Marina, the Commission, and Mexico City

[Paul Brancato]

Paul T - you listen with deaf ears.

[George Sawtelle]

Michael

Thank you for the thread on Paul T´s old thoughts on the radical right. A real eye opener.

[James DiEugenio]

Michael:

 

In going through that old thread, I could only find one post by RCD.  It was a good one though.  Reminding us of PT calling Allen Dulles "a great man".

 

 

[Paul Trejo]

On 3/10/2017 at 9:18 AM, George Sawtelle said:

Thomas

You seem to know about mole hunts in MC by the CIA. You shouldn´t have any problems answering the following questions;

1. How did the impersonation of Oswald start a mole hunt?

2. What was the first step by the CIA in it´s pursuit of a mole?

3. What is the name of the mole?

4. How did the hunt for the mole effect the JFK assassination assuming it did?

5. Who was in charge of the mole hunt?

George,

Since Tommy has evidently overlooked your questions, I will offer my opinion, as I address the past week's posts:

1.0. The Mexico City telephone impersonation of Oswald started a CIA Mole Hunt, according to Bill Simpich (2014) as follows. 

1.1.  The telephone between the Cuban consulate and the USSR Embassy was the most wiretapped phone on the planet.

1.2.  The CIA had a standing order to transcribe all calls over that phone into English, and have them on the local CIA Directors desk WITHIN 15 MINUTES.

1.3.  As soon as the CIA translators completed this call, they knew that it was not Lee Harvey Oswald.

1.4.  Yet the content of the call attempted to falsely link the name of Lee Harvey Oswald with the name of KGB assassin, Valeriy Kostikov.

1.5.   The CIA concluded that a Mole inside the CIA had deliberately attempted to use CIA procedures to link the names of Oswald and Kostikov.

1.5.  Therefore, within the hour of the impersonation, a top-secret CIA Mole Hunt was begun to find the Mole.

2.0.  The CIA took many steps in its pursuit of the Mole:

2.1.   The first step was to alter Oswald's 201 File, by removing his pictures, and replacing them with another man's pictures.

2.2.  The second step was to alter Oswald's 201 File by changing his middle name to "Henry."

2.3.  The CIA made several other minor alterations to Oswald's 201 File, as discovered by Bill Simpich (2014) in recent CIA FOIA releases.

3.0.  The name of the Mole was never determined by the CIA (according to CIA FOIA releases), however, Bill Simpich opines that David Morales was the Mole.

4.0.  The CIA hunt for the Mole did not affect that JFK assassination in the slightest, that I can see.

5.0.  Only CIA top-command were in charge of the Mole Hunt.  Middle-level CIA agents were not allowed to know about it.  This is the  nature of any Mole Hunt.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited March 13, 2017 by Paul Trejo
typos

[Paul Trejo]

On ‎3‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 7:17 PM, George Sawtelle said:

Paul T

You swindle the mafia and you´re dead. Forget about blackmail.

Okay so the radical right killed Kennedy. What next?

This is where you are wrong about the radical right killing Kennedy. There is no what next with the radical right. They don´t have the influence or the power to invade Cuba or nuke Russia.

And that is the reason for the MC affair. Set up Oswald as the assassin and take out Cuba/Russia.

And failing to take out Cuba and Russia what next for the radical right? Why would the  military, FBI, CIA and all government agencies tasked with security of the president cover up the deed of the radical right when they could have easily let them hang? They already had what they wanted, a coup.

George,

The Radical Right killed JFK.   There certainly was a "what-next".  However, their "what-next" was a big failure.

The purpose of the Radical Right in killing JFK was not merely to kill JFK, but to fool the USA into believing that the Communists killed JFK.

That is why LHO was framed so perfectly in New Orleans during the summer of 1963.  LHO was framed to appear to be a Communist.

In the "what-next" of the Radical Right, the USA should have risen up in rage against Fidel Castro, and invaded Cuba, killed Castro, and restored Capitalism to Cuba by force.

That did not happen.

Instead, the US Government used J. Edgar Hoover's strategy of the "Lone Nut" theory of Lee Harvey Oswald.   The Communists would not be blamed (because they really didn't kill JFK, and they had no reason to expect that his successor would be more liberal).   The Radical Right would not be blamed (because otherwise the USSR would have had a great advantage in propaganda worldwide).  Instead, Lee Harvey Oswald would take all the blame.

