Jump to content
The Education Forum

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Jason Ward said:

Hi David, thanks for the polite conversation.   Let's be clear: I'm not arguing against your opinion.  I'm only giving consideration to other explanations.   

It is IMO enough for a man in Oswald's situation to seek ASC admission merely as a way to legally travel.   His interest or lack of interest in education is possibly not relevant.   Having some even nominal educational plan in Europe is probably enough to count as an allowable exception to the rule against reservists leaving the country.   

I've seen this enrolling-in-college tactic used in many other examples where the military, the draft, the penal system, or the government in general is concerned.  Authorities in all contexts are more lenient if they see you making an effort at education.   Tens of thousands got out of the draft this way, so it's reasonable to me that LHO used the old college enrollment trick for his own purposes, such as travel.

Thanks again for posting so much evidence for us to consider.

A pleasure... really.

It is IMO enough for a man in Oswald's situation to seek ASC admission merely as a way to legally travel. 

{sigh}   "Oswald's situation" is where the train jumps the track here....  how about you fill us in on this "situation"... as you see it.

In the meantime, let's take a small step backward...  his dependency discharge which allows him to get out earlier than he THOUGHT (Dec 1959 due to the giving back of the days spent in the brig))...   You think that was initiated by Oswald from his sincere interest to care for his mother?

First... what takes him 2 WEEKS... we come to find out from Lt Col Kozak that a hardship discharge is a 3-6 month process...

image.png.7160fc0ac834eafbd7232af74c918874.png


Second...  what does Oswald do once he gets out to care for his mother....?

Jason, He spends a grand total of THREE DAYS with her.... and then leaves for Europe....
The documents he just recently processed describes a DIRE situation for the woman...  yet he neither gives her any money or spends any time with her...

and just leaves.....  with the situation not changing at all.

What has happened, Mr. Rankin--when Lee stayed with me the 3 days, he left his seabag with me. And that is why I have his discharge papers and things. And then, as you know, when the defection broke, I had no place to go. So the lady I was working for even threatened to call the police, because of' the defection. I was working for $5 a week, gentlemen, taking care of her son. But I was happy to have a home and food, because I had had this accident, and I could rest. But my salary was $5 for the whole week. But when the news broke, she didn't want to be involved with anyone who had a son as a defector, so she asked me to leave. It was a very cold winter night. And I said I would. 
But I didn't want to leave--didn't have any place to go. 
She said, "You will leave now or I will call the police." 
So I called Robert and he told me to come out to his home. 

 

Robert; Jason?  If Robert was a phone call and a drive away in October, he wasn't in August?

Do you understand that the activities Oswald goes thru from March 1959 thru his departure in Sept serve a single purpose - provide this man with a plausible story for why he is traveling to Switzerland....  yet once again a simple indicator...  how can Oswald put down a 4 MONTH STAY and a departure date of Sept 21 if he is SO EXCITED about ASC which would not start until April... 6 months after his planned leave date...   

These kinds of mistakes are the cornerstone for uncovering the conspiracy....  He knows he's taking a boat, he states he's going to A Schweitzer college... he would know he starts in April, agreed?  If so Jason, then the conflict is very hard to resolve...

In the context of AN INNOCENT MAN TAKING A TRIP (which is what I see you saying up to the point "something" changes the plans) do you see where "4 months" is a problem - as well as not being in his own handwriting...  maybe he was asked by the person taking the app?  either way "4 months" is a big red flag and a large thorn in the side of your theory that Oswald was doing this on his own based on his desire to travel and go to the school...

1444948559_1959Passportapplicationmentio

 

 

his letter to her from New Orleans

img_1133_604_200.jpg

He's so excited to be going that he completely forgets to mention WHERE he's going.... but reminds his mother of the differences in her sons...
What do you suppose would be the "concepts too hard to understand" stopping Oswald from telling his mother he's going to a Liberal Arts College in Switzerland?

Given you claim he went based on his own desire and initiation.... what could be so nefarious as to stop him from telling his mother about this innocent little school?

