Larry Hancock

Just curious if either of you have read Gerry McKnight's book on the Warren Commission, he delves into issues with Frazier's testimony and other issues of the FBI's presentations...including the WC taking

expert testimony on issues from agents who were not experts in that particular area. If not it might be helpful. When Gary gets his book out I understand he will be adding significantly to that area as well.

Tommy, I don't intend any offense but this thread illustrates why I find these discussions so frustrating - I'll elaborate just as a way of showing why I don't participate more.

"I guess former Army Intelligence analyst Newman was wrong, and Oswald was, as Jon Tidd says, just an Odd Duck who attracted the attention of U.S. Intelligence. But just it just amazes me how this "Odd Duck" had been an aviation electronics operator in the Marine Corps and had been stationed at a place that the U-2 operated out of, and was able to get into Russia on a moment's notice and had enough money to stay at one of the most expensive hotels in Helsinki for a few days and buy a couple hundred dollars worth of Intourist Coupons or travel vouchers to Russia or whatever they were called, to boot, and that he just happened to show up in Moscow a few hours after Colonel Popov was arrested (and about the time that look-alike Robert Webster resurfaced), etc. I guess as far as any potential interest the KGB might have been reasonably expected to have in Oswald, he might just as well have been a defecting Marine Corps Reserves dishwasher, especially in regard to whether or not he could help the CIA (maybe with just an itsy-bitsy bit of help from the ONI false defector program?) to determine whether or not what the drunken Russian general allegedly told Popov was true -- that the Russians already knew absolutely everything there was to possibly know about the U-2.

.....The issue I responded to was the old saw about Oswald having special knowledge of the U2 and offering it. I tried to clarify that point and referenced some fine books...I have done that before and I bet nobody will stand up and say they read the references I gave. Beyond that, I stated that the Soviets might well have been interested in Oswald's information on radar sets and access corridors on the West Coast - but that would be Soviet military intelligence. Following the end of the Cold War and prior to the new one now starting, the Russians releases a trove of KGB and other intel records covering their interest and surveillance of Oswald....has anyone here studied those in detail?

Actually in terms of an intel role for Oswald, I did not disparage that. I suggested that Oswald may well have collected info for ONI in Japan, come to the attention of the CIA via his interest in the Soviet embassy there and actually have been guided into an open source intelligence program centered on foreign studies....has anyone read Evica's extensive work on that or Greg Parker's studies of the actual programs and how they worked...which was very covertly and quite well. I also said that Oswald might well have been re-targeted in a knee jerk fashion due to the Webster incident...Bill Simpich covers that in detail, did anyone go study that again?

"But seriously, as Newman or Simpich point out, "Defecting is not illegal, but committing espionage is." Or words to that effect. I would think that the U.S. consul could have the marine guards arrest (or "detain"), inside the Embassy or Consulate, any American citizen whom the consul had good reason to suspect was going to commit espionage against the U.S."

....a very interesting point, so who is going to call or write the State Department and pursue the question of what their legal authority is and how they would respond if someone walked into the embassy, said they were going to try to become a foreign nation citizen and offer security information to that nation. Its a good question so how about some research on it.

What I find frustrating is that there is a real lack of homework on these subjects and posts, its really easy to throw up dialog based on books and internet searches but of course nothing ever gets resolved that way.

Which is fine but why I think having a dialog area separate from real research on the forum is a great idea. As I said I don't mean to offend but its also why I tend not to spend less and less time posting on forums.

Tommy, those devices are nothing more than radar sets, a quick qoogle on the numbers and radar will give you the details of each. They had nothing to do with the U2 project

As to Oswald seeing a U2 over China, just not possible, it took the underpowered U2 hours to reach mission height, which it did with a series of rising ellipses as I recall. Oswald

was working a relatively short range approach control radar at Atsuki, I'm just guessing but no more than 100 to 200 miles at best and with a limited height finder was well. I suppose he might have

seen a U2 take off to the west but that's about it. And if you check into the books I referenced earlier you will find that U2 missions over China were no big secret either. As usual

I recommend reading a lot more broadly than what is in the routine JFK literature.

