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
Paul Brancato

Does Lifton's Best Evidence indicate that the coverup and the crime were committed by the same people?

Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Tommy,

When it comes to bureaucrats -- especially in Government -- and more especially in higher places in Government -- no delays in obtaining data are too absurd.

Now, as for the story of Oswald at the Russian Embassy in Mexico City during the final week of September 1963, Oleg Nechiporenko gives us his story shortly after the Oliver Stone movie, JFK, was promoted worldwide.  This was a reasonable time to wait to come forward.  He never mentioned Leonov.  

I have a real problem with Nikolai Leonov presenting the same story in the first person more than 10 years later..

Leonov has his cute story about a volleyball game that he had to miss, so that guaranteed in his story that it was a Sunday.  And nobody else was there except him and Oswald and the Security Guard.  Let's see -- the same story as Nechiporenko in 1993, but with different people and this volleyball game.  You buy that?   It sounds made up to me.

Look at Bill O'Reilly, for goodness sake, writing a book about the JFK assassination, and placing himself near the scene of the suicide of George DeMohrenschildt, the special friend of Lee Harvey Oswald.  There's money in this story for really good fibbers, IMHO.  Leonov needed the money.  That's my take on it.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Dear Paul, 

Another interpretation is that Oswald never went to the Mexico City Soviet Embassy, at least not when Nechiporenko and Leonov said that he did, and that his alleged meeting with Nechiporenko "and the boys" on Saturday and his alleged meeting with Leonov-and-only-Leonov (and the Security Guard) on Sunday were fabricated from whole cloth and in such a way as to paint him not only as being so unstable and violence-prone as to suggest he very well could have killed JFK, but also that he was so unstable, in fact, as to "substantiate" and "legitimize" the KGB's Department 13's being disinterested in him when moved to the U.S.S.R. and, you know, allegedly tried to kill himself.

So disinterested, in fact, that Kostikov's Department 13 didn't even interview him to see if he knew any military secrets.

--  Tommy :sun

 

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/17/2017 at 3:49 PM, Paul Trejo said:

Tommy,

You accuse me of minimizing the numbers, but you are maximizing the numbers.

Look at that photograph again of Oswald between the two Dallas cops.   Why do you keep saying 5'10" when he clearly less than that?

If Marina really is 5'3" as I've read, then Oswald is no more than 5'7" in that photograph from Minsk.   People often lie about their height.  

What evidence do you have to keep saying 5'10" for Oswald?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo


Oswald really does seem to be about 5' 7" in the Minsk photograph. And in other photographs, as I've been noticing lately (since I've been wondering if the record of his height was purposely exaggerated).

As an aside... If so, that would add further evidence that 1) Prayer Man was Oswald, and 2) there were two different Oswalds (Harvey and Lee).

But back to the relative heights of Oswald and Leonov... As Paul Trejo says, people often lie about their heights. But in this case it could be Leonov who lied. It could be that he was really more like 5' 4" or  5' 5" than 5' 6".

Just sayin'...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, I think all this speculation about the exact height of LHO is a distraction from the Big Picture.  The JFK Cover-up Team was different from the JFK Kill Team.  Sylvia Duran was terrified of the Truth -- and outside the early days of the Lopez Report material, her testimony should be taken with a grain of salt. 

Still -- what exactly was LHO doing in Mexico City in the final week of September, 1963?   Marina testified repeatedly that LHO was there for the sole purpose of getting a visa into Cuba, Cuba, Cuba.  No place else -- certainly not Russia.

LHO had no idea who or what Kostikov, Kostin, Nechiporenko or Leonov really were.  The only reason that LHO went to the Soviet Embassy was to fool the Cubans into granting him an instant visa into Cuba.

In his book, Passport to Assassination (1993), KGB agent Oleg Nechiporenko said that LHO was there multiple times -- for hours -- meeting with Nechiporenko and Kostikov.   LHO had no idea who these guys were -- but LHO made a fool of himself with his pistol and his weeping. 

After they kicked LHO out, LHO returned to the Cuban consulate to try again to get an instant visa to Cuba.  He said that the Soviets had approved his request.  Duran called the Soviets who denied it.  Duran turned LHO over to Azcue, who escorted LHO out.  LHO failed miserably in his ploy to get an instant visa to Cuba as a Fake FPCC officer.

The motive for LHO to get into Cuba is told by his fake FPCC resume, complete with photos (see the Lopez Report) which he created at 544 Camp St. in NOLA as directed by Guy Banister.  Probably LHO was offered a lot of money if he succeeded in joining a Kill Fidel team in Cuba, and completing his mission.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
typos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Still -- what exactly was LHO doing in Mexico City in the final week of September, 1963?   Marina testified repeatedly that LHO was there for the sole purpose of getting a visa into Cuba, Cuba, Cuba.  No place else -- certainly not Russia.

