Thomas Graves

Paul, One would think that the newspaper-reading Oswald knew that Kennedy was coming to Dallas on 11/22/63 and would be passing right by the seven-story TSBD. Given that premise, I'm absolutely shocked that the penurious Oswald didn't turn down Hemming's offer and insist that he wouldn't accept less than triple what he'd paid for the rifle to smuggle that sucker into the building that morning and hide it in a prearranged place on the sixth floor. LOL --Tommy

On the contrary, Paul B., it's a PARTIAL CONFESSION on the part of Lee Harvey Oswald. He was confessing that he was part of a plot -- he unwittingly played the part of the PATSY. He was confessing that he KNEW the murderers of JFK. That's a lot. Too bad he didn't live to tell us more. Regards, --Paul Trejo Although a person can participate in a counter-intelligence or "sting" operation by pretending to let others set them up as a patsy, when Oswald said "They've taken me in because of the fact that I lived in Russia. I'm just a patsy!", he was not necessarily admitting that he knew the conspirators or that he even suspected, before the assassination, that was being "set up." After all, if the latter were the case, wouldn't Oswald have done something to try to prevent it? I suppose it is possible that he went to Mexico City in late September in an attempt to "get the hell out of Dodge" before 11/22/63, and tried to get the Russians to pay his (and his wife's and children's) way to Russia (via Cuba) in exchange for information he could give them about the planned assassination, but it seems equally possible that Oswald came to the realization that he was "a patsy" only because he "put 2 plus 2 together" after he was arrested and realized that, given his past, he was the perfect patsy, but still may not have known the details of how he'd been set up or by whom. --Tommy edited and bumped

On the contrary, Paul B., it's a PARTIAL CONFESSION on the part of Lee Harvey Oswald. He was confessing that he was part of a plot -- he unwittingly played the part of the PATSY. He was confessing that he KNEW the murderers of JFK. That's a lot. Too bad he didn't live to tell us more. Regards, --Paul Trejo Although a person can participate in a counter-intelligence or "sting" operation by pretending to let others set them up as a patsy, when Oswald said "They've taken me in because of the fact that I lived in Russia. I'm just a patsy!", he was not necessarily admitting that he knew the conspirators or that he even suspected, before the assassination, that was being "set up." After all, if the latter were the case, wouldn't Oswald have done something to try to prevent it? I suppose it is possible that he went to Mexico City in an attempt to "get the hell out of Dodge" before 11/22/63, and tried to get the Russians to pay his way in exchange for information he could give them about the planned assassination, but it seems equally possible that Oswald came to the realization that he was "a patsy" only because he "put 2 plus 2 together" after he was arrested and realized that, given his past, he was the perfect patsy, but still may not have known the details of how he'd been set up or by whom. --Tommy

[...] The characters that they [Garrison, Mellen, Hancock, and Simpich] uncovered (brilliantly) were almost all MERCENARIES and not CIA Officers at all! The characters that they uncovered REALLY DID MURDER JFK; I believe that. Many of these wackos did PRETEND to be CIA Officers. They were liars as well as murderers. Truly pathetic characters. In this number I include those who confessed: Frank Sturgis, Johnny Roselli, John Martino, David Ferrie, Jack S. Martin, Thomas Edward Beckham, Gerry Patrick Hemming, David Morales and Howard Hunt. I would also include those who partially confessed: Lee Harvey Oswald, Loran Hall and Joseph Milteer. I would also include those who never confessed but whose close association with those named above is documented beyond all doubt: Clay Shaw, Guy Banister, Ex-General Edwin Walker, and Guy Gabaldon. [...] [emphasis added by T. Graves] Pray tell, how did Lee Harvey Oswald "partially confess" to the assassination of JFK? --Tommy

Kathy, Thanks for posting that link. Just thinking out loud here: Wouldn't many people seeing a car, any car, abruptly slow down during a shooting from eleven miles-per-hour to a very brief, near-crawl later say that that car had come to a "complete stop"? I think memories are fascinatingly unreliable, particularly those involving spacial relationships and relative motions in a fast-developing, complicated "scene." Especially when that "scene" imparts a significant degree of emotional trauma on the viewer. --Tommy

Robert, Do you think that everyone who believes that the Zapruder film was not altered is a "Lone Nut"? --Tommy