In any event, anything to do with the U2 would be CIA, certainly nothing to do with ONI.

Tommy, I do recall that one of the concerns expressed in the WC inquiry was that Oswald did know the capabilities and range of the American radars .....there seems to be some confusion on that

point because the traffic control radars Oswald was working with were far different than the long range surveillance radars but certainly the Soviets might have been interested

in that sort of information ...it would have gone along with any West Coast flight corridor or other control info Oswald would have had. As to Powers, its hard to think that Powers didn't

know that the Soviets knew exactly how high and were the U2's were flying since they routinely sent interceptors after them and the interceptors tried to attack from their own

max altitudes. However the details NSA was picking up from monitoring Soviet military comm were very likely compartmentalized from the U2 pilots.

As to devices, could have had something to do with the friend or foe transponder devices or any of the comm devices on Marine aircraft, hard to guess at that one.

Based on that it would seem to me that all groups involved were doing just what they should do.....as I've noted earlier, the real issue of Oswald's radar knowledge that was a concern was his knowledge of the designated air control routes and related designations and practices on the West Coast, something he had personal experience with....

I just can't see any point to the ONI sending Oswald into Russia and then have him make a statement that would ring all the alarm bells, making lots of things more difficult including communicating with him inside Russia. Makes no sense. The only wild card would be if it were some sort of planned independent Naval intel action to follow up on the Webster incident ...which Simpich discusses at length.

Just way too complex for good, low profile intelligence work as I understand it...

This is exactly the sort of thing that needs to stand out in a section on actual JFK Research and not get hidden in other threads...IMHO

Tommy, I honestly don't recall.....someone needs to do the research and see if the cable did happen....and if there was any further communication between State and Navy while Oswald was in those first days in Russia. If the cable did happen then the embassy was doing its job. I don't know if the embassy personnel have any legal right to arrest anyone, although the embassy is legally US territory they would need to call on the Legate (normally and FBI officer) and pursue that. Interesting points but I surely don't know (or at least remember those details from Moscow). I can tell you after doing some research that none of that happened at all when Nagell did the same thing at the US embassy in Mexico City.

That seems realistic enough, for all we know there could have been more than one individual being used in the same fashion. Some of the girls may have been doing it for ideology but others were just collecting for a fee. As Jon pointed out, actually what you want to do is turn some of the latter to get a line on how the network was being run....so somebody has to get into position to even make the offer. A lowly enlisted Marine might well be less suspect in such a role. And for said lowly Marine, not a bad way to liven up your tour. Oswald was always looking for something new and different and that certainly would fit.

The only risk is that no doubt your buddies may take note of your considerably improved lifestyle...which some of them apparently did.

Tommy, I following you out on the limb because I don't have Dick's book and some of the other references but the way I recall the scenario is that Oswald hit some of the normal enlisted men's bars and then his friends noted that suddenly he had enough money to be going out with one or more of the girls from the Queen Bee, not necessarily going to itself itself routinely. They wondered how he could afford her company. I'm thinking a Marine of his rank might have stood out at the Queen Bee if he spent too much time....Officers might have noticed and objected. Not sure the Queen Been was a bar in our sense but rather a Geisha house which is a good deal different. Marine enlisted go to bars, ranking officers go to private clubs ...

-- again, that is all from memory which I shouldn't do but it would really be worthwhile to see what Dick has to say about it...

In regard to Tommy's point, certainly it would be expected that when news of Oswald in Russia became widely known, the ONI would do investigations. The point I was making was whether or not the State Department had initiated any alerts or warnings about his statement about providing info to the Soviets. I they did and that paper trail exists between State and on to Navy and ONI then things are as they should be. On the other hand if that trail is not there and there is no sign of proper security reporting in pretty much real time from the State Dept to CIA Soviet Desk and to Navy/ONI, then it might suggest something more complex.

I certainly can't question Jon's point about recruiting the bar girls but its also possible that Oswald himself might have reported an approach by a bar girl and matters proceeded from there; if he was inclined to play spy then that could have been an easy start.

