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 an email 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

8,969 profile views
  1. 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?
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. The blond Oswald in Mexico

    No, he had nothing on the subject.
  6. 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?

  7. 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
  8. 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
  9. The blond Oswald in Mexico

    Oh, no. Just saying that I think Leonov held a post with the Soviets similar to the post Phillips held with the Americans. They were both propaganda/recruitment kind of guys.
  10. The blond Oswald in Mexico

    Jim - I am not a big fan of a most threads but I like this one. I think the blond Oswald has been a red herring for a long time, and I hope this thread can put a few theories to bed. At the same time, the role of the blond Ernesto Lehfeld Miller who visited the Cuban Embassy on September 26 is not yet completely understood. The first thing I want to say is that I agree with you that photo studies are among the least reliable evidence there is, unless they are very good photos and there is reliable corroborating evidence. Trying to make sense of them is a humbling experience. One is that the pictures released by the HSCA in 1978 portray Oswald - the photos I have posted make a strong case that one of the men identified as "LEON" on the CIA photos is Nikolai Leonov, the man "who was David Phillips' alter ego" for the Soviets in Mexico City. Not just because of the resemblance, but because LEON is written down and Leonov regularly went in and out of the station. The other is that the blond man who appeared in the Embassy on September 26 was the friend of the Duran family - Ernesto Lehfeld Miller. I didn't identify him - but I went to the National Archives and read the depositions of Silvia, her then-husband Horacio, and the whole family - they all identified Ernesto Miller as the man after looking at the photo, and they testified that he would regularly borrow Horacio's car. A line of inquiry I am looking at is that Horacio and Ernesto were both architects, and the intelligence documents have a fair amount of discussion about the 7th Congress of the International Union of Architects between September 27-October 3. A CIA agent within the architects was quizzing Teresa Proenza about this conference - Proenza was a close friend and ally of Silvia Duran. I will submit it is possible that Ernesto Lehfeld Miller impersonated Oswald on September 26. Not probable, but possible. Hardway and Lopez made a finding that a 5 foot six blond "Oswald" appeared at the embassy on September 26, wearing a light blue "Prince of Wales" suit. So it can't be ruled out - but it is not found in the final conclusion contained in the Lopez-Hardway report. Again you are quite right - that is a fine document. I'm mailing the document to Dan today to see if it jogs his memory as to why they apparently changed their mind about this initial finding. I believe they decided it was Ernesto Lehfeld Miller, because the Duran family interviews were conducted in the closing months of the HSCA study. Finally, I want to address a misunderstanding about what i referred to in my book as the Oswald-Webster "uncanny resemblance" and said that they looked "almost exactly the same". You wrote that I thought the two men were "dead ringers" for each other. The difference is subtle, but important. The difference is that I think the resemblance can be seen in photos. A glance shows that they are not the same man. But the resemblance is important because it got people to talk about the resemblance. And talking among Soviets was what was important, because any wiretaps would pick up that conversation. Similarly, I am very struck that both Webster and Oswald were identified as 5 foot 10 and 165 pounds. It is simply not an honest description of Oswald. The question in my mind is why were each of them given the identical description? Like "Henry" and the quarrel about whether or not Oswald had "renunciated his citizenship", this is all grist for the mill in a molehunt. From your comments, I think the biggest difference that you and I have is that you don't believe a molehunt happened. The molehunt remains a theory - not a fact - an important distinction with Mr. Trump as president. I do think there is much good evidence to support the theory. Bill
  11. The blond Oswald in Mexico

    Tommy, I can't quite go with you on your theory about "the intentional scene caused by Oswald". If it's true - which I am not sure about at all - Oswald could have done it for any number of reasons. The big question for me remains whether Oswald went to the Cuban embassy. I get the feeling we are looking at the same document when you refer to the "hard-to-find Cuban embassy"... I never considered the Cuban embassy as "hard to find" until I took a hard look at the document I cited earlier in this thread - specifically, expat Elizabeth Mora tells two Mexican FBI informants that Teresa Proenza ran into Oswald "cold" at the Cuban embassy and she turned him over to the nearest person who was "higher in rank and spoke English"...the FBI agent writing the memo describes the Cuban embassy as "difficult to find". Maybe Mora just had a poor memory, but this FBI summary refers to this event and says Proenza "turned (Oswald) over to Silvia Duran, a personal friend of Proenza, and embassy employee." That's a different story from the Mora story...did it come from Proenza, Duran, or somewhere else? It would be good to find the source. If you believe the Jack Childs story that Oswald comment about "I'm going to kill Kennedy" - a big if - that would mean that Fidel knows something about the story that nobody else seems to know. Fidel's meeting with the HSCA members is worth checking out. It is very jovial. Fidel makes a point of not attacking Azcue, but makes it clear he has "no special theory" whether or not the real Oswald came to the Cuban compound. He does not discuss the embassy vis-a-vis the consulate with the HSCA members. Duran and Azcue don't tell us the "I'm going to kill Kennedy" story - if the Childs story is true, it sounds like it happened at the embassy and not the consulate. Like you are doing, I hope as many of us as possible keep digging deeper into the documents we have on hand. It's the best way to prepare for whatever we find out in October. Bill
  12. Marina, the Commission, and Mexico City

    I'm the kind of guy who loves researchers but hates arguing about who's right and who's wrong. I'm a lawyer that hates lawyers. With that said, Paul, I appreciate the kind things you've said about me, but leave me some wiggle room. And yourself too. When I wrote State Secret, the center of the story was my belief that Oswald was impersonated in Mexico City. At least on the telephone. And when I got into the whodunit question...which I did very gingerly...I offered my thinking as a hypothesis. A hypothesis. Not faith. I was not saying that I thought the higher-ups in the CIA were innocent - or in the other intelligence agencies either. I was saying that the killing of JFK could have been a revolt from within the middle-level of the Agency, not the tippy-top. But it might have been from the tippy-top - like Angleton. Or Angleton might have been caught with his shorts down - Kim Philby showed it could be done to him. Someone framed Oswald, I'm convinced of that. You think the radical right did the whole thing. Walker and friends could have been in on it. But who manipulated the entire autopsy? I don't see how the radical right could have controlled that. All I'm saying is be a little more flexible. Listen to everyone a little harder.
  13. Walter Raymond Jr.

    CA/B3 Walter Raymond was a CIA officer active in Mexico City in Oct 1963. State was apparently cover for him in the 60s. He wrote a memo on 10/16/63 setting up meetings with David Phillips and two officers (including one who was a propaganda specialist (known as KUWOLF) to discuss QKOPERA operations (Congress of Cutural Freedom). The goal was to shift the tenor of Mexican intellectual life to a more pro American stance- should they start their own publication or take another one over? http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=45135&relPageId=2&search="Walter_Raymond"
  14. Goosecreek?

    Reviving this thread...I notice there are two lines of GOOSECREEK...when running traces on the NSA defectors and when running traces on leads from QJWIN. Both involve Bill Harvey doing some heavy lifting at Staff D. My speculative read on GOOSECREEK is that it is the slugline used when requests are made for traces or other assistance from Staff D. The term GOOSECREEK probably derives from the need to engage in a wild goose chase to put together obscure references on a very important subject.
  15. Curtis-Mathes plant

    James, Can you tell us or share your source for Morales being Volsky's case officer? I tried to contact Volsky on Facebook, but he hasn't written me back. His website is http://georgevolsky.com/ Bill