"Dear Mother, well, I have hooked passage on a ship to Europe. I would have had to sooner or later, and I think it is best to go now." 
"I would have had to sooner or later, so I think it is best that I go now. Just remember above all else that my values are very different from Robert or us, and it is difficult to tell you how I feel. Just remember this is what I must do. I did not tell you about my plans because you could hardly be expected to understand. I did not see Lillian while I was here. I will write you again as soon as I land. Lee." 
Mr. RANKIN. What do you think he meant by that? 
Mrs. OSWALD. That is what I want to tell you. All of this speculation, gentlemen. And that is why I say the Warren Commission--unless they hear my story and the witnesses involved, cannot arrive at a true conclusion. 
Now, what would you think about this? 
A few days later you get headlines, "Fort Worth Boy Has Defected to Russia." And I made the letter public. This letter says to his mother he is defecting to Russia--right? That is the way you would read the letter. 
It is easily read this way when you think a boy has defected to Russia. So you would read the letter that way

 

So even Marge here "gets" it...  She could not know at the time what he meant, but once he defected we get the "A-ha" moment....  she goes on to confirm this

Mr. RANKIN. Did you know that he spoke Russian at that time, when he had this passport? 
Mrs. OSWALD. No, sir; I did not know. The only time I knew that he spoke Russian is what came out in the news. But when I really knew was Lee's application for the Albert Schweitzer College. Shall we go into that--the application?

"But when I really knew"....   what Jason... what do you think Marge here is saying that she "knew"... connected with his speaking Russian and finding out he really did defect?

 

No discussion of a hardship discharge, 

After three days he is leaving his mother. But we had a talk. When Lee arrived home and I will go into this thoroughly. I was ashamed when he arrived home. I was in a one bedroom and bath and a small kitchen. And my son came in about 2 o'clock in the morning. I have never lived lavishly, but we have always had a nice clean little moderate house. And, remember, I was destitute. I had no money. You have the affidavits evidently from the Red Cross. If you don't. I have copies. 
The first thing I said to him, "Honey, the first thing we will have to do is to move and find a decent place." 
I had a studio couch, which has two parts. The top part I put on the floor for my son to sleep on that particular night, in the one room. 
So he said, "We will talk about it in the morning, Mother." 
So morning came. 
I brought the subject 'up immediately. I said., "The first thing we will have to do is find a place. I am well enough that I can babysit or pick up a few dollars. And until I settle my claim, I think we will be able to manage, and you will get a job." 

He said, "No, Mother, my mind is made up. I have thought this out thoroughly. I have no background. If I stay here, I will get a job for about $35 a week, and we will both be in a position that you are in. I want to board a ship and work in the import and export business, where there is some real money." 

Jason - if the man was truly interested in ASC.... and his mother was well aware of the college and how it now suggested a cover story to get him to Russia... why does he never speak of the school, never express a single desire...  "Import and Export" was something he was involved in at TUJAGUES.... which in turn opens an amazing can of worms between HARVEY and LEE (but that's for another discussion)

Jason... I enjoy the discussion yet at this point it is incumbent on you to start showing your cards...  Speculation on an island is fun but not very fruitful....

Use your MICRO POV to scratch the surface a bit more than you have...  Oswald "desiring" to attend ASC was never part of this equation... when you see that and begin to see the different programs employed by the Military/CIA to get intel agents into Russia...  maybe you'll see what we're saying here...

Cheers

DJ 

 

p.s. how much do you think he earns at the TSBD?

 

Edited by David Josephs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David, you have pointed to the real issue: You have all of these GREAT documents (and I do mean that sincerely), and you are at the same time shooting holes in the ASC pretense. Fair enough. Point made. Point taken. However, the fact that ASC was not something unknown or difficult to find, and the fact that it was tied to a high U.S. Administration official, should also light up questions as to why officialdom tried to pretend that it could not be found. The same goes for the University of Turku, which is another interesting story. But all of this leads to a man telling everyone that he is going to ASC. The last thing we hear from this man is that he has exited U.K. Customs in Southampton, England. Then he vanishes. His U.S. Passport later bears a stamp for "London Airport", but how it got on there is another matter - because we don't know the answer as to who was holding the U.S. Passport when that stamp was applied, nor do we know when it was PHYSICALLY applied, nor where it was applied. Yes, we know that the stamp specifies a location, and yes we know that it signifies a date. But unlike the documentation up until the moment of exit from U.K. Customs, there is no actual proof that the person known as Lee Harvey Oswald was involved. - Mervyn

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple more things courtesy of Armstrong:

Within 2 weeks of sending his $25 deposit to ASC, he is working on the affidavits for a Dependency Discharge

On his PASSPORT Application and in the reports after the fact, we find he used his DOD ID card on Sept 4, 1959 to apply for his PASSPORT

Problem being he didn't get the card until the Sept 11, 1959....

oooops

Within 2 weeks of applying for his passport... he's in Russia, never having given a second thought to ASC or some Univ in Finland...

