Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      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
James DiEugenio

Davey and Jean: Love at First Sight

Recommended Posts

Let us take a look at another of Davey's heroes, or in this case, a heroine: Jean Davison.

She published a book called Oswald's Game in 1983. Davey was so enamored with her and the book that, decades later, he wrote a mash note to her thanking her profusely for her efforts. (You can see it at the head of the first article below.)

Now, today, this book is an ancient relic from the past. Because of superseding work by people like Phil Melanson, John Newman and John Armstrong. These books--and others-- have all made Davison's book the equivalent of a Model T Ford.

But, my point below is to show how, even in 1983, Davison was very selective about the info she used in the book. And beyond that, its pretty obvious that she did next to nothing as far as original research went. In fact, there is no evidence in her notes that she either 1.) Went anywhere, or 2.) Called anyone.

Which, as I note below, is incredible. I mean why write a bio of Oswald 20 years after his death and not do any legwork, or even phone work?

I supply the answer below. But please read part 2. See, Jean made a faux pas in her book. She implied Oswald learned Russian in the service. Somebody, like say McAdams, clued her in and told her, "Hey, that hints he was getting intel training." So Jean then changed her mind. She said that Oswald now learned Russian from his--get this-- tourist guide in the USSR.

And Arnold Schwarzenegger never used steroids.

Anyway, this is the kind of writing that Davey admires. An author who tells only half the story. But its the half Davey wants to hear.

http://www.ctka.net/2014_reviews/Davison%20review.html

http://www.ctka.net/2014/Davison%20update.html

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In his book, which he co authored with Mel Ayton, Davey denies any relationship between Oswald and American intelligence.

Which in my view, is simply a non starter today. Especially after the work of John Newman in Oswald and the CIA.

In her book, Davison failed to note the puzzling fact that the CIA did not open a 201 file on Oswald--until a year after he defected.

When the HSCA interviewed some CIA people on this, they could not explain it, including Helms.

Does Davey?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say the delay in opening Oswald's 201 file was merely bureaucratic red tape and foot-dragging. Nothing more. And certainly nothing sinister. It was opened, as I recall, in December 1960, about a year after Oswald left for Russia (which was in Oct. '59). But so what? Where do you want to go with the one-year delay, Jim? What is the delay supposed to mean anyway? And how does the one-year delay in opening the 201 file somehow indicate that the subject of that 201 file was working for U.S. Intelligence?

Things in Government sometimes get delayed. Big deal. Is that really a surprise to you, Jim?

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd say the delay in opening Oswald's 201 file was merely bureaucratic red tape and feet-dragging. Nothing more. And certainly nothing sinister. It was opened, as I recall, in December 1960, about a year after Oswald left for Russia (which was in Oct. '59). But so what? Where do you want to go with the one-year delay, Jim? What is the delay supposed to mean anyway? And how does the one-year delay in opening the 201 file somehow indicate that the subject of that 201 file was working for U.S. Intelligence?

Things in Government sometimes get delayed. Big deal. Is that really a surprise to you, Jim?

I'd say the delay in opening Oswald's 201 file was merely bureaucratic red tape and feet-dragging. Who wudda thunk? You ask some interesting questions, and I'll bet you have some equally interesting answers. Want to throw them out here?

Dec 1960? hey, that's about a year after mine was opened, just before my clandestine trip to XXXXXXX (still Top Secret)

Edited by Kenneth Drew

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Davey:

You don't know when to keep your mouth shut do you?

As I said, you always lead with your chin.

You know why? Because you never read anything of any value. You did not read Newman's book did you? He explains why its so strange.

See, when the news came in that Oswald had defected to Russia, the FBI, State, ONI and Navy Dept. all opened files on the case. And the files were all stamped properly and filed properly. And the FBI put out the proper FLASH warning on the file. In other words, everything is handled clearly and routinely.

But not at the CIA.

When they got the news, it went into a Black Hole, undetectable for about a month. It then surfaced in Angleton's super secret SIG counter intel office. Which, as Newman notes, is kind of weird also. Because it should not have been there. It should have been in the Soviet Russia division. In other words, the black hole it went into kept it from going to where it should have gone. On top of that, there is no evidence that the CIA now did a security investigation to see what secrets Oswald could give to the USSR. I mean, as Newman writes, he was a radar operator and involved with the U2. In fact, Oswald was one of the few who knew the U2 was flying over China. But again, John says there is no evidence of any damage assessment inquiry in 1959.

