Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton


      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send these  to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team

Bill Simpich

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Bill Simpich

  • Rank
    Experienced Member

Recent Profile Visitors

9,045 profile views
  1. Lee Henry Oswald

    Why would thin, 5' 7", blond, blue-eyed, very thin faced, 30 year-old KGB officer Nikolai Leonov be used by James Jesus Angleton in the impersonation of Oswald... ************* Why indeed? I don't know of any evidence that Angleton used anyone to impersonate Oswald. The fact that Leonov was leaving the Soviet consulate on October 2 was picked up by CBS reporter Ed Rabel as a possible Oswald impersonator. The time is linked with the date that Goodpasture was hiding as the sighting of the Mystery Man ...but Goodpasture switched the date of October 2 with October 1 in an attempt to artificially glue together the Oswald phone call of October 1 with the Mystery Man sighting of October 2. I see no evidence that the sighting of Leonov was anything more than coincidental. which impersonation you believe was used to create a molehunt... ************* Nope - neither the sighting of the Mystery Man or Leonov led to the creation of a molehunt, in my opinion. I believe that what led to the molehunt was the phone calls of "Oswald and Duran" on Sept. 28 and a follow-up phone call by "Oswald" on October 1. which fake molehunt, in turn, became a "poison pill" for all those who were involved in the paper trail involving Oswald? ************** I don't believe that the molehunt was fake. I believe that the molehunt was real. As Morley lays out in the Ghost, numerous CIA agents and informants were fluttered during October 1963, after the alleged visit of Oswald. Or (as I believe may have been possible) did somebody force Azcue and Duran to describe, in their 1978 HSCA testimonies, the invisible 9/27/63 impostor in such a way as to implicate KGB-boy Leonov? ************** I remember Duran saying she thought the man they saw was short - I remember Azuce saying he was wearing a blue Prince of Wales suit. Is that the kind of suit Leonov was wearing? What is your theory about why somebody would coerce anybody to say Leonov was impersonating Oswald? I follow the shortest path - someone impersonated Oswald in order to make everyone who handled Oswald look guilty and increase the number of 1) suspects and/or 2) blame for JFK's death. That's the coercion that I see. If so, could the person who did the abovementioned coercing have been ... (gulp) ... Fidel Castro? ************** My belief is that Castro was the focus of numerous assassination attempts - and that he was in the midst of negotiations with JFK for rapproachement. Castro and Angleton got hung out to dry just like Oswald did. The only difference is that Angleton had something to hide - his surveillance of Oswald since 1959.
  2. Lee Henry Oswald

    Please don't put words in my mouth. I'm sure you don't want me to suggest what you think. For example, that Angleton was "good, good, good"? I will say that I am sure about one thing - by Angleton's own admission, the man was deeply troubled. He said on his deathbed that he would see his fellow officers in hell. The whole point of CI/SIG is that to insulate other CIA officers from discovering its function. That's why it was effective - and why its security was so high. The need to protect CI/SIG, and Staff D, LIENVOY and LIFEAT, and numerous other internal CIA secrets helped drive the cover-up, as an internal accelerant to wanting to leave the lone-nut story alone. All the institutional forces gathered to put a stranglehold on an effective investigation.
  3. Lee Henry Oswald

    Hi Paul and Tommy, Reading the deposition doesn't convince me that Egerter didn't know that the two posts were different - at least, not based on her say-so. Egerter's job was to run molehunts. The main role of CI-SIG was to prevent penetrations of the Agency by moles. It kind of took over the office, as Angleton focused on defensive CI maneuvers and pretty much abandoned using it as an offensive force. I don't believe Egerter told the truth when she said that "Lee Henry Oswald" was a mistake. She never corrected the file entitled "Lee Henry Oswald" - Rocca did it in 1975 when the CIA was in hot water. Note that the index cards for the HTLINGUAL program display “Lee Harvey Oswald” and Egerter’s name together. Nor did she correct the 3 by 5 cards that were used to monitor the files - one said Lee Henry Oswald, another said Lee Harvey Oswald, and a third said Lee H. Oswald to account for the New Orleans/Dallas persona after his return from the USSR. My belief is that "the impersonation of Oswald" was used to create a molehunt - which in turn became a "poison pill" for all those who were involved in the paper trail involving Oswald. Jack Whitten, who had the original responsibility for the Oswald investigation, had it taken away from him by Angleton after 30 days. I think Whitten was compromised to some degree - his fingerprints were on the Oswald file. If you asked me if he played a role in the cover-up, I would say yes - simply because he kept quiet about his suspicions about Bill Harvey and other problems in the case. But Angleton's team had a bigger problem, which led Angleton to play an active role in the cover-up after he became the lead on the Oswald investigation: Egerter had removed most of the documents from the 201 file and had put them under lock and key in her office. Those were the documents that told the full story. Whitten's assistant Charlotte Bustos only had a few documents left in the 201 file. When Bustos wrote the twin 10/10/63 letters, she was relying on Egerter. Egerter gave Bustos contradictory information for the descriptions of Oswald in those two letters. Although Bustos may have realized that there was some contradictory information in the two memos, she probably didn’t suspect a molehunt since she was directly relying on the remnants of the 201 file and whatever she was told by the coordinating officers Ann Egerter and Stephan Roll, chief Soviet analyst and Bill Bright’s ex-boss. It was not known within the CIA that CI/SIG’s role was to protect CIA’s internal security, much less to conduct internal molehunts. As an inspector general wrote in a history of CI/SIG during this era, “it would be very seriously damaging to the efforts of the CI Staff if it ever became known that it was engaged in any activities involving CIA employees.” Angleton pursued leads that pointed to possible Soviet and/or Cuban complicity in the assassination, and ignored the evidence that pointed towards the anti-Castro Cubans or other right-wing associations.
  4. Lee Henry Oswald