1875073081_IDforpassportappdatedandreceivedafterpassportapp-smaller.thumb.jpg.15d25104c4bb0d7cd4c229504f8d0ee7.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
51 minutes ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

David, you have pointed to the real issue: You have all of these GREAT documents (and I do mean that sincerely), and you are at the same time shooting holes in the ASC pretense. Fair enough. Point made. Point taken. However, the fact that ASC was not something unknown or difficult to find, and the fact that it was tied to a high U.S. Administration official, should also light up questions as to why officialdom tried to pretend that it could not be found. The same goes for the University of Turku, which is another interesting story. But all of this leads to a man telling everyone that he is going to ASC. The last thing we hear from this man is that he has exited U.K. Customs in Southampton, England. Then he vanishes. His U.S. Passport later bears a stamp for "London Airport", but how it got on there is another matter - because we don't know the answer as to who was holding the U.S. Passport when that stamp was applied, nor do we know when it was PHYSICALLY applied, nor where it was applied. Yes, we know that the stamp specifies a location, and yes we know that it signifies a date. But unlike the documentation up until the moment of exit from U.K. Customs, there is no actual proof that the person known as Lee Harvey Oswald was involved. - Mervyn

 

 

BINGO.  by George, I think he's got it...   LOL

So in reality, what occurs during those days cannot be attributed to changing any of Oswald's real plans....   Would MI-?/CIA be helping Oswald learn HOW to defect?  Provide him with the time to practice his defection scene which SNYDER said looked rehearsed and provided....  who knows, right?

Is the same person exiting the ship at La Havre the same man meeting RIMMA in Moscow?

We come to find that the investigation was very reticent in showing photos of Oswald...  the Captain and Purse of the ship don't even remember the man....  if you know anything about Ozzie this would be the opposite of who he was... he'd always make a memorable scene... that was one of his gifts....

---

The context for this trip is the infiltration of assets into Soviet Russia for the purposes of confirming and/or expanding our knowledge base...  WEBSTER went to provide info on the plastics capabilities....  Oswald, it appears, helped confirm information related to Minsk....

Any and all means available would be employed to successfully infiltrate Oswald into Russia....  it is very possible that NONE of the things his passport say he did, he did...

Then there's the fact that the PASSPORT PHOTO and our little man didn't look all that much alike...  these photos are only weeks apart...

As I forget to mention above, the photo on the DOD card is FROM MINSK.... the actual photo at the time of the passport application was probably similar to the one on the left below...  but it was changed... as was the SSS card to the man on the right...  wonder why he would have to fake a card (either SSS or DOD) that was supposedly given to him anyway?

1381415567_Comparing1959PassportphotowithOswald1959.jpg.8c0357b7215bf448a1529f1f66ac70b3.jpg

When all there is, are stamps and 2nd hand referral (hotel registry) the ease in which this is created cannot be underestimated....

The CIA (and by default the military) were masters at creating the back story...   Which is probably why most of the Military records on Oswald will never be seen.

Mervyn, I am sure that you have much to offer from a POV many haven't thought from before... but your wholesale discounting of 50+ years of work rubbed EVERYONE the wrong way...

We're really not all that stupid out here buddy...  If you'd take some time and delve into the DULLES/QUAKER/RELIGION situation you may find his activities at direct odds with JFK in conjunction with the cover of religion.

1097544501_MilitaryNotificationofEstablishmentofMILITARYCOVERBACKSTOP104-10112-10186-smaller.jpg.9391f9724b91d78b072978daecf48926.jpg

Edited by David Josephs

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

On his PASSPORT Application and in the reports after the fact, we find he used his DOD ID card on Sept 4, 1959 to apply for his PASSPORT

Problem being he didn't get the card until the Sept 11, 1959....

oooops

 

David,

To further make your point, you should add that the DOD ID card was issued to Oswald illegally. It was a DEPENDENT ID card and was to be issued only to dependents of active military personnel. (To allow dependents to be on a military base without getting a temporary pass or being escorted.)

Oswald, of course, was not a dependent. So he was ineligible for the card. One must ask why he was issued a dependent card at all, and why so only days before his discharge.

In a hypothesis posted here:

 

 

I make the case that the card was issued to Oswald in order to expedite getting his passport. And that this was done by the CIA. Chris Newton had pointed out that Gary Powers, CIA U-2 pilot. carried the very same military dependent card.