I do agree with you on one point, George -- namely -- that the reason for the Mexico City affair was to set-up Oswald as a Communist -- so that the Communists could be blamed and the USA would invade Cuba (and possibly go to war with Russia).

However -- the US Government did not want this.   Only the Radical Right wanted this.  My proof is that the US Government blamed LHO alone for the JFK assassination.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited March 13, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

On ‎3‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 7:49 PM, George Sawtelle said:

Paul T

¨The Last Investigation¨ pg 390, Morales is quoted as saying ... ¨Well, we took care of that son of a bitch; didn´t we?¨ Morales said ¨we¨ not ¨I¨.

Also, Hunt said he was a ¨bench warmer¨ for the big event. That means he sat on the sidelines and didn´t participate.

Unless you have recent quotes that are different from the ones above I don´t see where Hunt and Morales said they killed Kennedy. Morales saying ¨we¨ could mean that his associates killed Kennedy and by association with his friends he says he did too.

George,

I agree 100% that David Morales was involved in the JFK assassination.   Well, he actually confessed.

But David Morales did not disclose what he meant by the word, "we," in his confession to Ruben Carbajal, "we took care of that SOB."

The CIA-did-it CTers rush to judgment -- they jump to the conclusion that David Morales "must have" meant the CIA.

That is a hasty move.

Bill Simpich (2014) strongly suspects David Morales as the force behind the "Mole" operation in Mexico City, impersonating LHO there.   Yet the CIA high-command had no idea who the Mole was.

CIA agent E. Howard Hunt gave us further clues when he confessed on his deathbed to his son, that he, too, was involved in the JFK assassination.  Hunt claims he was "on the sidelines."  This suggests a large operation.  Frank Sturgis (who was not a CIA agent) secretly invited David Morales to join the plot.

The fact that Frank Sturgis invited Howard Hunt to join the plot is hard evidence that this was not a CIA plot. 

So, the logical conclusion is that David Morales and Howard Hunt joined a plot outside the CIA, namely, a US Radical Right CIVILIAN plot.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

On ‎3‎/‎11‎/‎2017 at 8:00 PM, George Sawtelle said:

Paul T

If the radical right killed Kennedy what is the CIA worried about with regard to holding back it´s files on the JFK assassination. I mean they didn´t do JFK, the radical right did, so why worry about what may be in their files. Why does the CIA continue to protect the radical right when all their leaders are probably dead (H.L. Hunt, Murchison, General Walker, the radical CIA agents like Philips, etc.). The leaders of the radical right have no legacy to protect or do they. 

Please address the above and then I´m done questioning you on the radical right.

George,

The CIA does not decide what to do with its own data.   The US President tells the CIA what to do, and when to do it.

In 1963-1964, the US President told the CIA to hold back all its files on the JFK assassination.   Period.  So they have.

In 1992, the US President signed the JFK Records Act, which will release all US Government documents on the JFK assassination by Thursday 26 October 2017.

I look forward to this date.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[George Sawtelle]

Paul T

You are not making sense. If the mole (CIA agent) knew the CIA had a file on Oswald, why didn´t he refer to the file before the MC affair? IOWs, why didn´t he review the file before he went to MC to impersonate Oswald? If you are going to impersonate someone you want to know everything about the target. That´s just common sense intelligence. The mole is a CIA agent; he would have had access to his file.

OTOH, if he didn´t know the CIA had a file on Oswald, why change anything in Oswald´s file? The mole is not going to refer to a file he believes doesn´t exists.

The above is written with the idea that the mole is working outside CIA protocol as you indicated above.

The hunt for the mole was definitely related to the JFK assassination. By discovering who the mole was Oswald would have been off the hook. He could not have been blamed for the assassination.

I am assuming the mole was working for the radical right since the mole was working outside CIA protocol, wasn´t working for the military (right Paul) and wasn´t working for Hoover. Since he was working for the radical right, why impersonate him in MC as a communist if he already had been framed in New Orleans to appear to be a communist by the radical right (Banister et al).