 

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul,

Why the Transit Visa? Who do you omit it from your scenario? Where does it fit?

It seems like you are avoiding a place where you can't comfortably fit with an explanation for the Transit Visa.

And, to be sure, this gets us no closer to being back on-topic.

Cheers,

Michael

Edited by Michael Clark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Tommy,

When it comes to bureaucrats -- especially in Government -- and more especially in higher places in Government -- no delays in obtaining data are too absurd.

Now, as for the story of Oswald at the Russian Embassy in Mexico City during the final week of September 1963, Oleg Nechiporenko gives us his story shortly after the Oliver Stone movie, JFK, was promoted worldwide.  This was a reasonable time to wait to come forward.  He never mentioned Leonov.  

I have a real problem with Nikolai Leonov presenting the same story in the first person more than 10 years later..

Leonov has his cute story about a volleyball game that he had to miss, so that guaranteed in his story that it was a Sunday.  And nobody else was there except him and Oswald and the Security Guard.  Let's see -- the same story as Nechiporenko in 1993, but with different people and this volleyball game.  You buy that?   It sounds made up to me.

Look at Bill O'Reilly, for goodness sake, writing a book about the JFK assassination, and placing himself near the scene of the suicide of George DeMohrenschildt, the special friend of Lee Harvey Oswald.  There's money in this story for really good fibbers, IMHO.  Leonov needed the money.  That's my take on it.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

 

9 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

Dear Paul,

In his book, does Nechiporenko say anything about Mexico City Soviet Embassy's Third Secretary (and KGB officer) Nikolai Leonov's claim (in Leonov's published memoirs and in a well-written National Enquirer article) that he (Leonov) met with a highly unstable and revolver-brandishing Oswald by himself ("The security guard was the only other person inside the Embassy at the time") on Sunday, September 29?

What's particularly interesting to me is that both Nechiporenko and Leonov describe the Oswald they dealt with (Lee Harvey Oswald?) as being dangerously unstable and as having brandished a revolver in their presence, and the fact that although Nechiporenko and the boys (Kostikov and Yatskov) missed their beloved volleyball game that day (Saturday) because they decided they'd better send a cable about the incident to Moscow right away (and a letter or a cable or something to the Mexican authorities, as well), and presumably Leonov, being the responsible KGB officer and "Third Secretary" that he was, did the same thing regarding his unscheduled meeting with Oswald on Sunday, ... well, what's interesting is that none of those cables or letters were ever produced by the Russian and Mexican authorities when they started looking for them after "the Cold War was over" (lol) and everything.

I mean, it's almost as though those unscheduled meetings never happened, and that Nechiporenko and Leonov, in their books and memoirs and magazine articles, were only trying to "substantiate" and "make plausible" the KGB's alleged assessment (in 1959 or 1960) that Oswald was just too gosh-darned unstable and dangerous for Department 13 to even consider interviewing to find out whether or not he, as a U.S. Marine, was aware of any military secrets or information that could benefit the U.S.S.R.

--  Tommy :sun

Edited and bumped, perhaps prematurely.

I'm sorry and I do apologize.

--  Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Tommy,

IMHO, you're the one who looks silly here sometimes.  But, your posts often amuse me, so I'll answer your question.

Your question is backward -- you think that I'm talking about the precise height of Lee Harvey Oswald, when actually I'm talking about the Mexican cultural linguistics of Sylvia Duran.

"About the same height as me" was Duran's phrase.  Let's start with the context.  She is surrounded by white, blond, blue-eyed giants -- all six-footers -- from the CIA, FBI, Secret Service and State Department -- pressing her for data 15 years old -- that she knows damn well they already got from the Mexican Police the month that JFK was assassinated.

The Mexican Police had already tortured her and terrorized her family.  What new hell could happen to her after these HSCA inquisitions -- I mean -- interrogations?  Try to remember that the Cold War was still raging hot in 1979.  The Russians and the Cubans were still Communists with nuclear weapons.  There was real danger here.

Do you honestly think that Sylvia Duran was cool, calm, collected and ready to answer FBI questions with academic precision?    That's ludicrous.

Sylvia Duran was terrified.  She and Eusebio Azcue had long decided to lie about that "visitor" to the Cuban Consulate.  They said it again and again -- the person who killed JFK didn't look anything like the guy who was in our office during the final week of September 1963.  Nothing!   We don't know a doggone thing about Lee Harvey Oswald!

That, Tommy, is the real context of Sylvia Duran's words.  And nothing whatever to do with the height of LHO to the nearest half-inch.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

 

Post moved to my new thread "This Is My Final Post To Paul Trejo"

--  Tommy :sun

 

 

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

Paul,

Why the Transit Visa? Who do you omit it from your scenario? Where does it fit?

