Bill Simpich

Robert Howard, Back in 2009, you posted this list that includes a reference to AMCANOE-6 as Juan Herrera Valladeres - Do you still remember where to find the document that nailed this down?

Hi Paul, My hypothesis that David Morales was a mole stands. You and I go to different places about what that means. As it is a hypothesis, it could have been another AMOT, who reported to Morales. Or the AMOT could have reported to someone else, although I think Morales was the most likely one to get the news. Furthermore, Morales and Gen. Walker were not close allies - Morales' allies were Bill Harvey, Rip Robertson, Clark Simmons...that path would lead to Mafia guys like wiretap expert Richard Cain. Morales was buddies with Mafia guys who knew Cain (and Sam Giancana)...like Johnny Roselli. Navy guys like Chuck Feeney. I went to some length to say that's what I think...while staying open to new evidence because there are many other avenues of evidence to consider. I think it is more valuable to focus on the social relationships between the various individuals involved in the JFK story, because there is a great deal more that we can know and need to know. If our investigation is built on marshy ground, it will lead to weak and unreliable results. That is why I am more interested in light than heat. What I see too often in the Education Forum - and especially on this thread - people forcefully fighting over their pet theories and not listening to one another. I'm an attorney, I see this kind of thing every day, and don't think it's productive. I am calling for a spirit of cooperation where we listen to one another and don't respond in a heated fashion to items of evidence that challenge our own beliefs. The cooler head prevails. With that said, I'm all for the spirit of inquiry. I agree that it is important to say what you think, and put together a hypothesis based on what you have learned. It's also important to treat each other with respect. Especially our adversaries. Bill

I think Bright is important. Whether or not Oswald was a spy - and I think he was, at least in his own mind - Marina and June got to go to the USA with him, while the State Dept lent him some money, and meanwhile the military took away his honorable discharge so he was broke and completely manipulable - the CI crowd was manipulating his records. From Chapter 1 of my book: "WB" (William Bright) told the registry to "index page 7", which is the page in the Fain memo that has an inaccurate hand-written description of Oswald as “CIT: USSR, Res. Moscow, USSR, ex-U.S. Marine, who upon his discharge from Marine Corps, Sept 59 traveled to USSR and renounced his U.S. citizenship.” Marguerite Oswald never said that Oswald was a Soviet citizen – only that Oswald had “apparently sought Soviet citizenship”. See how these notes from Fain’s memo were preserved on this index card; however the clerk accurately fixed the writing to say that Oswald traveled “to renounce his US citizenship” rather than “renounced his US citizenship”. The claim that Oswald was a Soviet citizen, however, was not corrected. Did Bright write the note himself? Based on a quick review of the meager amount of Bright’s handwriting that is available, I can’t rule it out yet. This inaccurate handwritten description was on the same page as the physical description as "5 foot 10, 165 lbs, light brown wavy hair, blue eyes".[ 27 ] Now, if anyone turned from the index card to page 7 of Fain’s memo, the reader would immediately see Oswald’s inaccurate physical description. The FBI’s version of page 7 does not include the handwritten description. It’s also possible that page 7 was indexed specifically for the “5 foot 10, 165 pounds” description, the handwriting was added later, and the index card was created last. In either case, Bright had now successfully shoehorned the Webster-like description of Oswald into the CIA’s indexing system. Thanks to Bright focusing on this particular page to be indexed – rather than another page that did accurately describe Oswald’s citizenship status - the CIA now had quick access to an inaccurate description of Oswald’s citizenship status and an inaccurate physical description of Oswald." Although I appreciate that Paul Trejo likes my hypothesis, I should add that we don't agree on a host of issues and Paul's views are frequently not mine. For example, I don't think that Morales "went rogue". Secondly, whether Morales was even involved with Mexico City is simply a hypothesis. I based it on the likelihood that it would have been an AMOT inside the intercept station that manipulated the "voice of Oswald and Duran", or the transcript itself. If the Oswald character actually spoke terrible Russian and terrible English as a couple of the records indicate, the one who did the impersonation was probably a native Spanish speaker. Again, just a hypothesis. I think a better conversation is whether there was a split (based on social class and personal ideologies) between Angleton, Scott, Goodpasture and Phillips on one hand, and Harvey, Morales, Rip Robertson, and their Mafia buddies on the other. If Carl Oglesby was here, he would describe Dick Helms and Allen Dulles as "the Yankees", and what I've described below as a "split within the Cowboys". Resolving my question about a possible split doesn't resolve who led the forces against JFK, but this type of discussion sheds more light than heat. Bill