    Tommy, I did something I rarely do a few years back - when I heard it was released, I wrote the Archives, ordered a copy of Egerter's depo, and then asked Rex to post it at MFF - here it is: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=146600&relPageId=52&search=egerter_AND DEPOSITION
  5. Lee Henry Oswald

    Tommy, I did something I rarely do a few years back - when I heard it was released, I wrote the Archives, ordered a copy of Egerter's depo, and then asked Rex to post it at MFF - here it is: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=146600&relPageId=52&search=egerter_AND DEPOSITION
  6. The blond Oswald in Mexico

    This photo at page 6 of the new file posted by David Josephs today proves that that the 10/2/63 of "Oswald" in Mexico City is Leonov. The number of photo IDs that I am confident of in this case I can count on one hand - this is one. https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=147865&search=aestorage#relPageId=6&tab=page
  7. picnic at White Rock Lake

    Ready for some double agent intrigue? Involving Pino Pino, the Veciana family, and Castro's G-2 intelligence service? Daniel Flores - foreman at El Chico Foods in Dallas, said Osvaldo Aurelio Pino Pino is a truck driver with his company Jose Lecusay said that Pino is married to my wife's aunt (Lecusay was sec'y of propaganda at Dallas SNFE, allied with Alpha-66)\ Pino and Lecusay were both former members of Dallas SNFE Lecusay - Guillermo Ruiz Rodriguez recently immigrated, staying at my home. Ruiz advised Lecusay - Pino not trusted - he could be G-2 https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=125427&search=RUIZ#relPageId=6&tab=page Guillermo Antonio Ruiz-Rodriguez, 10/11/65 brother in law to Lecusay Osvaldo Pino Pino dated Ruiz' aunt then they got married her name is Nelda Rodriguez https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=125427&search=RUIZ#relPageId=7&tab=page Nelda lives at Calle 184 in Havana https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=125427&search=RUIZ#relPageId=9&tab=page Look at this coincidence... Nilda Veciana Lopez (Antonio Veciana's sister) married to Orestes Guillermo Ruiz Perez (a key member of Castro's G-2 intelligence service) https://maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=47103&relPageId=8&search=nelda_nilda%20AND%20VECIANA Were they covering for one another? Osvaldo Pino and his brother Oscar were members of ECLA, Christian Anticommunist Army https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=125427&search=RUIZ#relPageId=8&tab=page They were considered assets in March 62, when they let intel know they could get pix of Cuban bases, etc https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=125578#relPageId=2&tab=page
  8. CIA abbreviations and codenames

    Robert Howard, Back in 2009, you posted this list that includes a reference to AMCANOE-6 as Juan Herrera Valladeres - Do you still remember where to find the document that nailed this down?
  9. Bill Simpich's State Secret

    Hi Paul, My hypothesis that David Morales was a mole stands. You and I go to different places about what that means. As it is a hypothesis, it could have been another AMOT, who reported to Morales. Or the AMOT could have reported to someone else, although I think Morales was the most likely one to get the news. Furthermore, Morales and Gen. Walker were not close allies - Morales' allies were Bill Harvey, Rip Robertson, Clark Simmons...that path would lead to Mafia guys like wiretap expert Richard Cain. Morales was buddies with Mafia guys who knew Cain (and Sam Giancana)...like Johnny Roselli. Navy guys like Chuck Feeney. I went to some length to say that's what I think...while staying open to new evidence because there are many other avenues of evidence to consider. I think it is more valuable to focus on the social relationships between the various individuals involved in the JFK story, because there is a great deal more that we can know and need to know. If our investigation is built on marshy ground, it will lead to weak and unreliable results. That is why I am more interested in light than heat. What I see too often in the Education Forum - and especially on this thread - people forcefully fighting over their pet theories and not listening to one another. I'm an attorney, I see this kind of thing every day, and don't think it's productive. I am calling for a spirit of cooperation where we listen to one another and don't respond in a heated fashion to items of evidence that challenge our own beliefs. The cooler head prevails. With that said, I'm all for the spirit of inquiry. I agree that it is important to say what you think, and put together a hypothesis based on what you have learned. It's also important to treat each other with respect. Especially our adversaries. Bill
  10. Bill Simpich's State Secret