OK, and I was there and can confirm Sherry's remarks from first hand observation. There was a very large retail area for that particular conference and a good number of folks actually paid for

tables to sell books and other materials; once you get into that level of event you have to ensure everyone is following the same guidelines.

That's probably a little far fetched Tommy but it is interesting that when Oswald made remarks about turning over information to the Soviets...which he did in the US embassy which we know was bugged by the Soviets...should it not have triggered some sort of serious investigation of what he might have known and be turning over. Should not State have immediately gone to the Navy/Marines/ ONI. How solid is the paper trial that they took a purported defector offering information seriously? Or were those remarks just for Soviet consumption.

Interestingly we know that in Mexico City in 1962, Richard Case Nagell went into the US embassy, stated he was renouncing his citizenship, that he had worked for military intelligence and that he planned to offer information to interested foreign nations...and their is no evidence that incident (which is documented in SWHT) triggered a security investigation either. Given the fact that Nagell had indeed held clearances and worked for CIC, it should have. So was that just part of another security test? Or was the State Department routinely and egregiously following down on its security responsibilities?

No problem here Tommy, I have the same issues and really have to force myself to go back to original material before commenting.....

I do think the question of whether Oswald might have been "directed" towards a program that would have involved placing students in Russian

foreign exchange programs via college study is worth some attention - and whether Oswald might have been "re-targeted" right in the middle of

that to some outstanding issue with American's in Russia at the time. The best place to tackle all that would be a mix of Greg Parker's work,

George Micahel Evica's book and Bill Simpich's recent work.

Tommy, I'll take a look when I get a chance....it just dawned on me there might be a very simple explanation. ONI also does very routine stuff like security clearance checks and personnel investigations. Its possible that for a hardship discharge the Corps might simply ask them to verify the hardship or the claims behind the request to make sure it was legitimate. I'll get back to this once I read the material you linked...

I'm afraid the honest answer is that I just don't remember it well to comment... Right off the top of my head I don't know why that would be necessary. All you need are some letters and documents relating to his mother's medical problem, some certifications such as by the Red Cross that confirm the need and its simply a Corps personnel process. If ONI would going that route I can't see why you would need "collaboration" since they would need to have the pieces in place in his personnel file for the cover story and backstop anyway? If you can give me a link to where I can look at it I'll offer an opinion but I just wouldn't feel comfortable based on my vague recollection of the issue.

Tommy, I really don't understand what value that would be for ONI. As Jon said, ONI's intelligence collection has to do with information that benefits the Navy, Soviet naval capabilities and technology, deployments, a host of other things but none really fit with Oswald.

On the other hand, there were several CIA Soviet Intelligence desk programs going on related to using college students placed within the Soviet Union, Greg Parker had done great work and described that in some detail, I mention it in SWHT but where escapes me right at the moment. The goal there was to gain political and social open source intelligence that could best be obtained circulating inside the Soviet Union and within a student community. That would dovetail much more with Oswald's interest in overseas education and his apparent "routing" towards a college work overseas...the only thing is that of the instances Greg describes, most had to do with students attending Eastern establishment type universities where the CIA had a strong old boy network which could be used to identify candidates.

My guess is that if there was an intelligence connection it would have happened under the Soviet Desk of the CIA and not military intelligence. I do vaguely recall the PDS remarks about the discharge and some anomalies there. Its wild speculation on my part but if Oswald had become visible to the CIA as having shown an interest in the Soviets - visiting their embassy or writing them - or given his general interests in the Soviet system he might have also become visible to the CIA. In that instance someone could have come up with some ideas for using him and simply asked the Marines to facilitate making him available though an accelerated discharge. ONI might simply have been asked for observations on him or to see if there had been some "entanglement" in his Japanese tour that would bring using him in question. But that's just a wild guess. What we do know is that the CIA was not bashful about reaching out and assisting the Eastern establishment college students ....getting them into special foreign education programs, getting them grants, etc. Its a stretch but Oswald's interest in European study has a lot more anomalies in and around it than anybody pays much attention to these days. There's a very good book on that by George Michael Evica that I would highly recommend.