I think about the strategy of tension all the time. I think it goes back to the dawn of time. On that particular phrase, the Gladio staybehind network and the bombings in Italy of 1968 and 1980 and the whole course of events that uncurled for decades afterwards is quite revealing. The theater offered me great solace on this subject - Dario Fo's Accidental Death of an Anarchist was written right in the thick of the tension. Bill

No, he had nothing on the subject.

I was trying to say I think Oswald was impersonated on the phone - and on Sept 28 and October 1. Bill

Speaking personally I spent a lot of time studying this subject thinking it was going to lead to a major revelation. It was a fascinating trip, but it wasn't worth the time I personally put into it. That is the red herring. That's largely why I post here. I think the only relevant question for me at this point is if Miller impersonated Oswald which I doubt. Another one might be is if someone like Phillips wanted people to think Miller or another man impersonated Oswald as a false lead and they created this long exhausting goose chase with the help of Jack Childs. Otherwise, absent a big break, I think time has covered up who might have impersonated Odwald in Mexico City. I remain agnostic whether he was impersonated in person or not - I do think he was on the phone. I don't know If Ed or Dan thought Miller acted as a blond Oswald or was mistaken as one. I am sending a post to Dan today about Miller - I will let you all know what he says. Bill

Oh, no. Just saying that I think Leonov held a post with the Soviets similar to the post Phillips held with the Americans. They were both propaganda/recruitment kind of guys.

Jim - I am not a big fan of a most threads but I like this one. I think the blond Oswald has been a red herring for a long time, and I hope this thread can put a few theories to bed. At the same time, the role of the blond Ernesto Lehfeld Miller who visited the Cuban Embassy on September 26 is not yet completely understood. The first thing I want to say is that I agree with you that photo studies are among the least reliable evidence there is, unless they are very good photos and there is reliable corroborating evidence. Trying to make sense of them is a humbling experience. One is that the pictures released by the HSCA in 1978 portray Oswald - the photos I have posted make a strong case that one of the men identified as "LEON" on the CIA photos is Nikolai Leonov, the man "who was David Phillips' alter ego" for the Soviets in Mexico City. Not just because of the resemblance, but because LEON is written down and Leonov regularly went in and out of the station. The other is that the blond man who appeared in the Embassy on September 26 was the friend of the Duran family - Ernesto Lehfeld Miller. I didn't identify him - but I went to the National Archives and read the depositions of Silvia, her then-husband Horacio, and the whole family - they all identified Ernesto Miller as the man after looking at the photo, and they testified that he would regularly borrow Horacio's car. A line of inquiry I am looking at is that Horacio and Ernesto were both architects, and the intelligence documents have a fair amount of discussion about the 7th Congress of the International Union of Architects between September 27-October 3. A CIA agent within the architects was quizzing Teresa Proenza about this conference - Proenza was a close friend and ally of Silvia Duran. I will submit it is possible that Ernesto Lehfeld Miller impersonated Oswald on September 26. Not probable, but possible. Hardway and Lopez made a finding that a 5 foot six blond "Oswald" appeared at the embassy on September 26, wearing a light blue "Prince of Wales" suit. So it can't be ruled out - but it is not found in the final conclusion contained in the Lopez-Hardway report. Again you are quite right - that is a fine document. I'm mailing the document to Dan today to see if it jogs his memory as to why they apparently changed their mind about this initial finding. I believe they decided it was Ernesto Lehfeld Miller, because the Duran family interviews were conducted in the closing months of the HSCA study. Finally, I want to address a misunderstanding about what i referred to in my book as the Oswald-Webster "uncanny resemblance" and said that they looked "almost exactly the same". You wrote that I thought the two men were "dead ringers" for each other. The difference is subtle, but important. The difference is that I think the resemblance can be seen in photos. A glance shows that they are not the same man. But the resemblance is important because it got people to talk about the resemblance. And talking among Soviets was what was important, because any wiretaps would pick up that conversation. Similarly, I am very struck that both Webster and Oswald were identified as 5 foot 10 and 165 pounds. It is simply not an honest description of Oswald. The question in my mind is why were each of them given the identical description? Like "Henry" and the quarrel about whether or not Oswald had "renunciated his citizenship", this is all grist for the mill in a molehunt. From your comments, I think the biggest difference that you and I have is that you don't believe a molehunt happened. The molehunt remains a theory - not a fact - an important distinction with Mr. Trump as president. I do think there is much good evidence to support the theory. Bill