That the CIA was involved should tip us off to what was really going on with Oswald's trip. (How do Jason and Mervyn explain Oswald's illegal possession of the card? And how it was used by Oswald to get a passport before it was even issued?)


BTW David, thanks for your presentation of documents above. Well done.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Sandy Larsen said:

make the case that the card was issued to Oswald in order to expedite getting his passport. And that this was done by the CIA. Chris Newton had pointed out that Gary Powers, CIA U-2 pilot. carried the very same military dependent card.

But Gary was not part of the defector program.... Did Webster have one thru RAND I wonder.

Also. The card with the Minsk photo could not possibly be what was in his possession in Sept 59, right? The photo would have to be different

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Putting a couple things together and using a couple of assumptions as a hypothesis.

- Let's assume Oswald was recruited out of the Marines and into the CIA. 

- He ends-up in Eorupe on his assignment in Russia by October 15.

- His Discharge, visit with Mom, and departure are all done in haste.

- Laherve- England to Helsinki, all tout-de-suite. 

- Secured documents for Russia as quickly as can be done...

Why Take  a 3 week steamer to Eorupe?

Of, course, traveling by steamer in 1963 might sound quaint, or normal. But, LHO was burning rubber between his discharge and Russia. The steamer makes no sense, and as David Josephs has pointed out, there is little evidence of our Ozzie on that boat.

So, assuming he's not on that boat, he is of course getting debriefed and trained somewhere, and meeting contacts. We'll never know how he really got to England or Helsinki. Can we pick up the trail of who may have handled him during the time he was supposed to be on a boat?

A boat trip, in this case, is just too rich to pass up as cover for other activities.

 

Edited by Michael Clark

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

But Gary was not part of the defector program....

David,

My point wasn't that Powers and Oswald were both false defectors. My point was that they were both CIA employees

Here's my line of thinking:

  1. We ask ourselves, why did Gary Powers carry a military dependent ID card (even though he wasn't a dependent)? So that he could freely access military bases.
  2. Who issued his military dependent ID card? His employer, the CIA.  (We know the military didn't issue it because it wasn't issued according to strict military standards... Chris Newton produced document showing how the military issued the cards.)
  3. Therefore, we conclude that the CIA had an agreement with the military, that they could issue military dependent ID cards to their employees. Those who needed frequent access to military bases.
  4. Then we ask ourselves, how did Oswald get a military dependent ID card? There is no reason the military would issue one to him. (And in fact, we know the military didn't because, like Powers' card, it wasn't issued according to strict military standards.) So some other government agency must have issued it.
  5. The CIA is the only way we know that a non-dependent could get a military dependent ID card. Therefore the CIA likely issued Oswald's card.
  6. Therefore Oswald -- like Gary Powers  -- likely worked for the CIA.

 

49 minutes ago, David Josephs said:

Also. The card with the Minsk photo could not possibly be what was in his possession in Sept 59, right? The photo would have to be different 

 

My opinion is this:

  • Oswald's military dependent ID card probably had the same photo on it as the passport application... the photo of LEE. (This will change later.) Presumably this card stayed in America during the defection.
  • HARVEY took to Russia a composite photo of him and LEE. This is the so-called "Minsk photo."
  • HARVEY used the so-called Minsk photo for one or more of his Soviet ID cards. We know that because at least one came back with a Soviet style security stamp on it.
  • Upon returning to the U.S., HARVEY peeled the LEE photo off of his military dependent ID card and pasted in its place the so-called Minsk photo.
  • This photo shows the "rim" of the Soviet style circular security stamp, and so it looked out of place on the military card. Oswald camouflaged this by making a number of circular and text stamps in that area. What he did looks a bit like a circular postal stamp.
  • Richard Case Nagell thought he could do better. He made a photocopy of Oswald's military ID card, and carefully removed Oswald's camouflage work. He then did his own camouflaging. What he did was cover the security stamp area by drawing in a white shirt, tie, and suit.

 

a48z8o.png

 

Share this post


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

Putting a couple things together and using a couple of assumptions as a hypothesis.

- Let's assume Oswald was recruited out of the Marines and into the CIA. 

- He ends-up in Eorupe on his assignment in Russia by October 15.

- His Discharge, visit with Mom, and departure are all done in haste.

- Laherve- England to Helsinki, all tout-de-suite. 

- Secured documents for Russia as quickly as can be done...

Why Take  a 3 week steamer to Eorupe?

