Was Oswald an Intelligence Agent?

[Larry Hancock]

Jon, at the risk of being rude, you simply need to do a more significant amount of homework to judge Nagell. You said you were going to read Russell's books on him, hopefully The Man Who Knew Too Much and the newer version. Have you read my Someone Would Have Talked which discusses Nagell in some detail? Have you gone through the CD I recommended? Were the documents you refer to in my posting on my own web site....that's the only place I've posted any. The bottom like is that if all you have read about him is online or at McAdams site which does offer a very negative view of him online then you simply don't have the full picture. Indeed your summation of the Nagell story in your last sentence is very far from the much more complex story that I touch in in my book and Dick goes into in extreme detail. Certainly Nagell was not employed by the CIA in any formal sense sense, nor did he state that he had been. He did describe being in contact with CIA personnel, providing information and performing tasks for individuals who he knew to have been CIA but also individuals who he felt might have been misrepresenting themselves to him.

Given that I don't try to change anyone's opinion and that I've often said forums are very insufficient places to explore any of these subjects effectively without a lot of background, I'll leave it at that. If you do decide to explore the source material I cited and remain totally skeptical that's fine too....Nagell himself admitted to not at all having a full picture of what was going on around him at all times and he certainly did have some psychological issues...he never denied that either. In any event, I'll not pester you on the subject, it took several years and huge amount of study for me to even develop an opinion on him.

[Jon G. Tidd]

Larry Hancock @ post #151:

Both your "Someone Would Have Talked" and "The Man Who Knew Too Much" are on my desk within arm's reach. I'll profit from reading both. Please give me a head start re Nagell. To what verifiable facts should I pay attention? I like to begin any intellectual endeavor with a clear statement of facts or a clear statement of the problem to be solved.

I haven't made up my mind except to this extent: it's important to me to separate what is verifiable about Nagell from what's not verifiable. I don't discount out of hand everything that may be true about Nagell but which cannot be verified. I just want to re-start my thinking with two clean piles of asserted facts: those that can be proven concretely and those that lack concrete proof.

Please let me know if any of the asserted facts on which I've relied in prior posts are invalid. I'm not so sure at this point, for example, of the rank Nagell held in army when he separated from active service. One source says 2d Lieutenant, others say Captain. This is a possibly significant matter I believe, bearing on Nagell's trajectory as an army officer.

[Larry Hancock]

Jon, to help I will give you some excerpts from the study which you would find on the Keys to the Conspiracy CD (I don't go into nearly the same detail in SWHT).

Nagell was give a combat field promotion in Korea, to Lt. As of 1955 when he was given a Top Secret clearance he was a Captain. He was discharged from active duty with Army CIC following an airplane crash which damaged the side of his head and the Army medical appraisal of him at that time was that "this officer shows no evidence of psychosis or disabling neurosis. He is immature...he is a management problem...but he does not require further neuro psychiatric hospitalization". (situational note - this was at a time when Nagell had been having problems following is marriage to a Japanese national, problems with his assignment and with his fellow officers). A great many of his personal problems related to his wife, her nationality and later to custody over their children. In contrast, one of his former sgt's in Korea described Nagell as a maverick simply because he always wanted to do things by the book and was totally intolerant of bending the rules....which was his complaint about certain CIC activities in Japan.

In Nagell's poessession, when taken into custody at the bank, was a Fair Play for Cuba newsletter, a Minolta camera and developing kit, a jacket from a Mexico City clothing store with 2 Mexican tourist cards hidden in the lining....one card had the name Joseph Kramer, the other Aleksei Hidel. He had two notebooks, one of which was later returned and one which was not. The one which was returned contained the unlisted number for the Cuban embassy in Mexico City with Sylvia Duran's name (same as in Oswald's notebook), a note from an FBI agent concerning names and meetings at unspecified locations, with dates. It also contained the names - which were later verified - of six CIA personnel, some on the West Coast and one or more in DC.

Nagell's recorded statements to officials (with affidavits) on the assassination include the following...that Lee Oswald had been recruited into a conspiracy against the President and some sort of incident that was to occur in the DC area in September 1962. That Oswald's contacts were anti-Castro Cubans representing themselves as Castro agents. That the conspiracy itself was of domestic inspiration and origin and that that he had provided this information to the FBI following his arrest.