Tommy, I've posted this in other threads but it sometimes gets lost in the shuffle. The bottom line on the U2 was that the Soviets tracked it on its very first missions, and American signals intelligence was very good at monitoring Soviet communications so they actually recorded the Russian tracking messages and the dialog about the height of the U2, its flight path etc. There had been some hope the Soviet radar did not have the capability of reliably following the U2 at its operational altitude but that proved to be wrong and the US was well aware that the Soviets could track the U2, consistently launched interceptors and fired on the aircraft - unsuccessfully. Some methods were taken to reduce the U2's radar visibility but they proved relatively fruitless.

The only question was at what point the Soviets would field anti-aircraft missiles with the ability to actually hit the U2 at its operational altitudes and when the aircraft would get an assignment that would take it within range. I should also mention, given Oswald's duties on approach radar at Atsuki, he would not have been able to observe the plane on its actual mission path and most likely at its max height since that occurred well outside the range of approach control radar.

Bottom line is that the Soviets knew everything they needed to know about the U2 from its first missions. Those interested can find the research and details in two books on US surveillance aircraft by Curtis Peebles, Shadow Flights and Dark Eagles.

I felt the same way about Haslam's first book and its second edition. It was intriguing. Then it morphed into the Judyth world and that is another story entirely. I don't disagree with Mr. Caddy's point about an open "marketplace for ideas" (although I've seen that become quite literal in some instances) but I think free speech requires that we apply a great deal of critical review and some hard nosed (I'm from Missouri class skepticism) on them. You need to look at the contrary views in just as much depth as the propositions being put forth. Its way too easy to jump onto bandwagons, especially if they are going in a direction which you tend to favor. Which of course explains the success of today's news talk radio - just as a minor example. Find a view you like and tout it on your show...don't waste time actually investigating it or requiring hard data to back it up, just go with it. It creates what I think of as "fan" news...the temptation of bandwagons and "fandom" is something historical research really has to be cautious about.

And yes, I am wearing my "curmudgeon" T shirt today...

For a little background, check Dr. Ferrell's authors page.....actually I have a couple of his books, highly entertaining if you are into NAZI wonder weapon technology.....note, I said "entertaining"...

http://www.amazon.com/Joseph-P.-Farrell/e/B001KCNKF4/ref=ntt_dp_epwbk_0

Robert, I don't know who you have in mind for "they" but I will assert that if you think there is no jihadi terrorism, that there is no jihadi social network and there is not a clear and present threat of fundamentalist terror attacks either sponsored or incited by that network then you are simply wrong. The thought that some mysterious "they" has to "sell" such a threat is just plain ridiculous.

You can hyper analyses photos all day long and it will not make that threat go away nor diminish it....I wish it would.

I've offered some suggestions for exposing true false flags in current events; I seriously doubt anybody will do the real work that would be required for that but I suspect my attitude is pretty much as clear as Stephen's so I'll just leave this thread for those who find some sort of value in it.

For anyone who wants to think a bit more deeply about the nature and consequences of the terror attacks in France I recommend the following essay:

https://medium.com/war-is-boring/what-i-learned-after-charlie-hebdo-f11d1a27e469

Given that this is an education forum and in pursuit of that I suggest the following - to individuals or teams of individuals with an interest in this:

1. Conduct a study with an organized outreach to a national wide sample of law enforcement agencies and legal professionals on the subject of the frequencey

with with crimes and terror acts are each committed and the perpetrators leave behind actual evidence producing leads to their arrest.

2. Conduct a study of legal prosecutions in which an individual was actually framed for a crime and the nature of that evidence, how it was planted and how the

frame was ultimately detected regardless of the incriminating evidence.

3. Conduct a study of historically documented false flag actions....not speculative ones but ones that can be documented....and profile who launched them, with what

motive and the MO for how they were carried out.