Fascinating stuff, Larry. Your "wild speculation" at the end actually makes a lot of sense. Question: Do you think it would have been obvious to Phillips that it must have been Morales that had played him? Thanks, --Tommy EDIT: According to John Newman in Oswald and the CIA, Oswald arrived in Mexico City on September 27 but his name wasn't on any of the phone transcripts until an imposter (who first called on Saturday, September 28) called the Soviet Embassy on Tuesday, October 1 and identified himself as "Lee Oswald." Newman points out that the transcripts of about eight phone calls involving Oswald were circulated out of sequence inside the Mexico City C.I.A. station, including the never officially acknowledged and now apparently missing Monday, September 30 transcript of a phone call to the Soviet Embassy (probably by an impostor) which "Mrs. T". said she personally processed and on which, she claimed, the caller spoke only English, asked the Russians for financial assistance in exchange for information, and said his name was "Oswald". On page 374 Newman says: "This leads us to the most important question of all: How did the [Mexico City] impostors learn of Oswald's name in the first place? In this connection, we are drawn back to Mr. T's speculation ... that Oswald's name first came to the station's attention through his contacts with the Cuban Embassy. If he is right, then the CIA's knowledge of what happened inside the Cuban Consulate is the key to the puzzle. Did the CIA station learn Oswald's name through an informant inside the Cuban Consulate? From a bug in the wall? From photographic coverage of the entrance? For thirty years the CIA has claimed they did not know Oswald was inside the consulate until after the Kennedy assassination. In the next chapter we will demonstrate that this is a lie - a cover story to protect CIA sources inside. For now it is sufficient to stay focused on the fact that it was Goodpasture who walked into the CIA station with the Cuban Consulate transcripts in her hand on Tuesday [October 1st]. Who in the [Mexico City] CIA station figured out that Oswald had visited the Cuban Consulate? At the end of Goodpasture's career, David Phillips, not Win Scott, wrote up her retirement award in 1973. It contained this passage: 'She was the case officer who was responsible for the identification of Lee Harvey Oswald in his dealings with the Cuban Embassy in Mexico.' Besides her role 'in support of the successful coup against the communist government in Guatemala in 1954,' her identification of Oswald in the Cuban Consulate was the only specific action in her entire career singled out by Phillips in her award." What's interesting to me in the context of this thread is that in the margin (in pencil of course) I had written years ago, "Maybe he told her!" I had totally forgotten about that particular "wild speculation" on my part, but given the fact that Antonio Veciana has recently (within the past year?) admitted that David Atlee Phillips was indeed the "(Maurice) Bishop" who had summoned him from Miami to Dallas for a ten-minute meeting in the summer of 1963 and that this "Bishop" was in the company of Lee Harvey Oswald at the meeting, added to the fact that this meeting took place just a couple of weeks before Oswald went to Mexico City, all leads me to think that maybe my speculation wasn't so "wild" after all. --Tommy edited and bumped

Fascinating stuff, Larry. Your "wild speculation" at the end actually makes a lot of sense. Question: Do you think it would have been obvious to Phillips that it must have been Morales that had played him? Thanks, --Tommy EDIT: I was just now thumbing through Oswald and the CIA, looking for references in it to Phillips, and I stumbled upon this passage by Newman on page 374: "Who in the [Mexico City] CIA station figured out that Oswald had visited the Cuban Consulate? At the end of Goodpasture's career, David Phillips, not Win Scott, wrote up her retirement award in 1973. It contained this passage: 'She was the case officer who was responsible for the identification of Lee Harvey Oswald in his dealings with the Cuban Embassy in Mexico.' (64) Besides her role 'in support of the successful coup against the communist government in Guatemala in 1954,' her identification of Oswald in the Cuban Consulate was the only specific action in her entire career singled out by Phillips in her award." What's interesting in the context of this thread is that not only had I drawn a big "X" with a circle around it years ago in the margin next to this passage (in pencil of course!), but I had also written there, "Maybe he told her!" LOL --Tommy

"The man [David Atlee Phillips] was far more creative than we will ever know. On the other hand, he played so many hands and so many games that at some level those who knew about some of them - like Morales - could easily have taken advantage of him." --Larry Hancock Absolutely. Terrific point, Larry. Perhaps a niggling question here, but I wonder if Phillips would have worked for Fitzgerald or Angleton while wearing his counter-intelligence "hat"? As regards the JFK assassination, would / could Fitzgerald and Angleton have been equally culpable? Thanks, --Tommy

Larry, What's particularly interesting about Phillips, as you point out in SWHT, it that he may have been wearing three "hats" in 1963, in three "interesting" CIA "departments". From page 351 of SWHT's Appendix C: Barnes, Hunt and Friends: "Peter Dale Scott relates that David Atlee Phillips was cross-posted as Chief of Cuban Operations in Mexico City, and as Chief of Psychological Operations (i.e. propaganda) in Miami at JM/WAVE. Scott also feels it very possible that Phillips held down three posts in 1963, also serving as a member of Angleton's [sic] Special Affairs Counter-intelligence (SAS/CI) staff. 18" [emphasis added by T. Graves] footnote 18: " As noted in Peter Dale Scott's "The Three Oswald Deceptions: The Operation, The Cover-Up And The Conspiracy" originally published in: Deep Politics II: Essays on Oswald, Mexico and Cuba, and available at http://www.assassinationweb.com/scottd.htm " --Tommy P.S. I just now put the "sic" in, above, because after reading PDS's essay I realized that SAS/CI was run (I think) by Dez Fitzgerald, not Angleton per se. Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong here...

