Veciana, Oswald in Dallas

[Michael Clark]

5 minutes ago, B. A. Copeland said:

Couldn't agree more Mike, concerning the fanboy bit. I really try staying the course on the evidence and frankly, that is the element I love about 2 great researcher's works (Simpich and Newman for example) and how Simpich basically (and respectfully) disagree with Newman that Angleton played a big role in setting up LHO, especially in Mexico City (please correct me if I'm wrong someone (or Dr Newman!).

Simpich says Angleton was duped by Harvey/Morales & Co (this implies (possibly?) a rogue group) in more ways than one. Dr Newman doesn't seem to mention Harvey or Morales much in his older work (Oswald & The CIA) which is very interesting when you consider just who Harvey and Morales was in the conext of the Secret War against Cuba. Its really challenging for me NOT to consider those 2 when you get to Mexico City and I believe we're just probably at the tip of the iceberg....there is probably so much more to know but I think some light is certainly being shed into those events.

 

Mike, from what Newman has presented, it seems compelling that Nosenko was not a bonafide defector. I was just listening to even Malcolm Blunt and Dale's talkes (I never get enough) where Blunt himself has always been skeptical of Nosenko's bonafides as well based on the evidence we do have.

Thanks B. A., I have not read anything of Simpich, it's interesting that you say that Simpich has the same doubts about Angleton that I have. And your surmise, or Simpich' that this is where the rogues play their hand the heaviest is right in line with my thinking. I am quite certain that there were two Oswalds and that Angleton was trying to figure this problem out in the fall of 63?

Your observations about Newman's lack of interest in some of these characters is very interesting. 

I wish John were here to discuss these things with us, but it must be very difficult for an author such as Newman to open him or herself up in a forum like this.

[James DiEugenio]

That event was sponsored by Gary Aguilar up near his office in San Francisco about 3-4 months ago.

It was a kind of invitation only of some of the better researchers, primarily on the West  Coast.  

But John flew in from back east.  Some of the people there were Lisa Pease, Pat Speer, TInk Thompson, and myself.  There were about 20 people there.  Gary even invited Wagner to attend, that guy who wrote the Oswald did it book and was a fan of Bugliosi.  He did not speak of course.

John apparently does buy into Bagley, and Nechiporenko, and he underplays  the incredible gyrations that went on in the USSR after the fail.  

 

 

[Michael Clark]

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10102-10189.pdf

CIA response to questions about Veciana. Says Veciana contacted them in December of 1960.

[Michael Clark]

11 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

That event was sponsored by Gary Aguilar up near his office in San Francisco about 3-4 months ago.

It was a kind of invitation only of some of the better researchers, primarily on the West  Coast.  

But John flew in from back east.  Some of the people there were Lisa Pease, Pat Speer, TInk Thompson, and myself.  There were about 20 people there.  Gary even invited Wagner to attend, that guy who wrote the Oswald did it book and was a fan of Bugliosi.  He did not speak of course.

John apparently does buy into Bagley, and Nechiporenko, and he underplays  the incredible gyrations that went on in the USSR after the fail.  

 

 

Thanks for the backstory, Jim. I wanted to know who was there. With that kind of gathering that meeting should have gone on for a week. I hope to see more video from that conference.

[B. A. Copeland]

On 7/26/2018 at 4:10 PM, Michael Clark said:

Thanks B. A., I have not read anything of Simpich, it's interesting that you say that Simpich has the same doubts about Angleton that I have. And your surmise, or Simpich' that this is where the rogues play their hand the heaviest is right in line with my thinking. I am quite certain that there were two Oswalds and that Angleton was trying to figure this problem out in the fall of 63?

Your observations about Newman's lack of interest in some of these characters is very interesting. 

I wish John were here to discuss these things with us, but it must be very difficult for an author such as Newman to open him or herself up in a forum like this.

My pleasure Mike. Yeah if you really want to get to the bones of Simpich's hypothesis I would encourage you to read State Secret and listen to his audios found at Alan Dale's site:

Bill Simpich 1

Bill Simpich 2

State Secret

 

Also are other amazing audios by Peter Dale Scott, Jim DiEugenio, Larry Hancock, Jeff Morley, J. Newman, Malcolm Blunt just to name a few:

http://www.jfklancer.com/audioconversations.html

 

On 7/26/2018 at 4:37 PM, James DiEugenio said:

That event was sponsored by Gary Aguilar up near his office in San Francisco about 3-4 months ago.

It was a kind of invitation only of some of the better researchers, primarily on the West  Coast.  

But John flew in from back east.  Some of the people there were Lisa Pease, Pat Speer, TInk Thompson, and myself.  There were about 20 people there.  Gary even invited Wagner to attend, that guy who wrote the Oswald did it book and was a fan of Bugliosi.  He did not speak of course.

John apparently does buy into Bagley, and Nechiporenko, and he underplays  the incredible gyrations that went on in the USSR after the fail.  

 

 

Hey Jim, doesn't Nechiporenko essentially (or indirectly) toe the WC line concerning LHO?