Hopefully that will get you started and I think that in SWHT you will find details which are verifiable, on the CD you will find a much more situational analysis of Nagell's evolving legal problems and remarks as well as related documents and of course in Dicks's book a much more personal view of the man himself.

[Jon G. Tidd]

Larry Hancock, you write:

"In Nagell's poessession, when taken into custody at the bank, was a Fair Play for Cuba newsletter, a Minolta camera and developing kit, a jacket from a Mexico City clothing store with 2 Mexican tourist cards hidden in the lining....one card had the name Joseph Kramer, the other Aleksei Hidel. He had two notebooks, one of which was later returned and one which was not. The one which was returned contained the unlisted number for the Cuban embassy in Mexico City with Sylvia Duran's name (same as in Oswald's notebook), a note from an FBI agent concerning names and meetings at unspecified locations, with dates. It also contained the names - which were later verified - of six CIA personnel, some on the West Coast and one or more in DC."

How do you know any of this is true?

[Larry Hancock]

The materials taken into custody are verified in police and court records, as to the identification of the CIA personnel, the Agency was questioned on the point and actually acknowledged the individuals and employment in a memorandum ...as I recall, to the HSCA. These were not covert nor covered CIA personnel, they were office type people...I don't recall if their positions were specified. As to the citations and sources on all these things, you will find them in the books and documents....I would not pretend to recall individual citations, that's why I write books and publish research including document collections....certainly I don't trust my own memory on specifics. I should note that obviously Dick did the primary work on Nagell including contacts with his lawyers, the court archives, and even the police and jailers involved as well as former service persons, Nagell's family and friends. I've shared a few documents and records I located and obtained via FOIA but the vast bulk of the research has been his and at best I've contributed a minor amount...but that includes the possible identification of Nagell's CIA contact in Mexico City....who had also been stationed in Tokyo when both Nagell and Oswald were in Japan.

[Jon G. Tidd]

Back to whether Oswald was an intelligence agent.

If he was, he served an intelligence service. He served it by performing specific tasks the service gave him. The intelligence service rewarded him in some way; at least that is customary.

The intelligence service would have recruited him and trained him. In the course of each mission or after, someone in the intelligence service would have debriefed him -- to gain information from him, possibly to give him new instructions or training, possibly to compensate him. These activities are characteristic of the way an intelligence service deals with its agents.

Do I detect signs of any such activity? No, but some things catch my eye besides his ability to speak, read, and write Russian. In no particular order they are:

1) He claimed to know photography well and appears to have possessed a Minox camera. These things catch my eye because they indicate skills that might be useful for an intelligence agent. These things don't tell me Oswald was an intelligence agent. They're markers.

2) He apparently knew, perhaps instinctively, how to deflect an interrogator's questions. This is a skill taught by an intelligence service to some agents. Another marker.

3) He had at certain points unexplained money. Unexplained money is a third marker. Yet he always seemed to need a job in order to earn money. There's a contradiction here it appears.

4) He apparently met with Ruth Paine in the course of seeing Marina. This is a fourth marker. The suggestion here is that Marina's staying with Ruth Paine provided a pretext for Oswald to meet with Ruth Paine, a cover story. Ruth Paine is a suspicious person (I'll just posit that).

5) He either went to Mexico City at the end of September 1963 or didn't. Either way, there is no satisfactory accounting for him during the "Mexico City period." What was he doing? A question like this in the context of the assassination is another marker.

OK, so there are some markers consistent with Oswald's being an intelligence agent. With being under the direction of an intelligence service. But not having any apparent mission and not receiving any significant compensation for the work he was performing for the intelligence service.

My take: Oswald was an odd duck who did unusual things (like defecting to the USSR) on his own, for his own purposes. The particular unusual things he did lit him up like a flashing neon sign for one or more intelligence services.

Edited January 4, 2015 by Jon G. Tidd

[Thomas Graves]

Back to whether Oswald was an intelligence agent.

If he was, he served an intelligence service. He served it by performing specific tasks the service gave him. The intelligence service rewarded him in some way; at least that is customary.