Of, course, traveling by steamer in 1963 might sound quaint, or normal. But, LHO was burning rubber between his discharge and Russia. The steamer makes no sense, and as David Josephs has pointed out, there is little evidence of our Ozzie on that boat.

So, assuming he's not on that boat, he is of course getting debriefed and trained somewhere, and meeting contacts. We'll never know how he really got to England or Helsinki. Can we pick up the trail of who may have handled him during the time he was supposed to be on a boat?

A boat trip, in this case, is just too rich to pass up as cover for other activities.

 

Michael - wasn’t there one person on the boat that did recall Oswald?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul, his shipmate Billy Lord... if not found, I’ll post tomorrow... the other two as well give accounts... a Lt Col retired army who Steve Thomas touches on in his excellent thread on colonels.... yet as I’ve learned with MacFarland and Pam Mumford... testimony that is provably wrong is not evidence against.... 

it was 1959 and this was Cold War front lines....  I see clearly now what Sandy is proposing above....

Sandy...   :cheers

The patterns only emerge at 5000 feet....  will need time and serious thought....

Employees... a stretch... feels more like Pawns to me... if they shine, if they rise above the pack... they become Bishops and Knights... B)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, Mervyn Hagger said:

because we don't know the answer as to who was holding the U.S. Passport when that stamp was applied, nor do we know when it was PHYSICALLY applied, nor where it was applied. Yes, we know that the stamp specifies a location, and yes we know that it signifies a date. But unlike the documentation up until the moment of exit from U.K. Customs, there is no actual proof that the person known as Lee Harvey Oswald was involved.

Hi Mervyn,

This is where I depart from your train of thought.  There is no reason to invoke the supernatural or extraordinary, is there?   For everyone else in the world using a passport is sufficient to confirm their identity.  Why suggest that in Oswald's case there is no "proof...LHO was involved," when for everyone else in the world we believe they alone use their own passport unless strong evidence suggests otherwise?

7 hours ago, David Josephs said:

Jason - if the man was truly interested in ASC....

LHO may or may not be truly interested in ASC.  Evidence of his interest or non-interest in ASC is not so important when we consider that the true value of ASC is the ability it affords Oswald to legally travel.

If he is interested in traveling overseas, he needs at least nominal college plans in place to leave the country as a reservist.  ASC provides this.

As always, David, I appreciate very much posting evidence instead of mere commentary.   In my work there is no evidence of CIA involvement whenever we encounter the unexplained.   You take the evidence differently and see the CIA as the only explanation in places where I see alternatives equally or more likely than the CIA, which is of course fine with me. I just have what we might call a stricter standard of evidence and am totally comfortable with saying "we don't know why Oswald did xxxxxx."    The unexplained does not equate to the CIA for me.

 

Jason

Edited by Jason Ward

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Jason Ward said:

Hi Mervyn,

This is where I depart from your train of thought.  There is no reason to invoke the supernatural or extraordinary, is there?   For everyone else in the world using a passport is sufficient to confirm their identity.  Why suggest that in Oswald's case there is no "proof...LHO was involved," when for everyone else in the world we believe they alone use their own passport unless strong evidence suggests otherwise?

Jason

Hi Jason, the ONLY point I am personally making, is that up until the person called LHO departs from U.K. Immigration at Southampton, England, there is corroborating evidence.

Now if we dispute the evidence up until that moment in time, without providing superior evidence, then all bets are off. Suddenly UFOs are a possible source of intervention. Yes, I am being sarcastic, but to listen to some sources (on overnight AM radio, for instance), UFOs cannot be ruled out - but I am not associating myself with speculation.

I am looking for the facts in evidence that might be introduced into a court room. Now given that the evidence we have is at present the only evidence that there is to present to a hypothetical 'jury', I am dealing with what is, and not what might be. I believe that this is exactly where I am in agreement with you.

That is why, like you, I wonder why there was all that hoopla about the existence of ASC? I also find the choices of ASC and Turku to be very strange indeed.

But given the framework of existing evidence, then at least at this moment in time (until something superior is introduced into evidence), the person known as LHO did exit U.K. Immigration after making his itinerary known to at least one British official on site.

Then the trail goes cold.

The next item in sequence is the U.S. Passport bearing a stamp for "London Airport". That stamp normally signified London's Heathrow Airport which had taken over that title from Croydon Airport. But, how did that stamp get on to that U.S. Passport, and when did it get applied, and who was holding that U.S. Passport at the very moment it was presented for stamping? That we do not know. At least, we do not know it in such a way that it meets with either your standard of strict evidence, or mine.