It seems like you are avoiding a place where you can't comfortably fit with an explanation for the Transit Visa...

Cheers,

Michael

Michael,

I explained the Transit Visa fully in my post above.  It was an afterthought following the Cuban consulate's denial of LHO's request for an instant visa to Cuba.

I also gave my source on this, namely, the Lopez Report (2003).  Sounds to me like you never read it.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Paul Trejo said:

Michael,

I explained the Transit Visa fully in my post above.  It was an afterthought following the Cuban consulate's denial of LHO's request for an instant visa to Cuba.

I also gave my source on this, namely, the Lopez Report (2003).  Sounds to me like you never read it.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Paul,

I have read your post a few times. I just read it twice again, quickly, then slowly. You make no mention of the Transit Visa. I am at a loss to see how it was explained if you never mention it. You may feel justified in complaining that I am being picky, but the subject of the visas does not entail very much and could be easily dealt with. 

There are two visits to the Cuban Consulate, and one to the Russian embassy. There are visa requests. You make no mention of a Transit visa. I see a problem with the transit visa and the way that it fits into your theory. You decide to omit the transit visa rather than deal with the problem. 

I have found a couple ways that you might be able to cram it into your theory, but it's awkward; and I shouldn't be trying to fix your theory.

Why do you omit the transit visa and how does it fit into your story?

Cheers,

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

Dear Paul,

In his book, does Nechiporenko say anything about Mexico City Soviet Embassy's Third Secretary (and KGB officer) Nikolai Leonov's claim (in Leonov's published memoirs and in a well-written National Enquirer article) that he (Leonov) met with a highly unstable and revolver-brandishing Oswald by himself ("The guard was the only other person inside the Embassy at the time") on Sunday, September 29?

What's particularly interesting to me is that both Nechiporenko and Leonov describe the Oswald they dealt with (Lee Harvey Oswald?) as being dangerously unstable and as having brandished a revolver in their respective presence.  Oh yeah, and the fact that although Nechiporenko and the boys (Kostikov and Yatskov) missed their beloved volleyball game that day (Saturday) because they ("luckily for them") decided to write and send a cable about the incident to Moscow right away (and a letter or a cable or something to the Mexican authorities, as well), and presumably Leonov, being a responsible kind of KGB officer and "Third Secretary" did the same thing regarding his unscheduled meeting with Oswald, none of those cables or letters were ever found by those authorities when they started looking for them really seriously, especially, you know, after "the Cold War was over" and everything.

I mean, it's almost as though those unscheduled meetings never happened, and that in their books and published memoirs and magazine articles Nechiporenko and Leonov were only trying to show how unstable and dangerous (evidently far too unstable and dangerous for Department 13 to have even considered routinely interviewing U.S. military man Oswald, you know, a few years earlier, right after Oswald arrived in the U.S.S.R. and tried to kill himself and everything.

--  Tommy :sun

Tommy,

You bumped this after I answered it, so I'll try again.

Nechiporenko says nothing about Leonov in his 1993 book.  Nothing.

Good luck getting verification from "released" KGB documents from the Cold War period.

Two KGB agents claim to be authors of the same story.  That's the problem.

In the absence of other information, I vote for Nechiporenko, who published his version more than ten years before Leonov.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Michael,

.....

I also gave my source on this, namely, the Lopez Report (2003).  Sounds to me like you never read it.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

I have read the Lopez report. Unfortunately, my first reading of anything really only gives me an idea of what is in the item in question. I can then re-read it looking for particular details, and make notes. I can also use such a document as a reference for particular details.

I believe that I recall a "Transit Visa" being mentioned.

You ignore this item. It causes a problem for your story.

Cheers

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎5‎/‎14‎/‎2017 at 6:41 PM, Chris Newton said:

I would assume that Phillips and Leonov, as respective opposites would be very familiar with each other.

What purpose does it serve for a Russian Diplomat to impersonate Lee Harvey Oswald in the Cuban Embassy? Why would he do that? I think if Leonov was inside the Cuban Embassy at the same time as an Oswald impersonator, he'd be there as his KGB tail. How does he get away with an impersonation?

Chris,

Excellent questions.

I would add this -- if the KGB really did impersonate Oswald in Mexico City during the final days of September 1963 (and/or the first days of October 1963), then how did they obtain Oswald's New Orleans "Fake FPCC resumé" that was presented to the consuls at the Cuban Consulate, as shown by the Lopez Report?

How did they obtain those visa photographs of Oswald that the Lopez Report also published?

Was the KGB also working with Guy Banister in New Orleans?   I sincerely doubt it.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Michael Clark said:

I have read the Lopez report. Unfortunately, my first reading of anything really only gives me an idea of what is in the item in question. I can then re-read it looking for particular details, and make notes. I can also use such a document as a reference for particular details.