Tommy, I can't quite go with you on your theory about "the intentional scene caused by Oswald". If it's true - which I am not sure about at all - Oswald could have done it for any number of reasons. The big question for me remains whether Oswald went to the Cuban embassy. I get the feeling we are looking at the same document when you refer to the "hard-to-find Cuban embassy"... I never considered the Cuban embassy as "hard to find" until I took a hard look at the document I cited earlier in this thread - specifically, expat Elizabeth Mora tells two Mexican FBI informants that Teresa Proenza ran into Oswald "cold" at the Cuban embassy and she turned him over to the nearest person who was "higher in rank and spoke English"...the FBI agent writing the memo describes the Cuban embassy as "difficult to find". Maybe Mora just had a poor memory, but this FBI summary refers to this event and says Proenza "turned (Oswald) over to Silvia Duran, a personal friend of Proenza, and embassy employee." That's a different story from the Mora story...did it come from Proenza, Duran, or somewhere else? It would be good to find the source. If you believe the Jack Childs story that Oswald comment about "I'm going to kill Kennedy" - a big if - that would mean that Fidel knows something about the story that nobody else seems to know. Fidel's meeting with the HSCA members is worth checking out. It is very jovial. Fidel makes a point of not attacking Azcue, but makes it clear he has "no special theory" whether or not the real Oswald came to the Cuban compound. He does not discuss the embassy vis-a-vis the consulate with the HSCA members. Duran and Azcue don't tell us the "I'm going to kill Kennedy" story - if the Childs story is true, it sounds like it happened at the embassy and not the consulate. Like you are doing, I hope as many of us as possible keep digging deeper into the documents we have on hand. It's the best way to prepare for whatever we find out in October. Bill

I'm the kind of guy who loves researchers but hates arguing about who's right and who's wrong. I'm a lawyer that hates lawyers. With that said, Paul, I appreciate the kind things you've said about me, but leave me some wiggle room. And yourself too. When I wrote State Secret, the center of the story was my belief that Oswald was impersonated in Mexico City. At least on the telephone. And when I got into the whodunit question...which I did very gingerly...I offered my thinking as a hypothesis. A hypothesis. Not faith. I was not saying that I thought the higher-ups in the CIA were innocent - or in the other intelligence agencies either. I was saying that the killing of JFK could have been a revolt from within the middle-level of the Agency, not the tippy-top. But it might have been from the tippy-top - like Angleton. Or Angleton might have been caught with his shorts down - Kim Philby showed it could be done to him. Someone framed Oswald, I'm convinced of that. You think the radical right did the whole thing. Walker and friends could have been in on it. But who manipulated the entire autopsy? I don't see how the radical right could have controlled that. All I'm saying is be a little more flexible. Listen to everyone a little harder.