If you do those things then you have some benchmarks to evaluate contemporary events...otherwise its pure speculation. Anomalies are always worthwhile pursuing

but unless you have some data to examine them all you are left with is speculation, some of it sensational and I suppose entertaining but not much more. It would be

good to see some actual research on these subjects since they are obviously relevant to several major crimes of the 1960's as well as current events and come up

repeatedly.

John, it really is a waste of energy to continue to discuss any level of detail until you read the source material I referenced - and for that matter its now been years since I was dealing with it myself (my own studies were mainly between 2000 and 2006 when I was doing the work on SWHT; the 2010 edition had only a few updates pertaining to him). I've done three historical studies/books since working with the Nagell material. I would be silly for me to try to be more specific without going though it all again myself. However, as I recall Nagell told Dick that he did undertake some translation activity with visiting Japanese, simply as a favor to some of the local office folks. Beyond that, what got him involved with the FPCC and exile matters is another story and you will need to explore that yourself. As far as Mexico City, his contact there was with a CIA officer whom he had known in Japan. So, generally speaking, no he had no special knowledge other than language skills as a known quantity, unconnected to the Agency but personally known to the CIA officer who was operating in a very detached role at that point in time.

I wish you well if you choose to explore this but I'm not going to embarrass myself by claiming to recall details that I really don't....

The only thought I can contribute here is that Sam Cummins was getting very involved in procurement for the Agency about this time, first with weapons and ammo for PBFORTUNE and after PBSUCCESS he did some large scale sales to reequip the Guatemalan army with a new set of weapons. Don't know that any of that would make sense but along with what was going on in Albania/Greece that would be another Agency area of activity that involved weapons traffic.

Also, if Olin was doing some covert sales for the US government, certainly I would expect some broad cover statements from them that would obfuscate the movement of certain ammo...but I'm guessing Gary knows all about that possibility.

Jon, as it shouldn't until you spend a great deal of time on it....couldn't agree more. However I would point out that I don't myself feel that Nagell was officially working for either the Agency in any formal or paid role as an agent or source. However, I do believe that he was in contact with CIA officers and very possibly KGB officers as well, in line with his own interests and available to them on a totally unofficial basis for peripheral activities of their own interests...very likely unknown inside the official reporting hierarchies. I know you are skeptical of this but with our current knowledge of CIA "soft files", with proven field officer involvement in unsanctioned operational activities and with statements from officers themselves - all recounted in Shadow Warfare and elsewhere - I personally feel the operational side of the CIA Plans Directorate functioned with a lot more discretion for its officers and with a lot less formal reporting than the intelligence collections and analysis groups.

It's also quite possible that Nagell "name dropped" and exaggerated his role....however, that does not preclude his possible contacts or observations in Japan nor his proven activities in and around the Fair Play for Cuba Committee both in the US and Mexico City....how much of that was at his own initiative and how much might have been "encouraged" will likely remain a mystery somewhat on the line of Oswald himself. The crux of the matter though is whether he was traveling in the same Cuban exile circles and fundamentally whether or not he observed Oswald in contact with suspicious exiles known to him in New Orleans. It should be noted that Nagell had no information on the Dallas attack, but rather on the contacts in NO and a potential September plot in the DC area - something corroborated by Oswald's own SWP and CPUSa correspondence about a move there which could not have been independently known to Nagell.

In any event, I expect your studies of the material I suggest will prove interesting even if they do not lead to a solid conclusion, for me Nagell is valuable only in regard to the fact that his remarks about Oswald and the exiles in New Orleans are corroborated by other sources and serve to show one step in the events prior to Dallas...in which Oswald was very visible to a variety of Cuban exiles who were in turn themselves in contact with CIA filed officers out of JMWAVE in Miami.

One of the keys to evaluating Kurtz would be to verify that he has indeed turned over his interview tapes and other related documents to his Sensitivities archives as he said he would. Those primary materials are critical to evaluating his more explosive claims.....we checked with the archivist some time ago and he was unaware of any donations or plans to donate by professor Kurtz. Its probably time for someone to make a new check on whether or not the materials showed up or to contact Kurtz and ask when/where he will make them available.