When the HSCA asked Helms about the delay in the opening of the 201 file, Helms replied "I am amazed. Are you sure there wasn't?...I can't explain that." The CIA then lied about about where the Oswald CIA docs went to before the 201 was opened. They said they were never filed higher than confidential, and were therefore destroyed. Well, John found them and they were not destroyed; because they were classified as secret. But further, the ones that were classified as confidential were still around also. (Hmm, trying to cover something up there fellas?)

But here is the kicker as far as I am concerned. Although Oswald was so inconsequential as not to merit a 201 file, the most common file in the Agency; somehow he was important enough to be placed on the Watch List for mail interception. Which was one of the rarest programs the CIA had. Literally thousands of people had 201 files. About 300 were on this Watch List. Naturally, it was supervised by Angleton.

And guess what? Oswald was on it when his file was in the Black Hole. (Destiny Betrayed, Second Edition, pgs 142-44)

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jim

Fascinating material. You really have been digging into this.

Question: Was LHO on the CIA's Watch List for mail interception at the time he supposedly ordered the rifle and pistol? And, if he was, what does this tell us about the CIA?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In his book, which he co authored with Mel Ayton, Davey denies any relationship between Oswald and American intelligence.

Which in my view, is simply a non starter today. Especially after the work of John Newman in Oswald and the CIA.

In her book, Davison failed to note the puzzling fact that the CIA did not open a 201 file on Oswald--until a year after he defected.

When the HSCA interviewed some CIA people on this, they could not explain it, including Helms.

Does Davey?

Jimmy, I know this is going to shock you greatly, but I'm going to still choose to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was in no way connected to or employed by the Central Intelligence Agency of the United States. And I still favor my previous explanation when it comes to the delay in opening Oswald's 201 file at the CIA -- "bureaucratic red tape and foot-dragging."

Also, do you think that when a person is put on a "Watch List for mail interception" by the CIA, this action is somehow an indication that the person being placed on the Watch List works for the same agency? That seems like a rather odd leap of logic to me.

It would seem to me that the fact Oswald was on a CIA "Watch List" would be a pretty good sign right there that the man being "watched" is NOT a person who is already employed by the CIA. Because if Oswald is with the CIA, then why would there be any need to put him on some kind of a "Watch List"? Or maybe it was merely a "fake" Watch List to throw people off. Is that it, Jimmy?

And let me also add the following excerpts from Vince Bugliosi's book concerning the subject of Lee Oswald's 201 CIA file....

“The CIA (specifically, the Special Investigations Group [sIG] of the CIA's counter-intelligence unit) did not open a 201 file (a file kept on an individual, including CIA employees, that brings him into the agency's records system) on Oswald until December 9, 1960, after he had defected to the Soviet Union, and then only after the agency had received a request from the State Department for information on American defectors.

However, the agency, before December 9, was already receiving information on Oswald from other agencies of the government. It had four written communications in 1959 from the State Department pertaining to Oswald's defection to the Soviet Union, the first one dated October 31, 1959, from Moscow, and a fifth communication dated May 25, 1960.

The CIA told the HSCA that there were "no specified criteria for automatically opening a 201 file on an American." And when the HSCA reviewed the 201 files of twenty-nine other defectors, eight of whom had 201 files opened before their defection, they found that for only four of the remaining twenty-one the files were opened because of the defection. The files on the seventeen other defectors were opened from four months to several years after the defection.

The HSCA said that "at the very least, the committee's review indicated that during 1958—1963, the opening of a [201] file years after a defection was not uncommon. [Oswald's defection to the Soviet Union first came to the attention of American officials in Moscow on October 31, 1959. So his 201 file was opened more than thirteen months later.] In many cases, the event was triggered by some event, independent of the defection, that had drawn attention to the individual involved."

The HSCA went on to say that "the existence of a 201 file does not necessarily connote any actual relationship or contact with the CIA." Though not automatic, such a file is normally opened by the CIA when "a person is considered to be of potential intelligence or counterintelligence significance." Oswald's 201 file, the HSCA said, "contained no indication that he had ever had a relationship with the CIA."

