly. Donald Gibson makes clear Hoover was initially clueless about the details of the assassination. Hoover wouldn't have been so clueless if he had been in on the plot. He surely came quickly to believe it was necessary to pin the assassination on Oswald as the lone assassin in order to protect the FBI from scrutiny.

That the cover-up began some time before the assassination, with the acquisition of the alleged murder weapons (rifle and pistol), is important to note but unremarkable in the sense that one would expect a frame to begin along those lines. What is remarkable is how quickly certain persons (for example, McGeorge Bundy and certain military officers) began implementing the cover-up, got the snowball rolling.

The framing of Oswald should not be taken necessarily to include all visible activities in which Oswald was involved or allegedly involved. The leafletting in New Orleans and the trip to Clinton, Louisiana, for example, may have been nothing more than the thrashing about of a man being manipulated for relatively legitimate intelligence purposes. The problem here of course is separating wheat from chaff.

Who were the plotters? For sure they understood the bureaucratic natures of the CIA and the FBI. They understood LBJ. They understood the American press and mass propaganda. These were not dummies. They were experienced professionals.

Edited by Jon G. Tidd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We can add Gerald Hill, that's for sure. He's a suspect in my eyes. I can't go any farther than that, but Westbrook and Hill both worked in the personnel

division of the police department, with access to the files of the applicants, those in trouble, and those having to deal with internal affairs. They knewall the

dirt on the officers, and who they could and couldn't trust. Westbrook went on to work as a liaison to the CIA in South Vietnam (source: Jones Harris)

http://www.opednews.com/articles/How-the-Warren-Commission-by-Bill-Simpich-Assassination_Evidence_JFK_JFK-Assassination-141119-717.html

I do think that's the task in the next period - try to distinguish between who was in on the planning to kill JFK, vis-a-vis those who were in on

the cover-up afterwards.

I have a new article on the framing of Oswald, focusing on the forensic evidence. I find that some of the evidence in Mexico City (5 foot 10, 165 pounds)

is repeated in the ID of the shooter on the police radio 15 minutes after the assassination. No one ever commented in the documents - hey, that's

the inaccurate description of Oswald that the CIA and the FBI relied on continuously between 1960 to 1963.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...