CA/B3 Walter Raymond was a CIA officer active in Mexico City in Oct 1963. State was apparently cover for him in the 60s. He wrote a memo on 10/16/63 setting up meetings with David Phillips and two officers (including one who was a propaganda specialist (known as KUWOLF) to discuss QKOPERA operations (Congress of Cutural Freedom). The goal was to shift the tenor of Mexican intellectual life to a more pro American stance- should they start their own publication or take another one over? http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=45135&relPageId=2&search="Walter_Raymond"

Reviving this thread...I notice there are two lines of GOOSECREEK...when running traces on the NSA defectors and when running traces on leads from QJWIN. Both involve Bill Harvey doing some heavy lifting at Staff D. My speculative read on GOOSECREEK is that it is the slugline used when requests are made for traces or other assistance from Staff D. The term GOOSECREEK probably derives from the need to engage in a wild goose chase to put together obscure references on a very important subject.

James, Can you tell us or share your source for Morales being Volsky's case officer? I tried to contact Volsky on Facebook, but he hasn't written me back. His website is http://georgevolsky.com/ Bill

Paul, you are right, Peter Dale Scott's discussion about the 5'10"/165 pound description of Oswald being inaccurate but nonetheless all over the police radio was one of the main factors that got me into writing State Secret. No intelligence document or investigative report ever discussed how remarkable it was that the description of Oswald that the CIA and FBI and other agencies had been using from 1960 to 1963 was being blasted repeatedly over the police radio just minutes after the president's death.

Robert - I did notice some very short and very late reports by the specific officers you were asking about, though it was quite late in the game. It looked like the WC asked Curry to ask the officers you mentioned to come foreward with something, however short. It seemed that some of them were at least working with notes. It certainly wasn't much, but it was something. I think you could find more like this if you are interested. Barnett... Denham.... Harkness... Smith J. Brown Murphy White Foster

Robert, Please go back to my previous post, and specifically what I cited earlier in CD 81. In those hundreds of pages, there is a lengthy DPD case report dated 11/22, many police reports from 11/22 (often dated December 2 and 3) about Oswald's arrest from officers like Charles Walker, W.R. Westbrook, and the like. You will also find many documents about the line-up of Oswald, the search of the depository, and the preparation to move Oswald from the police department before he was shot. But not nearly enough DPD documents are there. And virtually none in my quick review about the specific officers you named in your initial post.

Robert Mady, I'm with you, the DPD reports are a scandal long overdue for discussion, analysis, and a big story.. Many of the documents that exist have never been properly analyzed. There are some reports, but slipshod and all over the place. I can't find off-hand the specific ones you are looking for. CD 81 will give you some 11/63 and 12/63 reports by DPD - not just sheriffs. Starting at about p. 624 to about 661: https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10483&relPageId=624 Another burst of documents starting at p. 491 https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10483&relPageId=491 Again at page 451 https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10483&relPageId=491 The case report at page 419 is fascinating - a summary of sorts https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10483&relPageId=419 And so on, going backwards,,,, You can also look at CE 2003, which is derived from CD 81 and may have some differences, as well as CE 2002 on the failed transfer of Oswald https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/getToc.do?docId=1140&relPageId=233&source=controls_D.jsp I'm really wanting to hear more. Just one example. For Hargis, this Dallas newspaper article was gospel for decades, which would indicate no report was ever created or released. https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=16246&relPageId=22 For comparison, here's the aforementioned reports from July 64, CE 1358; CD 1259. https://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=11654&relPageId=2