[VB Footnote:]

“The reader should realize that many in the conspiracy community would give their right arm if they could prove that Oswald was a CIA agent. If they could do this, it would be the answer to their most wondrous dreams, the solution, at last, to the Kennedy assassination. This is because they are too blind when it comes to the assassination to realize that even if Oswald were a CIA agent, it would only be one step in their quest for the Holy Grail. They'd still have to prove that the reason why the CIA lied about Oswald's relationship with the agency was not because it didn't want the world to know that one of its agents murdered the president (as, on a lesser scale, a religious order would not want it to be known that one of its priests was a child molester), but because number one, the CIA decided to murder Kennedy, and number two, the agency got Oswald to murder Kennedy for it.” -- Vincent Bugliosi; Pages 1198-1199 of "Reclaiming History"

Edited by David Von Pein

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then there were about 30 some odd documents pertaining to Oswald in the HT/LINGUAL files, also like systematically being filed in another section. Those files are very

interesting as well. I know when the CIA and Nixon were going back and forth over the Huston Plan, was when J Edgar Hoover supposedly started getting really freaked out

and wasn't much later when he turned up dead. I wonder; the Nixon quote "that fellow, Hunt knows too damn much," wouldn't take a rocket scientist to note the same

fact about Hoover.

Edited by Robert Howard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bob:

No, I don't think he was on the Watch List at that time.

Davey, see, I read and noted VB's book if you recall. And I did so much more thoroughly and extensively and critically than you did.

VInce pulls one of his tricks in his discussion of Oswald and the CIA. He separates out the two facts that he was on the Watch List and did not have a 201 file yet. Because he does not want to address the paradox that this poses. And he does not note the Black Hole. Or the distinct indication that Angleton, at this early date, was controlling Oswald's file. Or else how did it end up in the super secret SIG? Vince knows he is walking on egg shells here. Because he only mentions Angleton's name four times in the entire book, and one appears to be a mistake by the indexer. To do that after the ARRB and after Newman's book is very puzzling. Especially in a book that states up front that it will face the arguments the critics made and face them as they want them made.

Geez Davey, no comment on the lack of a security inquiry? Just bureaucratic bungling eh? After all the U2 was the number one asset the USA had at that time in the Cold War.

Now, what is even odder about the missing 201 file is this: it was opened only after two queries by the State Department on the false defector program. These were sent to DIck Bissell at CIA. Otto Otepka was a State Department researcher and analyst. He noted the rising wave of "defectors" to the USSR at this time. And there certainly was such a rising wave, and it was soon to turn into a veritable tsunami. Which, by the way, is a definite trend which Vince does not note in his book. Wonder why?

Anyway, Otepka--unlike Davey, who has to feign ignorance--understood what was happening. He wanted to know which of these guys was genuine and which of them was part of the fake defector program. Which was being supervised by, guess who? James Angleton. How do we know that?

Two ways. First, when Newman asked Bob Bennerman how the Office of Security responded to Oswald's "defection", he replied with "Angleton was in on this." Secondly, Bissell passed the queries from State onto Angleton. About two weeks after the second query, the CIA opened a 201 file on Oswald. One has to wonder: was this done in reply to Otepka's queries? Or put it this way: If Otepka had not asked about the defector program at this time, would the CIA have opened a 201 file on Oswald even later? Or maybe never? Which would have been mind boggling to anyone-- except Davey of course.

There is a third way we know this about Angleton. As Newman noted many of the CIA documents on Oswald at this time bear the rubric CI/OPS which means counter intelligence operations Which was Angleton's domain.

Now, the 8th name on Otepka's defector list was Oswald. When the CIA finally began to reply to Otepka's request for info on the defectors, the analyst was told to work on some names, but not on others. Oswald was one of the "others". In fact, in the CIA reply to Otepka, Oswald's name was marked SECRET.

But Otepka would not give up. He didn't understand, you did not mess with Angleton. Therefore, his career now began to slide downhill. Until it became a Kafkaesque nightmare. He was first removed from sensitive cases. Smear stories about him began to appear in the press. He was asked to accept a transfer but would not. He was called before Senate committees to explain his methods for issuing security passes. But he would not give up his inquiry into the fake defector program. Now, spies, phone taps, listening devices were placed into his office. His trash was gone through after hours and his house was surveilled. Otepka did not understand what was happening. He could only figure that someone did not want him to find out about who was real and who was not in the defector program.