The intelligence service would have recruited him and trained him. In the course of each mission or after, someone in the intelligence service would have debriefed him -- to gain information from him, possibly to give him new instructions or training, possibly to compensate him. These activities are characteristic of the way an intelligence service deals with its agents.

Do I detect signs of any such activity? No, but some things catch my eye besides his ability to speak, read, and write Russian. In no particular order they are:

1) He claimed to know photography well and appears to have possessed a Minolta camera. These things catch my eye because they indicate skills that might be useful for an intelligence agent. These things don't tell me Oswald was an intelligence agent. They're markers.

2) He apparently knew, perhaps instinctively, how to deflect an interrogator's questions. This is a skill taught by an intelligence service to some agents. Another marker.

3) He had at certain points unexplained money. Unexplained money is a third marker. Yet he always seemed to need a job in order to earn money. There's a contradiction here it appears.

4) He apparently met with Ruth Paine in the course of seeing Marina. This is a fourth marker. The suggestion here is that Marina's staying with Ruth Paine provided a pretext for Oswald to meet with Ruth Paine, a cover story. Ruth Paine is a suspicious person (I'll just posit that).

5) He either went to Mexico City at the end of September 1963 or didn't. Either way, there is no satisfactory accounting for him during the "Mexico City period." What was he doing? A question like this in the context of the assassination is another marker.

OK, so there are some markers consistent with Oswald's being an intelligence agent. With being under the direction of an intelligence service. But not having any apparent mission and not receiving any significant compensation for the work he was performing for the intelligence service.

My take: Oswald was an odd duck who did unusual things (like defecting to the USSR) on his own, for his own purposes. The particular unusual things he did lit him up like a flashing neon sign for one or more intelligence services.

He appeared to possess a Minox camera, not a Minolta.

--Tommy

[Jon G. Tidd]

Thomas Graves, thanks. Edit made.

[Thomas Graves]

Jon, to help I will give you some excerpts from the study which you would find on the Keys to the Conspiracy CD (I don't go into nearly the same detail in SWHT).

Nagell was give a combat field promotion in Korea, to Lt. As of 1955 when he was given a Top Secret clearance he was a Captain. He was discharged from active duty with Army CIC following an airplane crash which damaged the side of his head and the Army medical appraisal of him at that time was that "this officer shows no evidence of psychosis or disabling neurosis. He is immature...he is a management problem...but he does not require further neuro psychiatric hospitalization". (situational note - this was at a time when Nagell had been having problems following is marriage to a Japanese national, problems with his assignment and with his fellow officers). A great many of his personal problems related to his wife, her nationality and later to custody over their children. In contrast, one of his former sgt's in Korea described Nagell as a maverick simply because he always wanted to do things by the book and was totally intolerant of bending the rules....which was his complaint about certain CIC activities in Japan.

In Nagell's poessession, when taken into custody at the bank, was a Fair Play for Cuba newsletter, a Minolta [sic] camera and developing kit, a jacket from a Mexico City clothing store with 2 Mexican tourist cards hidden in the lining....one card had the name Joseph Kramer, the other Aleksei Hidel. He had two notebooks, one of which was later returned and one which was not. The one which was returned contained the unlisted number for the Cuban embassy in Mexico City with Sylvia Duran's name (same as in Oswald's notebook), a note from an FBI agent concerning names and meetings at unspecified locations, with dates. It also contained the names - which were later verified - of six CIA personnel, some on the West Coast and one or more in DC.

Nagell's recorded statements to officials (with affidavits) on the assassination include the following...that Lee Oswald had been recruited into a conspiracy against the President and some sort of incident that was to occur in the DC area in September 1962. That Oswald's contacts were anti-Castro Cubans representing themselves as Castro agents. That the conspiracy itself was of domestic inspiration and origin and that that he had provided this information to the FBI following his arrest.

Hopefully that will get you started and I think that in SWHT you will find details which are verifiable, on the CD you will find a much more situational analysis of Nagell's evolving legal problems and remarks as well as related documents and of course in Dicks's book a much more personal view of the man himself.