Jon, I will take a quick pass at your question, because it is such a good one. I think four of the places where the set-up is clear are: 1. The phone call of Sept 28 from the Cuban consulate to the Soviet consulate, supposedly by Oswald and Duran, followed by the 10/1 call from "Oswald" to the Soviet consulate. As I wrote in State Secret, the purpose was to scare the CIA higher-ups into believing that its highly valued wiretap system in Mexico City had been penetrated and to cause a reaction. I believe that they reacted with a molehunt, centered around Lee Oswald. This molehunt can be most easily seen in the twin memos sent by HQ on 10/10/63 - one to the Mexico City station, one to the FBI, CIA, and Navy, with two different descriptions of Oswald sent to different offices of these three agencies - designed to smoke out a mole if and when an unauthorized person used any of this information.. Whether or not you agree with my hypothesis that Oswald's identity was used for a molehunt by Angleton's CI-SIG, it's clear that Oswald was a center of attention for these agencies in the two months before 11/22. All three of them acted in bizarre ways...in the days before the 9/28 phone call, the CIA's CI-SIG took most of Oswald's 201 file and put it under Egerter's exclusive control so that Mexico City had little understanding of LHO's biography; the FBI dug up Oswald's baby records and fluttered many of their most sensitive sources; the Navy was repeatedly asked (and failed) to send an Oswald photo to the Mexico City station so they could compare it with the Mystery Man. And, of course, ties had now supposedly been made between Oswald and Cuban secretary Silvia Duran, as well as the supposed master of assassinations and sabotage - Kostikov of the 13th Department. When Oswald was identified as the probable shooter - it was a "poison pill" or "blackmail" for the higher-ups of the CIA, FBI, and Navy. These facts set forth above were hidden until after the ARRB released the documents in the 90s, because they would have made these agencies look terrible, even culpable. 2. Oswald got moved into position to be employed at the TSBD in the month before the 11/22 shooting. JFK had come thru town before in motorcades; his trip was now a sure thing; his probable route going by the TSBD as I understand it was more or less a reasonable assumption. I think one of the things to look at is how Wesley Buell Frazier got his job at the TSBD around 9/15 thru an agency that I want to study....then Oswald got his job the following month, supposedly when Frazier's sister Linnie Randle was having cheesecake with Ruth Paine. Both of them have different stories...Ruth is more convinced that Linnie told her a job was available, Linnie said that she wasn't nearly that certain...I'm inclined to think parties manipulated both Ruth and Linnie, but I don't automatically give them a pass. 3. The sightings of Oswald at the Sportsdrome are very important. I do not think it was Oswald. I am particularly struck by the sighting of a man named Frazier who was supposedly there. I think Frazier was impersonated as well. That would explain why Frazier has been reluctant to talk all these years. Also important is the LHO sighting at Lincoln-Mercury as well as repeated sightings of Oswald at Hutchinson's grocery in Irving during the working day on the weekdays, particularly because Oswald had no ride from Frazier to get over there. (I get into these issues in depth in Chapters 11-12 of the Twelve Who Built the Oswald Legend series.) 4. I also think the five radio calls starting at 12:44 pm/Nov 22 passing on the tip about the 5 foot 10/165 pound shooter (and similar tips after the Tippit shooting) are very important and the final part of the set-up. Needless to say...though I think the Oswald legend had been used for a variety of reasons over the years, only during the last 60 days did this set-up take place. As Peter Dale Scott once said to me, it was like there was a paper mache figure named Oswald, borrowed by a lot of people, with his clothes always filled with pocket litter.

Tommy, You are always very kind to me. I just have a minute, and I will come back here, it's all good stuff. I believe that Phillips is referred to on August 18 as a "non-KUBARK American embassy official", and they were worried about Phillips' identity being compromised. The next day he got re-signed as a contract agent for another year. Here's a little more about Phillips and lack of a "trial date" as of August 21. He arrived in Cuba August 24. Phillips' cover in Cuba was blown by September 1959. He left Cuba for good in 1960. I did notice a response to the 8/21/59 post, dated 8/25/59. I'm trying to figure out who Lawrence R. Charron and everyone else is. Charron was continuing to work in these affairs in 60-61, that's clear. A note says that "Charron" got moved from HQ to Santiago by early 64. "De Los Reyes" appears to be Gustavo de los Reyes, according to Nelson Raynock who I believe is Hecksher. Armando Cainas Milanes was identified by a source of attache Paul Bethel, one of David Morales' close pals at the American embassy. Both Cainas and de los Reyes wind up in Cuban jail pretty quickly as I recall. Some of these documents are from Box 45, if you follow the RIF numbers back and forth sequentially much more of the story should be revealed. That technique may work for the other docs as well. Stu Wexler and I find this works about 50% of the time.