Above you say Simpich was given CIA documents under FOIA. Yet you say the president sealed those documents until 2039 and in 1992 it was changed to 2017. So it is possible to get CIA documents on the assassination. Yet not all documents are available for release since some reseachers haven´t been able to get anything out of the CIA. So I stand by by earlier statement, if they have nothing to hide and since according to you the radical right killed Kennedy not the CIA then why not release them all now.

[Paul Brancato]

Interesting questions George. It would seem that the 'mole' wanted to be noticed. And don't you think the CIA had pictures of him and knew who he was? The 'mole hunt' is a diversion in my opinion. I always try to think what would have happened had Oswald had lived and been tried. The whole Oswald story, whether they went with the lone Marxist, or the one Fidel sent to kill JFK, or the one that communicated with the head of KGB assassins - would have come apart. Trejo thinks that Oswald was a right winger whose connections with the radical right have long been hidden. He also thinks Morales went out on his own and worked with the radical right that Oswald intersected with, like Bannister and Walker. If so it would be a radical departure for a very important operational CIA officer who worked within the chain of command (Phillips and JMWave) his whole career. When I point that out does that make me a CIA did it conspiracy theorist? Not really. That's way too simplistic.

[George Sawtelle]

Paul B

Yes I agree.

There are too many holes in his radical right did it theory. He is doing a good job of covering some holes but he can´t cover all of them.

He doesn´t realize that the radical right did not control Oswald. Philips did and Philips had no need to have Oswald talk to a Russian KGB assassin.

However someone did need a more solid link of an Oswald/Russian assassination plot; someone outside the CIA and Hoover. 

The impersonation might have worked if Hoover would have played along in the beginning. The fakers would say ... ¨ oh yea we had a recording of Oswald talking to the KGB agent but a technician accidently erased the recording during translation¨ or something to that effect. Just like Z frames 208 - 212 were accidently destroyed by a technician. They got away with the Z frame accident and they would have gotten away with the recording accident. 

 

 

[Paul Brancato]

George - Why do you think Phillips didn't have a part in the Oswald impersonation linking him with Kostikov? One thing we know for sure is that Phillips was hands on afterwords doing what he could to frame Oswald with false stories out of MC. Another thing we know is that Morales was his man. 

[Paul Trejo]

11 hours ago, George Sawtelle said:

Paul T

You are not making sense. If the mole (CIA agent) knew the CIA had a file on Oswald, why didn´t he refer to the file before the MC affair? IOWs, why didn´t he review the file before he went to MC to impersonate Oswald? If you are going to impersonate someone you want to know everything about the target. That´s just common sense intelligence. The mole is a CIA agent; he would have had access to his file.

OTOH, if he didn´t know the CIA had a file on Oswald, why change anything in Oswald´s file? The mole is not going to refer to a file he believes doesn´t exists.

The above is written with the idea that the mole is working outside CIA protocol as you indicated above.

The hunt for the mole was definitely related to the JFK assassination. By discovering who the mole was Oswald would have been off the hook. He could not have been blamed for the assassination.

I am assuming the mole was working for the radical right since the mole was working outside CIA protocol, wasn´t working for the military (right Paul) and wasn´t working for Hoover. Since he was working for the radical right, why impersonate him in MC as a communist if he already had been framed in New Orleans to appear to be a communist by the radical right (Banister et al).

Above you say Simpich was given CIA documents under FOIA. Yet you say the president sealed those documents until 2039 and in 1992 it was changed to 2017. So it is possible to get CIA documents on the assassination. Yet not all documents are available for release since some reseachers haven´t been able to get anything out of the CIA. So I stand by by earlier statement, if they have nothing to hide and since according to you the radical right killed Kennedy not the CIA then why not release them all now.

George,

My CT makes good sense; but you seem to consider too little about CIA operations.

If you would read Bill Simpich's superb eBook, State Secret: Wiretapping in Mexico City (2014) instead of trying to piece it together from informal posts like this, your questions would all be answered.

First, there is a hierarchy in the CIA -- they are not all equal.   The Mole (David Morales) was not part of the CIA high-command.  He was a middle-level CIA agent.

Secondly, every glance at a 201 file has to be officially recorded.  If David Morales had asked to see Oswald's 201 file before the Mexico City impersonation, he would have to explain to the CIA high-command why he wanted it.  Also, after the impersonation, David Morales' name would be on the list of recent viewers of Oswald's 201 file, and he would have been among the first questioned.