Your answer to those questions switches from fact to interpretative speculation (in jest) by introducing the words "supernatural" and "extraordinary".

But you demand a legitimate chain-of-custody and rational explanation for events that can be supported by evidence from corroborating sources.

Yet there are none for the "London Airport" stamp.

That does not mean something supernatural or even extraordinary.

It means what it means: "Here is a stamp, now go figure what that stamp means."

I am not alone in raising this issue. That was the original line of questioning by people trying to backtrack LHO's movements. That is when THEY began speculating about airline flight times and even private flights for hire. I did not raise those issues, but they are both logical and natural enough questions to ask if you want to place LHO in Helsinki, Finland by a certain time on a certain date.

How did he get there (if indeed the person who left U.K. Immigration is the same person who arrived in Helsinki, Finland)?

Therefore there is only one question in play:

What happened after the person called LHO departed from U.K. Immigration?

Now as to this "CIA" business, maybe you and I do differ, I am not sure.

While "CIA"  officially exists with a headquarters at Langley, it is an umbrella for many units, and clearly some of those units have both freewheeling leaders within the official framework, and some of those units are not part of the official framework but are either 'fronts' or they are other official U.S. governmental entities utilizing "CIA" assets - both human and artificial (such as a ship.) It is by following the instance of the latter in an ongoing investigation unrelated to the JFK assassination per se, where the question of what happened on November 22, 1963 became a conjoined topic for me.

However, "CIA" is not unique here. It of course is the child of a sequence of entities going back from COI to OSS to SAS and SOE. In turn, "CIA" has its own siblings and its own progenies.

But the parent of it all is the British Crown which is a corporation sole. It is not the monarchy (human personages, per se, because they are merely its symbols - like Ronald McDonald and Mickey Mouse.) The British Crown is in turn the child of Rome from the time of Henry VIII of England. But references to "the Queen" get bandied around just like the letters "CIA". The ship I am tracking which led me here was never part of a Langley operation, but it was a part of the life and times of both Robert F. Kennedy and Gordon McLendon.

What the biography of McLendon (Garay) fails to address in depth is not only his association with David Atlee Phillips, but it also fails to mention how Gordon McLendon was associated with both Radio Free Europe, and the development of sponsored commercial radio in the British Isles. McLendon's involvement both preceded and continued through the arrival and departure of the person identified as LHO from U.K. Immigration at Southampton.

McLendon had an Intelligence background going back to WWII. Bill Colby began his training during WWII in Scotland, and then he went to Norway; then Sweden, before going on to Italy.

Overlapping this U.K. Immigration departure period in 1959, is a very complicated story involving Cambridge University students turned KFB spies implanted within Britain's MI6 (equivalent of CIA; MI5 is the equivalent of FBI). Add to that the beginning of the New York and New Jersey Mafia take over of London casinos (due to a new British law legalizing them); plus the squelching of the U.K. independent missile program ('Blue Streak'), and you have a very, very complicated geo-political British-American stage that the person called LHO has now stepped on to after exiting U.K. Immigration at Southampton, England.

In other words, this is not just a story set in Dallas, but a story that touches many different locations on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean - yet involving the same key players.

By dealing with "CIA" as if it was a unified entity, and by excluding the involvement of anything connected to London and by concentrating on Russia and USA, a big piece of the puzzle is being automatically discarded because it is in the U.K., more specifically in England, that the person called LHO disappears and then is said to reappear.

My question Jason is this:

Was the person who disappeared the same person as the one who reappeared?

By avoiding that question I see a Steve Martin routine in play whereby we jump from Point One to Point Three.

Mervyn

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Mervyn Hagger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Jason Ward said:

the true value of ASC is the ability it affords Oswald to legally travel.

Do you suppose that if the CIA chose a different "cover story" you'd be singing the song the same way but with slightly different details...   From what you see Jason, was all of the travel "legal"? When we don't know about the reality of the travel from the available evidence.

If you read any of my Mexico work you'd see the same patterns.... "Reliable sources" and a dim paper trail.... Real witnesses telling canned stories.... And an FBI asset providing the needed travel evidence....

The CIA is known for finding a thing that works and using it to death....

All I'm saying is you are applying a rational, overt explanation to purposefully irrational (from the outside looking in), covert activity.  Any number of excuses could have been created to allow Oswald to travel.... They chose this one this time....  Webster used a different route and process as did the other dozen names on that defectors list...

You see that, right?

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

×