Jump to content
The Education Forum

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


Recommended Posts

Tommy - good questions. But how could Leonov pretend he was Oswald to Azcue and Duran? I buy your argument that he was photographed shortly before that. But his Russian accent would have given him away. Unless of course you have evidence that he spoke English without accent. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 853
  • Created
  • Last Reply
2 hours ago, Paul Brancato said:

Tommy - good questions. But how could Leonov pretend he was Oswald to Azcue and Duran? I buy your argument that he was photographed shortly before that. But his Russian accent would have given him away. Unless of course you have evidence that he spoke English without accent. 

Paul,

I see your point.

Hmmm

Well, I guess it must have been a different 35-year-old, short, thin-bodied, blond-haired, blue-eyed, very thin-faced guy that Duran and Azcue dealt face-to-face with, huh?

Oh well, .... (sigh) ..... back to the drawing board, gosh darn it.

--  Tommy :sun

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Thomas Graves said:

Paul,

I see your point.

Hmmm

Well, I guess it must have been a different 35-year-old, short, thin-bodied, blond-haired, blue-eyed, very thin-faced guy that Duran and Azcue dealt face-to-face with, huh?

Oh well, .... (sigh) ..... back to the drawing board, gosh darn it.

--  Tommy :sun

 

Tommy,

The answer is obvious if we admit that Duran and Azcue were under threat of torture by the Mexican Police who wanted to obtain a Communists-did-it solution to the JFK assassination ASAP.

Duran and Azcue were already hated by the Mexican Police because they worked at the Cuban Embassy -- sponsored by Fidel Castro. 

Unlike in the USA, being a Communist in Mexico was illegal.

So, Duran and Azcue already had one strike against them.  Think how grateful the USA would be if the Mexican Police could beat a confession out of Duran and Azcue.

Now think about how terrified Duran and Azcue would be.

Actually, Duran was beaten -- more than once.  Also, the Mexican mass media was merciless to Duran.  She was portrayed as a tramp with Lee Harvey Oswald as her lover.  You know, like all those Communist scoundrels.

The TERROR of Duran and Azcue is the fact that you continually evade, Tommy.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

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

Tommy,

The answer is obvious if we admit that Duran and Azcue were under threat of torture by the Mexican Police who wanted to obtain a Communists-did-it solution to the JFK assassination ASAP.

Duran and Azcue were already hated by the Mexican Police because they worked at the Cuban Embassy -- sponsored by Fidel Castro. 

Unlike in the USA, being a Communist in Mexico was illegal.

So, Duran and Azcue already had one strike against them.  Think how grateful the USA would be if the Mexican Police could beat a confession out of Duran and Azcue.

Now think about how terrified Duran and Azcue would be.

Actually, Duran was beaten -- more than once.  Also, the Mexican mass media was merciless to Duran.  She was portrayed as a tramp with Lee Harvey Oswald as her lover.  You know, like all those Communist scoundrels.

The TERROR of Duran and Azcue is the fact that you continually evade, Tommy.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

So, the CIA (through the Mexican Police) forced Sylvia and Eusebio to describe the Oswald they'd dealt with on 9/27 as though he had been KGB officer Nikolai Leonov?

--  Tommy :sun

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

So, the CIA (through the Mexican Police) forced Sylvia and Eusebio to describe the Oswald they'd dealt with on 9/27 as though he had been KGB officer Nikolai Leonov?

--  Tommy :sun

Not even close, Tommy.

By the way, I notice that you're more frequently resorting to humor and jokes these days.  

No takers on your Communists-did-it CT?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

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

Not even close, Tommy.

By the way, I notice that you're more frequently resorting to humor and jokes these days.  

No takers on your Communists-did-it CT?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

"Not even close," eh?

Care to elaborate (sans the usual two-page "synopsis" of your 'CT') as to how Duran and Azcue ended up collectively describing Oswald as somebody so closely matching Leonov's distinctive physical description?

Was it a Jungian moment of Synchronicity and The Collective (pardon the pun, Komarad) Unconscious in-action?

--  Tommy :sun

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

"Not even close," eh?

Care to elaborate (sans your usual two-page synopsis of your 'CT')?

--  Tommy :sun

Tommy,

You wrote: "So, the CIA (through the Mexican Police) forced Sylvia and Eusebio to describe the Oswald they'd dealt with on 9/27 as though he had been KGB officer Nikolai Leonov?"

So I remarked, "Not even close."   Then you asked for elaboration.

So, to elaborate: the CIA never forced anything.  They even asked the Mexican Police to refrain from brutality (they said).  The CIA just wanted to be extra-certain that they weren't dealing with a Communist Plot to kill JFK.   So they asked the Mexican Police to please (gently) ask Sylvia Duran again.

The CIA didn't ask about Eusebio Azcue, as I read it.

All the CIA wanted was to be sure whether Lee Harvey Oswald was or wasn't a Communist Agent working under the control of Fidel Castro.