His study of that program was placed in his safe. After he was removed from his office, that safe was drilled into and it contents stolen. This occurred at about the same time he was removed from State: November of 1963.

Interesting story isn't it? Now, in over 2400 pages, one would think Bugliosi would address it. After all, he said he would make the critics' cases as they would. Yet, for some puzzling reason, Otto Otepka is not in the index to Reclaiming History. In 20 years, Vince never encountered this info? Neither does Davison deal with him.

These are the kinds of writers that Davey relies on for info on Oswald.

Edited by James DiEugenio

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Jim

Fascinating material. You really have been digging into this.

Question: Was LHO on the CIA's Watch List for mail interception at the time he supposedly ordered the rifle and pistol? And, if he was, what does this tell us about the CIA?

According to Professor George Michael Evica, on page 16 of the Prologue to his book, A Certain Arrogance, it was the FBI who was monitoring Oswald's mail at the time the Warren Commission alleges that the rifle was ordered.

Certain1.jpg

Certain2.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Greg. It has always fascinated me how someone such as Oswald, an avowed Communist, a defector to the USSR and someone whose mail was being monitored, could have ordered and received, by mail, a rifle, and not set off every single alarm designed to watch out for just such an occurrence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey nice footnote Greg, you actually reproduced the book.

Bob, I agree.

Its very hard to understand why the FBI did not know about the rifle shipment way back in March or April.

Why did they have to scramble around in Chicago, and why did Holmes have to do all the skullduggery?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No reply about Otepka i almost three days eh.

How could Bugliosi have not even mentioned him in his mammoth book, that is what I want to know.

And in a bio of Oswald, Jean Davison ignores him. The guy who was trying to find out if Oswald was a fake defector or not?

I thin that is kind of important.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As Newman noted many of the CIA documents on Oswald at this time bear the rubric CI/OPS which means counter intelligence operations Which was Angleton's domain.

Now, the 8th name on Otepka's defector list was Oswald. When the CIA finally began to reply to Otepka's request for info on the defectors, the analyst was told to work on some names, but not on others. Oswald was one of the "others". In fact, in the CIA reply to Otepka, Oswald's name was marked SECRET.

But Otepka would not give up. He didn't understand, you did not mess with Angleton. Therefore, his career now began to slide downhill. Until it became a Kafkaesque nightmare. He was first removed from sensitive cases. Smear stories about him began to appear in the press. He was asked to accept a transfer but would not. He was called before Senate committees to explain his methods for issuing security passes. But he would not give up his inquiry into the fake defector program. Now, spies, phone taps, listening devices were placed into his office. His trash was gone through after hours and his house was surveilled. Otepka did not understand what was happening. He could only figure that someone did not want him to find out about who was real and who was not in the defector program.

His study of that program was placed in his safe. After he was removed from his office, that safe was drilled into and it contents stolen. This occurred at about the same time he was removed from State: November of 1963.

Maybe CIA suspected LHO was a part of British intelligence operation against the US.

In 1964-1967 CIA investigated stories of defectors and re-defectors.

We see an interesting remark at the end of page '* - stationed in Europe at time of defection'.

CIA was investigating the European trace.

Is anybody take into account the case of US counter intelligence operation against the UK?

Was Otto Otepka an obstacle for such counter intelligence operation?

Despite the fact that the Warren Commission received information from Hoover about Yuri Nosenko his name is not mentioned in the final report. Although the commission favoured Hoover’s interpretation that he was a genuine defector, it was decided that it was better not to include the information. This was decided after Tennent Bagley, spoke to commission members on 24th July, 1964: “Nosenko is a KGB plant and may be publicly exposed as such some time after the appearance of the Commission’s report. Once Nosenko is exposed as a KGB plant, there will arise the danger that his information will be mirror-read by the press and public, leading to conclusions that the USSR did direct the assassination.”