Look at 4:01, you see the same neck scratcher, with a big bald spot on the back of his head. Sorry, Tommy, I want to believe but I don't think so.

I'm pleased that I was able to successfully convey to you that Nikolai Leonov Is one of the two men in the 1978 HSCA photos. Now I want to make it clear that the other blond-haired man in the HSCA photos is Ernesto Lehfeld Miller. His HSCA photo is depicted below. I will go to the Archives later this year and pull the documents, unless someone beats me to it. The Duran family depositions and the photobook known as JFK Document 7549 (not at the Mary Ferrell website) make it complelely clear that the man in the 1978 HSCA photos who was photographed at the Cuban embassy on Sept. 26, 1963 is Miller. Take a look at the CIA's photo strip of the Cuban embassy on Sept. 26. See Miller's photos shown in the fourth column, first two photos, marked "24" and "23"? The CIA's log of the Sept 26 photos for items 23 and 24 states that Miller was sent from the Cuban embassy to the Cuban consulate. Sylvia Tirado Duran also identified Miller as the man depicted as #26 and #27 in the aforementioned photo book 7549. Duran said that he was the architect and friend of her husband - "Ernesto Lefel" (that would be Ernesto Lehfeld Miller) (#26 and #27). He was the guy who used to borrow her husband's car.

So you know, John Newman came out to the West Coast in November for a mini-conference sponsored by Gary Aguilar. He said that he has spoken with Sforza's daughter, re-checked his work, and now agrees that Sforza is the real name and there is no familial relation between Sforza and Tepedino (although the men were close). John's work is great, including his most recent research. It's very easy to make a mistake when doing this research, that's why it's important to do presentations before one's colleagues before committing to print.

All of your comments are on point. Gary's observation is correct, I was researching my article on the first-day evidence a couple months ago and got access to this photo. For many years I assumed that I was looking at a live round until this better photo was available. So that and a few other items need to be changed in my next edition of the book. In many ways, this is my favorite chapter of the book - the cover-up was what I had originally intended to make my focus, while I tried to figure out the impersonation in Mexico City. What I learned on that front changed the composition of the story. I like what Jon says about the "pre-programming" of the DPD; I'm spending a lot of time trying to figure that part out. I should also say, Tommy, that I agree with you about the absurdity of referring to a 5 foot 10, 165 pound man as "slender". The phraseology of "slender, 5 foot 10, 165" was used repeatedly by both the FBI and the CIA to identify Oswald during the last three years of his life - even though it was totally inaccurate. I never thought I'd agree with Marguerite Oswald on much of anything, but there it is.

I note that Oswald said to Officer Martello in August 1963 before his court hearing that he had a placard, made of brown cardboard, with several pieces of his literature on it around his neck, and with the hand-printed "Viva Fidel" at the bottom. Since the placard was in the court's possession, I would think he was telling on the truth on this one. His main flyer said in big letters "Hands off Cuba" (with more language in smaller font), which would have dominated the placard. The placard had the hand-printed "Viva Fidel" below the flyer. I still can't find the reference to the placard in the attic that I seem to have remembered in the archives, but I do see a brown piece of cardboard found at the Magazine residence on 11/23/63, two months after they moved out, with the aforementioned Hands off Cuba flyer pasted to it. No reference to "Viva Fidel", for whatever reason - maybe Oswald removed this hand-printed statement at some point? The August placard also seems similar to the April placard, which reportedly said from the hasty glance of a cop: "Hands Off Cuba. Viva Fidel." This may explain a lot of the placard story. How did his neighbor Gladys Rodgers know or remember that Bill Stuckey visited Oswald in August? That's probably true, but bizarre that she knew or remembered.