Notice that Fidel Castro was their concern with Sylvia and Eusebio, because they worked at the Cuban Embassy.  Sylvia and Eusebio knew Communists in Cuba.  They worked well with them.  That's how they got those jobs.  Everybody knew that.

The CIA would focus on Sylvia Duran, because in 1963, the USA common sense was like the Mexico common sense -- that women were weaker and more fragile and more pliable, and they would crack more easily.  

If so, then the CIA got their answer -- Lee Harvey Oswald was a big fat NOBODY.  The Communists didn't know Oswald.  Azcue didn't even like Oswald.  Duran was more friendly to Oswald (that is, more feminine) which is to say that she didn't openly tell him that his "Fake FPCC resume was so obviously fake -- and there is no such thing as a Communist Membership Card, anyway, dummy."

Duran went through the motions.  She said if the Soviets said OK, then OK.  Oswald went to the Soviet Embassy and they told him, "no."  So Oswald went back to Duran and told her that the Soviets said, "yes."   So, Duran called the Soviets, and they told her that they told Oswald, "no."

Sylvia Duran knew she was dealing with a fruitcake at that point.  So she turned him over to her manager, Eusebio Azcue.  Eusebio openly told Oswald, "You're no friend of the Revolution -- just look at the way you behave!  Any real friend of the Revolution would have given us the name of a reliable person in Cuba to vouch for you!  Get out of here!"

The CIA knew all this -- they just wanted to double check.  The Mexican Police took this as some sort of cloak-and-dagger Hollywood scene.   Poor Sylvia Duran.   (And no wonder Eusebio Azcue was so worried.)

After the torture -- it was impossible to get a straight answer out of Sylvia Duran for the rest of her life.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

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

Tommy,

You wrote: "So, the CIA (through the Mexican Police) forced Sylvia and Eusebio to describe the Oswald they'd dealt with on 9/27 as though he had been KGB officer Nikolai Leonov?"

So I remarked, "Not even close."

To elaborate: The CIA never forced anything.  They even asked the Mexican Police to refrain from brutality (they said).  The CIA just wanted to be extra-certain that they weren't dealing with a Communist Plot to kill JFK.   So they asked the Mexican Police to please (gently) ask Sylvia Duran again.

The CIA didn't ask about Eusebio Azcue, as I read it.

All the CIA wanted was to be sure whether Lee Harvey Oswald was or wasn't a Communist Agent working under the control of Fidel Castro.

Notice that Fidel Castro was their concern with Sylvia and Eusebio, because they worked at the Cuban Embassy.  They knew Communists in Cuba.  They worked well with them.  That's how they got those jobs.  Everybody knew that.

The CIA would focus on Sylvia Duran, because in 1963, the USA common sense was like the Mexico common sense -- that women were weaker and more fragile and more pliable, and they would crack more easily.  

If so, then the CIA got their answer -- Lee Harvey Oswald was a big fat NOBODY.  The Communists didn't know Oswald.  Azcue didn't even like Oswald.  Duran was more friendly to Oswald (that is, more feminine) which is to say that she didn't openly tell him that his "Fake FPCC resume was so obviously fake -- and there is no such thing as a Communist Membership Card, anyway, dummy."

Duran went through the motions.  She said if the Soviets said OK, then OK.  Oswald went to the Soviet Embassy and they told him, "no."  So Oswald went back to Duran and told her that the Soviets said, "yes."   So, Duran called the Soviets, and they told her that they told Oswald, "no."

Sylvia Duran knew she was dealing with a fruitcake at that point.  So she turned him over to her manager, Eusebio Azcue.  Eusebio openly told Oswald, "You're no friend of the Revolution -- just look at the way you behave!  Any real friend of the Revolution would have given us the name of a reliable person in Cuba to vouch for you!  Get out of here!"

The CIA knew all this -- they just wanted to double check.  The Mexican Police took this as some sort of cloak-and-dagger fun-and-games.   Poor Sylvia Duran.

After the torture -- it was impossible to get a straight answer out of Sylvia Duran for the rest of her life.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Okay, forget the CIA in this instance.  The question remains: Do you have any idea as to why Duran and Azcue collectively described the Oswald they'd dealt with in a way that so closely resembled 5'6", thin-bodied, blond-haired, blue-eyed, very thin-faced, 35-year-old Nikolai Leonov?

--  Tommy :sun

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

Okay, forget the CIA in this instance.  The question remains: Do you have any idea as to why Duran and Azcue collectively described the Oswald they'd dealt with in a way that so closely resembled 5'6", thin-bodied, blond-haired, blue-eyed, very thin-faced, 35-year-old Nikolai Leonov?

--  Tommy :sun

Tommy,

It depends on the timeframe you ask about.   In one instance they accurately described Lee Harvey Oswald.  In another instance (later, after the torture) they apparently described their associate, Soviet consul Nikolai Leonov (who worked down the street), and they insisted that the Oswald who allegedly killed JFK was nothing like the Oswald that they met in late September, 1963.