The dessert: http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/T%20Disk/TV-Radio%20Transcripts%20From%20Trunzo%20Russ/WNUS/67-11-02.pdf

P.S.
  1. 1945: Igor Gouzenko (place of escape: Canada, British dominion)
  2. 1954: Vladimir Petrov (place of escape: Australia, ex British dominion)
  3. 1964: Yuri Nosenko (place of escape: Switzerland, Europe) was suspected a double agent.
Edited by Vitali Zhuk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In his book, which he co authored with Mel Ayton, Davey denies any relationship between Oswald and American intelligence.

Which in my view, is simply a non starter today. Especially after the work of John Newman in Oswald and the CIA.

In her book, Davison failed to note the puzzling fact that the CIA did not open a 201 file on Oswald--until a year after he defected.

When the HSCA interviewed some CIA people on this, they could not explain it, including Helms.

Does Davey?

Jimmy, I know this is going to shock you greatly, but I'm going to still choose to believe that Lee Harvey Oswald was in no way connected to or employed by the Central Intelligence Agency of the United States. And I still favor my previous explanation when it comes to the delay in opening Oswald's 201 file at the CIA -- "bureaucratic red tape and foot-dragging."

Also, do you think that when a person is put on a "Watch List for mail interception" by the CIA, this action is somehow an indication that the person being placed on the Watch List works for the same agency? That seems like a rather odd leap of logic to me.

It would seem to me that the fact Oswald was on a CIA "Watch List" would be a pretty good sign right there that the man being "watched" is NOT a person who is already employed by the CIA. Because if Oswald is with the CIA, then why would there be any need to put him on some kind of a "Watch List"? Or maybe it was merely a "fake" Watch List to throw people off. Is that it, Jimmy?

And let me also add the following excerpts from Vince Bugliosi's book concerning the subject of Lee Oswald's 201 CIA file....

“The CIA (specifically, the Special Investigations Group [sIG] of the CIA's counter-intelligence unit) did not open a 201 file (a file kept on an individual, including CIA employees, that brings him into the agency's records system) on Oswald until December 9, 1960, after he had defected to the Soviet Union, and then only after the agency had received a request from the State Department for information on American defectors.

However, the agency, before December 9, was already receiving information on Oswald from other agencies of the government. It had four written communications in 1959 from the State Department pertaining to Oswald's defection to the Soviet Union, the first one dated October 31, 1959, from Moscow, and a fifth communication dated May 25, 1960.

The CIA told the HSCA that there were "no specified criteria for automatically opening a 201 file on an American." And when the HSCA reviewed the 201 files of twenty-nine other defectors, eight of whom had 201 files opened before their defection, they found that for only four of the remaining twenty-one the files were opened because of the defection. The files on the seventeen other defectors were opened from four months to several years after the defection.

The HSCA said that "at the very least, the committee's review indicated that during 1958—1963, the opening of a [201] file years after a defection was not uncommon. [Oswald's defection to the Soviet Union first came to the attention of American officials in Moscow on October 31, 1959. So his 201 file was opened more than thirteen months later.] In many cases, the event was triggered by some event, independent of the defection, that had drawn attention to the individual involved."

The HSCA went on to say that "the existence of a 201 file does not necessarily connote any actual relationship or contact with the CIA." Though not automatic, such a file is normally opened by the CIA when "a person is considered to be of potential intelligence or counterintelligence significance." Oswald's 201 file, the HSCA said, "contained no indication that he had ever had a relationship with the CIA."

[VB Footnote:]

“The reader should realize that many in the conspiracy community would give their right arm if they could prove that Oswald was a CIA agent. If they could do this, it would be the answer to their most wondrous dreams, the solution, at last, to the Kennedy assassination. This is because they are too blind when it comes to the assassination to realize that even if Oswald were a CIA agent, it would only be one step in their quest for the Holy Grail. They'd still have to prove that the reason why the CIA lied about Oswald's relationship with the agency was not because it didn't want the world to know that one of its agents murdered the president (as, on a lesser scale, a religious order would not want it to be known that one of its priests was a child molester), but because number one, the CIA decided to murder Kennedy, and number two, the agency got Oswald to murder Kennedy for it.” -- Vincent Bugliosi; Pages 1198-1199 of "Reclaiming History"

So Mr. V. P. Have you read Newman's book or not? (We all know VInce B is not a reliable source. )

Edited by Dawn Meredith

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×