Tidd's response:

Larry Hancock, you write:

"In Nagell's poessession, when taken into custody at the bank, was a Fair Play for Cuba newsletter, a Minolta [sic] camera and developing kit, a jacket from a Mexico City clothing store with 2 Mexican tourist cards hidden in the lining....one card had the name Joseph Kramer, the other Aleksei Hidel. He had two notebooks, one of which was later returned and one which was not. The one which was returned contained the unlisted number for the Cuban embassy in Mexico City with Sylvia Duran's name (same as in Oswald's notebook), a note from an FBI agent concerning names and meetings at unspecified locations, with dates. It also contained the names - which were later verified - of six CIA personnel, some on the West Coast and one or more in DC."

How do you know any of this is true?

Hancock's response to Tidd's question:

"The materials taken into custody are verified in police and court records, as to the identification of the CIA personnel, the Agency was questioned on the point and actually acknowledged the individuals and employment in a memorandum ...as I recall, to the HSCA. These were not covert nor covered CIA personnel, they were office type people...I don't recall if their positions were specified. As to the citations and sources on all these things, you will find them in the books and documents....I would not pretend to recall individual citations, that's why I write books and publish research including document collections....certainly I don't trust my own memory on specifics. I should note that obviously Dick did the primary work on Nagell including contacts with his lawyers, the court archives, and even the police and jailers involved as well as former service persons, Nagell's family and friends. I've shared a few documents and records I located and obtained via FOIA but the vast bulk of the research has been his and at best I've contributed a minor amount...but that includes the possible identification of Nagell's CIA contact in Mexico City....who had also been stationed in Tokyo when both Nagell and Oswald were in Japan."

I'm still waiting for Tidd's response to Hancock's response to Tidd's question, "How do you know any of this is true?"

--Tommy

Edited January 6, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Jon G. Tidd]

Thomas Graves @ post #159:

I thank Larry Hancock for his response.

One interesting fact I learn from Larry is that the names in Nagell's notebook were those of CIA employees who were not working undercover and who it appears may have not been performing any tasks requiring access to classified documents.

Lots of people, people who didn't work in any way for the CIA, could have written down the same names. I've certainly done no work for the CIA, yet I can name two persons I know who did work for the CIA, the fact of which is open knowledge.

I respect Larry and his work in this arena. I remain skeptical, however, that Nagell worked in any way for the CIA or the KGB in the early 1960s.

I am going to expand my knowledge re Nagell by studying Larry's SWHT and Dick Russell's book. So far, my skepticism hasn't waned.

Edited January 6, 2015 by Jon G. Tidd

[Larry Hancock]

Jon, as it shouldn't until you spend a great deal of time on it....couldn't agree more. However I would point out that I don't myself feel that Nagell was officially working for either the Agency in any formal or paid role as an agent or source. However, I do believe that he was in contact with CIA officers and very possibly KGB officers as well, in line with his own interests and available to them on a totally unofficial basis for peripheral activities of their own interests...very likely unknown inside the official reporting hierarchies. I know you are skeptical of this but with our current knowledge of CIA "soft files", with proven field officer involvement in unsanctioned operational activities and with statements from officers themselves - all recounted in Shadow Warfare and elsewhere - I personally feel the operational side of the CIA Plans Directorate functioned with a lot more discretion for its officers and with a lot less formal reporting than the intelligence collections and analysis groups.

It's also quite possible that Nagell "name dropped" and exaggerated his role....however, that does not preclude his possible contacts or observations in Japan nor his proven activities in and around the Fair Play for Cuba Committee both in the US and Mexico City....how much of that was at his own initiative and how much might have been "encouraged" will likely remain a mystery somewhat on the line of Oswald himself. The crux of the matter though is whether he was traveling in the same Cuban exile circles and fundamentally whether or not he observed Oswald in contact with suspicious exiles known to him in New Orleans. It should be noted that Nagell had no information on the Dallas attack, but rather on the contacts in NO and a potential September plot in the DC area - something corroborated by Oswald's own SWP and CPUSa correspondence about a move there which could not have been independently known to Nagell.