    I think Bright is important. Whether or not Oswald was a spy - and I think he was, at least in his own mind - Marina and June got to go to the USA with him, while the State Dept lent him some money, and meanwhile the military took away his honorable discharge so he was broke and completely manipulable - the CI crowd was manipulating his records. From Chapter 1 of my book: "WB" (William Bright) told the registry to "index page 7", which is the page in the Fain memo that has an inaccurate hand-written description of Oswald as “CIT: USSR, Res. Moscow, USSR, ex-U.S. Marine, who upon his discharge from Marine Corps, Sept 59 traveled to USSR and renounced his U.S. citizenship.” Marguerite Oswald never said that Oswald was a Soviet citizen – only that Oswald had “apparently sought Soviet citizenship”. See how these notes from Fain’s memo were preserved on this index card; however the clerk accurately fixed the writing to say that Oswald traveled “to renounce his US citizenship” rather than “renounced his US citizenship”. The claim that Oswald was a Soviet citizen, however, was not corrected. Did Bright write the note himself? Based on a quick review of the meager amount of Bright’s handwriting that is available, I can’t rule it out yet. This inaccurate handwritten description was on the same page as the physical description as "5 foot 10, 165 lbs, light brown wavy hair, blue eyes".[ 27 ] Now, if anyone turned from the index card to page 7 of Fain’s memo, the reader would immediately see Oswald’s inaccurate physical description. The FBI’s version of page 7 does not include the handwritten description. It’s also possible that page 7 was indexed specifically for the “5 foot 10, 165 pounds” description, the handwriting was added later, and the index card was created last. In either case, Bright had now successfully shoehorned the Webster-like description of Oswald into the CIA’s indexing system. Thanks to Bright focusing on this particular page to be indexed – rather than another page that did accurately describe Oswald’s citizenship status - the CIA now had quick access to an inaccurate description of Oswald’s citizenship status and an inaccurate physical description of Oswald." Although I appreciate that Paul Trejo likes my hypothesis, I should add that we don't agree on a host of issues and Paul's views are frequently not mine. For example, I don't think that Morales "went rogue". Secondly, whether Morales was even involved with Mexico City is simply a hypothesis. I based it on the likelihood that it would have been an AMOT inside the intercept station that manipulated the "voice of Oswald and Duran", or the transcript itself. If the Oswald character actually spoke terrible Russian and terrible English as a couple of the records indicate, the one who did the impersonation was probably a native Spanish speaker. Again, just a hypothesis. I think a better conversation is whether there was a split (based on social class and personal ideologies) between Angleton, Scott, Goodpasture and Phillips on one hand, and Harvey, Morales, Rip Robertson, and their Mafia buddies on the other. If Carl Oglesby was here, he would describe Dick Helms and Allen Dulles as "the Yankees", and what I've described below as a "split within the Cowboys". Resolving my question about a possible split doesn't resolve who led the forces against JFK, but this type of discussion sheds more light than heat. Bill
  11. Strategy of tension

    I think about the strategy of tension all the time. I think it goes back to the dawn of time. On that particular phrase, the Gladio staybehind network and the bombings in Italy of 1968 and 1980 and the whole course of events that uncurled for decades afterwards is quite revealing. The theater offered me great solace on this subject - Dario Fo's Accidental Death of an Anarchist was written right in the thick of the tension. Bill
  12. The blond Oswald in Mexico

    No, he had nothing on the subject.
  13. Bill - I stated recently on a post that I bought you were 'agnostic' on the question of whether Oswald was ever in Mexico City. Is my memory faulty on this point?

  14. The blond Oswald in Mexico

    I was trying to say I think Oswald was impersonated on the phone - and on Sept 28 and October 1. Bill
  15. The blond Oswald in Mexico

    Speaking personally I spent a lot of time studying this subject thinking it was going to lead to a major revelation. It was a fascinating trip, but it wasn't worth the time I personally put into it. That is the red herring. That's largely why I post here. I think the only relevant question for me at this point is if Miller impersonated Oswald which I doubt. Another one might be is if someone like Phillips wanted people to think Miller or another man impersonated Oswald as a false lead and they created this long exhausting goose chase with the help of Jack Childs. Otherwise, absent a big break, I think time has covered up who might have impersonated Odwald in Mexico City. I remain agnostic whether he was impersonated in person or not - I do think he was on the phone. I don't know If Ed or Dan thought Miller acted as a blond Oswald or was mistaken as one. I am sending a post to Dan today about Miller - I will let you all know what he says. Bill