I believe that I recall a "Transit Visa" being mentioned.

You ignore this item. It causes a problem for your story.

Cheers

Michael

Paul,

This is a polite challenge. I do wish you would take it up.

Cheers,

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Michael,

I explained the Transit Visa fully in my post above.  It was an afterthought following the Cuban consulate's denial of LHO's request for an instant visa to Cuba.

I also gave my source on this, namely, the Lopez Report (2003).  Sounds to me like you never read it.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

 

5 hours ago, Michael Clark said:

Paul,

I have read your post a few times. I just read it twice again, quickly, then slowly. You make no mention of the Transit Visa. I am at a loss to see how it was explained if you never mention it. You may feel justified in complaining that I am being picky, but the subject of the visas does not entail very much and could be easily dealt with. 

There are two visits to the Cuban Consulate, and one to the Russian embassy. There are visa requests. You make no mention of a Transit visa. I see a problem with the transit visa and the way that it fits into your theory. You decide to omit the transit visa rather than deal with the problem. 

I have found a couple ways that you might be able to cram it into your theory, but it's awkward; and I shouldn't be trying to fix your theory.

Why do you omit the transit visa and how does it fit into your story?

Cheers,

Michael

Paul,

The MC LHO walked into the Cuban Consulate, stating immediately that he wanted to go to Russia, Via Cuba. He was told that he needed a Transit Visa. Duran may even be saying that he walked-in, asking for a Transit Visa.

Interestingly, in my 48 page PDF of Sylvia Dura's testimony, there is no use of the word "Instant". There are 11 uses of the word "Transit".

In all of your renditions of this story, you use "Instant" visa every time. You do not, at all, use the term "Transit" visa. You even use quotes on the word "instant" even though it is not used, at all.

Paul, You are making stuff up. You are using false quotes to back-up an invented story.

 

Testimony of Sylvia Duran

CORNWELL - All right. Do you have a recollection whether it was all on one day or on separate days.
TIRADO - The same day.
CORNWELL - On the very first visit, would you describe to us what the man said and did, and what you said in response?

TIRADO - Yes, he, well, he enter and he ask me if I speak english and I say yes, and then he start asking me about requirements to go to Cuba, to get a visa to go to cuba, and I explain it. CORNWELL - What did you explain?
TIRADO - Well, that he needed to, he said that a transit visa so that he needs a visa to the country that he was going, from, if it was a Socialist country, the visa was given, as soon as he gets the other visa, and uh...

CORNWELL - When he first asked about the requirements for a visa, did he tell you that his objective was to go to cuba or to another country?
TIRADO - To the Soviet Union.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Paul Trejo said:

Tommy,

You bumped this after I answered it, so I'll try again.

Nechiporenko says nothing about Leonov in his 1993 book.  Nothing.

Good luck getting verification from "released" KGB documents from the Cold War period.

Two KGB agents claim to be authors of the same story.  That's the problem.

In the absence of other information, I vote for Nechiporenko, who published his version more than ten years before Leonov.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Dear Paul,

Taking the following things altogether: 1 )  the 9/25/63 - 10/03/63 evidence (factual or otherwise),  2 ) Duran's and Azcue's various descriptions of the "Blond Oswald" over the years,  3) the fact that (IMHO) Nosenko was a false defector sent to the U.S. to contradict, among other things, true defector Golitsyn's statement that Department 13 would have automatically interviewed Oswald in the U.S.S.R., 4 ) the fact that LHO himself said he had never been to Mexico City,  5) the fact that neither the Ruskies nor the Mexicans have ever been able to produce the communications that Nechiporenko and Leonov claimed to have sent about "highly unstable and dangerous" Oswald on 9/28/63 and 9/29/63 (respectively), causes me to believe that that Lee Harvey Oswald never went to Mexico (except maybe to TJ with his fellow marines back in the day).

--  Tommy :sun

PS  Like I said, I'm not going to "debate" you anymore.  On anything.

You can have the "last word" on this, now.  I couldn't care less.

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/14/2017 at 6:02 PM, Chris Newton said:

For the record...the above in the context of an Oswald "impersonator" visit to the Cuban Embassy makes no sense to me and I don't have any explanation.

It's a true conundrum.

Chris,

Yes, Tommy failed to explain WHY any KGB agent would want to impersonate Oswald at the Cuban Embassy.

Also, Tommy failed to explain HOW the KGB would get its hands on the 544 Camp Street resume of Oswald, which Oswald created under the guidance of Guy Banister.

Duran and Azcue disclosed this resume, and the Lopez Report revealed it as a keystone of the Mexico City episode.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo

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

×