Third, it is most likely that David Morales knew a lot about Lee Harvey Oswald before the impersonation.  He could have learned that simply by visiting the Cuban mercenary training camp in New Orleans, run by Guy Banister and David Ferrie.  

One member of this FORUM, Tommy Graves, believes that David Morales was on Canal Street when Oswald was handing out FPCC leaflets, and that we have him on film.  That is very possible, IMHO.  People like David Ferrie would have photographs of Oswald.  The Dallas and Fort Worth newspapers already reported that Oswald had returned from the USSR.  It was not hard for Morales to get information on Oswald.   (Guy Banister controlled Oswald completely after April 1963.  David Atlee Phillips only borrowed Oswald from Banister.)

Fourth, a CIA Mole Hunt procedure begins by changing the CIA 201 File, and telling nobody about that change except the CIA high-command.  The next person to request that 201 File would get bogus data and spread it.  

We know who that was -- it was the CIA agent who published the October 18, 1963 memo claiming Lee Oswald met with Kostikov; this memo was viewed by James Hosty, as reported by him in his book, Assignment Oswald (1963).  We know this because that CIA memo gives the full name as Lee "Henry" Oswald.  

Changing the middle name to "Henry" was part of the Mole Hunt procedure.

The Mole was clearly working WITHIN the CIA protocol (but he did not anticipate a Mole Hunt).  The Mole was hoping to link the name of Oswald with the name of KGB assassin Kostikov in official records.  

That hope failed.  

Further, George, you are mistaken when you think that if the CIA Mole was captured, then Oswald would be off the hook.  That is quite mistaken.  Oswald was to be blamed for the JFK murder no matter what else happened, because the Truth about the JFK murder -- that JFK was killed by forces inside the USA -- was to be hidden from the world for 75 years.   The USSR would have made a propaganda coup by this story.  So, Oswald had to be blamed.

Now -- Oswald was in fact part of the plot -- at least, he was the Patsy -- he knew who the plotters were -- he was cooperating with them, although he had no clue of all the details or that he would be tagged the Patsy.  So, Oswald was partly guilty, and so to that degree, some justice was done. 

All this was known by J. Edgar Hoover by 3PM CST on 11/22/1963, according to Professor David Wrone.

The Mole was a CIA agent gone rogue, who was working with the Radical Right to fool the USA into blaming the Communists for the JFK assassination, and then invading Cuba and killing Fidel Castro.  The purpose of framing Oswald in Mexico City, in addition to New Orleans, was to add the CIA record to the evidence.  It backfired.  Morales found out too late that it backfired.

Also, George, it seems you don't follow the JFK Records Act.  There were over 20,000 records sealed in 1964.  In 1992, with the JFK Records Act, the deadline for the all records to be revealed was October 2017.  However, that allowed for SOME of the records to be released before that date.  Today there are only about 3,000 records remaining to be revealed.  FOIA lawsuits have already revealed about 17,000 others, including those seen by Bill Simpich.

The reason they aren't all released today is because the US Government moves slowly, by priority and orders.  They have until Thursday 26 October 2017.  The most sensitive of those documents are being withheld until that date.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited March 14, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[James DiEugenio]

Does PT even know what a mole is?

From the above, I don't think he does.

The rest of this is simply assumption built upon assumption.  Morales could have known about Oswald, he could have gotten such and such info from people in New Orleans, he could have been in New Orleans etc etc  Which all reminds me of the whole adage about a frog with a glass butt.

This is why I like the Lopez Report.  It relies on data and not assumptions.

Keep on spinning Paul.  You never get tired of it, although the rest of us do.

[George Sawtelle]

Paul T

Morales was afraid to sign out for the 201 file but the mole wasn´t? Makes a lot of sense.

How could the mole be working within CIA protocol if he was working alone unbeknownst to his boss?

You´re just singing to the choir with the rest of your info.

 

 

 

 

[George Sawtelle]

Paul T 

Re: release of CIA documents on JFK assassination

All you´ve done is strengthen the belief that the CIA is hiding something by not releasing all the files. You say, in defiance of presidential orders, they can release some but not all. Tell us why Paul T.