The post-assassination torture by the Mexican Police was terrifying for them, so they both changed their stories. 

Yet in the early stages, they both admitted that the man who brought them this Fake FPCC resume, complete with photographs, was the same man that they officially spoke with at length, in their Cuban Consulate office space -- sometimes separately, and sometimes together.  These were long meetings.

There was no variance -- until after the torture

So, Tommy -- you ask if I have any idea as to why they would later change their description of Oswald -- so there is my idea: torture by the Mexican Police.   

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

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

So, Tommy -- you ask if I have any idea as to why they would later change their description of Oswald -- so there is my idea: torture by the Mexican Police.   

 

Would you say this is a fair rendition of what you believe to be the case as regards Duran's and Azcue's "later description" of the man they'd dealt on 9/27/63?:

"After she was tortured by the Mexican Police, not only was Duran compliant with whatever said police wanted her to say, but her boss Azcue was as well (through a process of I-don't-want-to-be-tortured-too "osmosis", if you will), and so both of them, following the instructions of the Mexican Police, described their associate, the 5' 6", blond-haired, very thin-faced Soviet "Third Secretary," Nikolai Leonov, as the "Oswald" they had dealt with on Friday, September 27."

--  Tommy :sun

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Thomas Graves said:

 

Would you say this is a fair rendition of what you believe to be the case as regards Duran's and Azcue's "later description" of the man they'd dealt on 9/27/63?:

"After she was tortured by the Mexican Police, not only was Duran compliant with whatever said police wanted her to say, but her boss Azcue was as well (through a process of I-don't-want-to-be-tortured-too "osmosis", if you will), and so both of them, following the instructions of the Mexican Police, described their associate, the 5' 6", blond-haired, very thin-faced Soviet "Third Secretary," Nikolai Leonov, as the "Oswald" they had dealt with on Friday, September 27."

--  Tommy :sun

Tommy,

Close, but no.  At no point was Sylvia compliant with whatever the Mexican Police wanted her to say.

Sylvia knew that the Mexican Police wanted to hear a full confession about the Cuban Communist plot to kill JFK, and nothing else.  She stayed as far as possible away from their ideas as possible.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

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

Tommy,

Close, but no.  At no point was Sylvia compliant with whatever the Mexican Police wanted her to say.

Sylvia knew that the Mexican Police wanted to hear a full confession about the Cuban Communist plot to kill JFK, and nothing else.  She stayed as far as possible away from their ideas as possible.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

You're unbelievable, Trejo.

Let me parse my words a little more precisely for you so that you might get a tiny little glimmering glimpse of what I'm trying to say:

 According to Paul Trejo:  

"After being tortured, Duran was temporarily willing to say whatever the Mexican Police had told her to say as regards the physical description of the man she (and Azcue) had dealt with on 9/27/63 . But she really, really, really didn't want to do it.  Or something like that."

--  Tommy :sun

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

 

Would you say this is a fair rendition of what you believe to be the case as regards Duran's and Azcue's "later description" of the man they'd dealt on 9/27/63?:

"After she was tortured by the Mexican Police, not only was Duran compliant with whatever said police wanted her to say, but her boss Azcue was as well (through a process of I-don't-want-to-be-tortured-too "osmosis", if you will), and so both of them, following the instructions of the Mexican Police, described their associate, the 5' 6", blond-haired, very thin-faced Soviet "Third Secretary," Nikolai Leonov, as the "Oswald" they had dealt with on Friday, September 27."

--  Tommy :sun

Sounds pretty reasonable to me. There was definitely an attempt by Phillips and Scott to pressure Duran, including torture, and to bring forward anyone that would buttress the left wing Castro or Russia conspiracy angle.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Sounds pretty reasonable to me. There was definitely an attempt by Phillips and Scott to pressure Duran, including torture, and to bring forward anyone that would buttress the left wing Castro or Russia conspiracy angle.

Paul,

I'm trying to figure out if Trejo believes Duran and Azcue were told what to say, or if they collaborated with each other in deciding what to say (when they collectively described Oswald as looking like somebody who strongly resembled their "diplomatic associate," Leonov).

--  Tommy :sun

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Sounds pretty reasonable to me. There was definitely an attempt by Phillips and Scott to pressure Duran, including torture, and to bring forward anyone that would buttress the left wing Castro or Russia conspiracy angle.


Paul B.,

I can understand Phillips and Scott wanting to make a connection between Oswald and Leonov, just like they wanted to make a connection between Oswald and Kostiikov.

But why would they want to make it look like Leonov impersonated Oswald? In doing that, a connection isn't made... at least not a clear one. And in fact it makes it look like Oswald didn't even go to MC. If Oswald didn't go to MC, he couldn't have met Kostikov. And the whole thing unravels.

So this scenario doesn't look right to me.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...