In any event, I expect your studies of the material I suggest will prove interesting even if they do not lead to a solid conclusion, for me Nagell is valuable only in regard to the fact that his remarks about Oswald and the exiles in New Orleans are corroborated by other sources and serve to show one step in the events prior to Dallas...in which Oswald was very visible to a variety of Cuban exiles who were in turn themselves in contact with CIA filed officers out of JMWAVE in Miami.

[Jon G. Tidd]

Larry Hancock @ post #161:

As an army officer who was C.I.-trained and language trained, I wound up in a military intelligence unit in Viet Nam. I dealt with the unit's most sensitive information and crossed paths with CIA officers. I flew on Air America. My job title at one point was classified. The whole time I was in country I operated under a cover story. From my vantage points and assignments, I could grasp the whole of the action, pretty much, in III Corps, the region, the provinces, surrounding Saigon. I got to know Saigon well. I spoke two of the local languages.

When I left active duty in December 1972, it was severing all these ties. Every one. I became a civilian, and that was that.

From what you write, I'm to understand Nagell maintained some such ties after he left army active duty. I find this hard to believe. Unless he possessed some unique, irreplaceable quality or knowledge (which I can't imagine) that made him useful to an intelligence service.

[Larry Hancock]

John, it really is a waste of energy to continue to discuss any level of detail until you read the source material I referenced - and for that matter its now been years since I was dealing with it myself (my own studies were mainly between 2000 and 2006 when I was doing the work on SWHT; the 2010 edition had only a few updates pertaining to him). I've done three historical studies/books since working with the Nagell material. I would be silly for me to try to be more specific without going though it all again myself. However, as I recall Nagell told Dick that he did undertake some translation activity with visiting Japanese, simply as a favor to some of the local office folks. Beyond that, what got him involved with the FPCC and exile matters is another story and you will need to explore that yourself. As far as Mexico City, his contact there was with a CIA officer whom he had known in Japan. So, generally speaking, no he had no special knowledge other than language skills as a known quantity, unconnected to the Agency but personally known to the CIA officer who was operating in a very detached role at that point in time.

I wish you well if you choose to explore this but I'm not going to embarrass myself by claiming to recall details that I really don't....

Edited January 7, 2015 by Larry Hancock

[Paul Brancato]

Jon - thanks for sharing your military experience. I did my best not to get drafted, and burned my draft card in front of the Pentagon in 1967 during a large protest against the war. Forward nearly 4 decades and here we are participating in this forum questioning authority and trying to understand our history. I still feel the same as I did then, and view our history through that lens. I don't think JFK would have sent our young men to Vietnam to fight a losing battle against a nationalist force. I recall that he went on a Congressional mission to Vietnam in the early '50's and returned saying pretty much the same thing. What is your perspective now on what we did then? I assure you I am not judging what you personally did, but I am openly critical of what I view as a mistaken and needlessly bloody foreign policy.

On the subject at hand I think that your strict view of military code and conduct probably colors your view of how operational intelligence operates. I obviously don't have military or intelligence experience, but it seems obvious to me that the lines get blurry when humans are involved in dangerous actions. You say that you flew on Air America. Did you encounter any drug running?

[Jon G. Tidd]

Larry, many thanks for your suggestions and feedback.

Paul, I've always had a lot of respect for young men who did what you did, burn your draft card and risk criminal prosecution. That took courage and principle.

I was no fan of the war but wanted to see first-hand what it was all about. I've always had mixed feelings about the war. My core belief is that it was a terrible mistake committed by LBJ. I've never believed JFK would have taken this country to full-blown war in Viet Nam. NSAM 263 is sometimes mis-read and sometimes misrepresented. Bottom line: I don't believe JFK knew what to do about Viet Nam and was willing to try small efforts to stem a communist takeover in the South; but he was pretty clearly averse to war.

Your question about drug running is right on target, although not because of any experience I had with Air America. A few officers in my organization had their fingers on the pulse of drugs being brought into South Viet Nam from Laos. The drug running was significant to these officers because the runners were passing through Cambodian and Laotian border areas that were of great interest, areas where the NVA had camps, prisons, caches of material, hospitals. Some of the runners had the potential to provide valuable information, really important and valuable information.

Edited January 7, 2015 by Jon G. Tidd