Robert, I always swerve when I think my car is being shot at. Kind of an involuntary reaction, I guess. --Tommy

Paul, Although I don't believe it was LHO who shot JFK, I can't agree with you that "Oswald was an unbelievably poor choice for an assassin." After all, at one point in his Marine Corps career Oswald qualified on the rifle range as a "sharpshooter," which is pretty darn good by civilian standards. --Tommy

I agree, Pat. --Tommy

Larry, It's interesting that Professor Trejo suggests that since Dulles, Angleton, Phillips and / or Harvey have not yet been proved to have conspired in the assassination of JFK, they mustn't have. I fail to understand his logic. After all, one wouldn't expect such career CIA pros to have left behind much self-incriminating evidence, if any. --Tommy

Well, Chris, you seem to be concentrating on the time interval between the second and the third shot, and I'm wondering if either of those shots was the one that nicked Tague. --Tommy

Which shot nicked Tague with the piece of flying concrete? The first, second, third, fourth, fifth, six, seventh, ... ? --Tommy

Bill, I like your theories, and I must say that you do a good job of supporting them with pertinent documentary evidence. I like the idea that although Oswald might have been sent to Russia by US intelligence, he may have gone to Russia on his own (I'm thinking that he wanted to be a double or triple agent). Regardless of his motives, it makes sense that Oswald was closely monitored by both the KGB and the CIA while he was there. It also stands to reason that he was used by the CIA as a U-2 info-based "dangle," and in conjunction with "defector" Robert Webster, a man whom he facially resembled (at least from certain angles) and whose biometrics were apparently assigned to Oswald to create "marked cards" for the Mole Hunt. It's fascinating that a probable result of this was the DPD's being unintentionally supplied with Webster's approximate height and weight and age on 11/22/63, which the DPD then broadcast to its officers to help them in their ostensible search for JFK's killer. One minor point I'd like to make, and it's obviously no criticism of you, is the interesting fact that the following document says that no derogatory information about Oswald was found in his Marine Corps files right after he defected in 1959. It makes no mention of the fact that he was court martialed twice while stationed in Japan. But maybe they were just looking for more serious, "national security" type behaviors or offenses. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=117797&relPageId=260 So, I'm with you and support you. What you've said elsewhere about Goodpastures' creating the fraudulent Mystery Man = Oswald situation and creating and disseminating different Oswald "marked cards" in her attempt to determine who had penetrated LIENVOY (as evidenced by the impersonation of Oswald and Duran on September 28, 1963) makes sense, too. I suppose the biggest compliment I can give you is that what you've written helps to me to understand the implications of Newman's Oswald and the CIA. --Tommy Here's an excellent article on Webster and Oswald by Gary Hill in The Fourth Decade: http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=48688&relPageId=49 re-bumped Here's a photo of blonde, Oswald look-alike Robert E. Webster from his 1946 Pennsylvania high school yearbook. Webster defected to Russia two weeks before Oswald did. From Greg Parker's reopenjfkcase website. This is Webster returning to the U.S., once again making the big move two weeks before Oswald. From oswaldsmother website. And there's a 1962 newspaper article viewable elsewhere on the Internet which has a closeup photo of Webster's face which intentionally makes him look like LHO, IMHO. Just thinking -- 1) Wouldn't it be something if Webster was the guy who impersonated LHO in Mexico City? 2) I've read in a CIA document that Webster was a Quaker. I wonder if he knew Ruth Paine? --Tommy

Well that was nice. I made one final simple edit and the whole thing disappeared.

Thanks, Shane. --Tommy

[...] " Paul your [sic] 100 % wrong [...] Ukraine change is for a banker globalist supremacy and totally supported by Republican Party. Clinton/Obama corporatist Republicans " [...] Right, Stevie. Ukraine should have kept its corrupt pro-Russian oligarch, Yanukovych, and allowed him to continue turning the country's back on Europe and the EU and, yes, NATO, so that Ukraine could continue to be just a buffer state for that huge, stagnating Mafia-owned Gas Station known as ... Mutha Russia! You probably believe that Obama and the Clintons and the Bushes "own" Mutha Russia and its full-of-gas Putin, too. Do you also believe that "Fascist Obama" and the "Fascist Republicans" and the "Fascist Ukrainian Government" shot down that Malaysian airliner over Ukraine a couple of weeks ago, and that "Fascist UFOs" abducted the airliner before that, and that, according to the National Enquirer, the moon is made of green cheese? LOL I'm so glad you've decided to come back, Stevie! --Tommy

Ernie, I'm guessing that Trejo didn't have an accurate understanding, that Harry's memory has morphed a bit, and Trejo has tried to accommodate it all by "word twisting". --Tommy

Excellent post, Ernie. But maybe Harry's memory isn't so suspect. Maybe Trejo just over did the word-twisting a bit. LOL --Tommy

Hi Kathy, Instead of "xxxx," is "prevaricator" okay? I mean, "prevaricator" sounds better than "xxxx," right? ( lol ) --Tommy I doubt Kathy will accept that either Tommy. Anything conveying adverse personal attributes is probably what she will object to -- no matter how egregious the provocation. [...] Ernie, Not that it's happened on this thread, but I wonder if it will continue to be okay for members to call other members "xxxxx"? That seems to be acceptable. LOL --Tommy PS Keep up the good work. Whenever Paul "A. J." Trejo twists your words or puts words in your mouth, just grin and bear it and try to point him in the right direction without expending too much of your own time and energy.