George Sawtelle

Jason Banister did not make a patsy of Oswald. By creating a communist persona in Oswald Banister hoped to discover communists and their sympathizers and Castro agents in New Orleans. Oswald was more of a spy than a patsy when working for Banister.

Jason Oswald the communist in Mexico City is not the same anti-Castro Oswald who visited Odio on 26 Sep 1963. Someone is impersonating Oswald in Mexico while the real Oswald, the one killed by Ruby, is in Dallas visiting Odio.

Jason "The Last Investigation" Fonzi pg 112 The meeting with two latins and Oswald in Dallas at Odio's apartment on 26 Sep 1963 ... Fonzi writes what Silvia Odio says about the three men who visited her apartment ... She said the three appeared tired, unkempt and unshaven, as if they just come from a long trip. The ride in a car from Laredo, TX to Dallas, TX is about 6-7 hours give or take an hour.

Jason From "ourhiddenhistory.org/entry/antonio-vecianna-maurice-bishop-my-cia-contact-agent-was-david-atlee-phillips" Here is what Antonio Vecianna said about the patsification of Oswald. In a response to Anthony Summers's question, and I paraphrase, why would Phillips allow you to see Phillips with Oswald. That is a huge mistake on Phillips's part. Vecianna, speaking through an interpreter, says the following ... "To answer your question Mr Summers, Mr. Vecianna believes that at that moment, the end game had not been decided, and it was't until November when that happened. He was an asset. He was someone that had a relationship with Phillips, but Mr Vecianna doesn't believe at the time that Oswald had been designated and selected as the patsy, or else he might have ------ Vecianna also says that Phillips was very capable but made many mistakes.

Jason The info from the WC, FBI and CIA is tainted. One doesn't know what to believe. But if someone lies to me I stop believing that someone. I believe Oswald and the two Cubans drove up from Laredo and met with Odio on the evening of 26 Oct. The CIA and FB muddied up the waters. When the water `clears you see the fish. Well eliminate the Mexico fake documentation and you see the Mexico City affair for what it is ... the impersonation of Oswald. You are on the right track. However I think the patsification of Oswald was before he got the job at the TSBD.

Jason Oswald never` travelled to Mexico City in late Sep early Nov 1963 Why was Oswald impersonated in the Cuban and Russian consulates if he was going there anyway? According to the WC, Oswald went to Mexico City to get an in transit visa for Cuba and a visa for Russia. The only reason to fake his presence in Mexico City is that he wasn't going there. I'm not sure when Oswald was designated the patsy by the plotters. If I was to guess, it's probably when David Phillips becomes his handler.

Jason The CIA and FBI had nothing to do with the impersonation. That was a military intelligence caper. The CIA lost nothing by calling off Oswald's Mexico City trip. However the impersonation had to be addressed since the patsy's lone nut case was compromised.How could Oswald be a lone nut if he's impersonated in Mexico City?

Jason Great post and good job. I agree with you for the most part. You're right. The Mexico City affair had nothing to do with the assassination. But the inpersonation of Oswald did. Oswald never made it to Mexico City. However when Hoover told anyone who would listen that Oswald was impersonated in Mexico City the CIA` and FBI had to back track and place Oswald in Mexico City after the fact. It was a necessity to deal with the impersonation. I believe like you that after Lisa Howard was debriefed by the CIA in April/May 1963 the CIA realized that Castro was willing to accede to the demands of the US for reproachment with Cuba. The hit was on. But don't forget the impersonation. And don't forget the original route of Kennedy's motorcade did not pass in front of the TSBD.

Andrej Chronic low dose radiation does suppress the immune system. Doses as low as 100 rad. I recently read an article that discusses this very issue. If you like I can post it for your review. From "Me and Lee" Judyth Vary Baker pg 495 Clay Shaw arrived with a zippered bag like the blue one Lee owned. It held two thermoses, one contained the deadly cancer cells. The other contained a sterile medium for replenising the liquid in the other thermos to keep the cells alive. There were also packets resembling packets of sugar to make more sterile medium, if necessary. pg 499 There he was handed a second blue zippered "lunch bag" and told that it contained fresh cancer cells which would give the Product two extra days of shelf life. pg 500 Lee went to the disignated drop-off point ... a souvenir shop where he was supposed to meet a medical technician that would continue to keep the cells alive. So apparently steps were taken to preserve the designer cancer. Oswald, who left Louisianna in the morning by plane, would fly to Dallas and then Houston where he would take a bus to the Mexican border and then to Mexico City. In Mexico City he would hand the weaponized cancer to a cuban who would then take it to Cuba. But I believe there was a more sinister plan in the works. Oswald would get as far as Laredo where he was met by two cubans who told him the plan had been called off and he was drive to Dallas with them. Upon arriving in Dallas, Oswald and the two cubans met with Sylvia Odio at her house. But what happened to the second blue bag supposedly containing weaponized cancer? And what happened to the original blue bag that was given Oswald in Louisianna? I believe the second blue bag was taken to Dallas by Oswald where it was discarded and the original blue bag with the weaponized cancer was left in Houston. I don't think Oswald made it to Mexico City.

Andrej The human body with a normal immune system ... the key words. The immune system, in this case Castro, would be broken down by radiation from x-ray photos. The doctor, who is one of the plotters, will schedule enough x-rays to damage Castro's immune system. Who will question the doctor? Without a healthy immune system, the cancerous monkey cells will be left unchecked to proliferate.

Andej I would agree with you if we are talking about regular cancer, or as you put it "cancer as such". JVB, with the help of Dr Mary Sherman among others, developed a cancer that caused big tumors in mice within one or two days. They developed a designer cancer. As such it was different than regular cancer. JVB said she worked for Oschner and now we know he has been tied to the CIA. Could it be that the weaponized cancer was to be given to Castro so that if he died of cancer it would give the US plausible deniability with regard to the US pledge to Russia not to invade Cuba or kill Castro?

The CIA does not work with units of agents. You won't see a group of agents sitting around a table in a room discussing an operation. Agents work alone their supervisor provides the resources, money, logistics, etc. other agents for the operation to succeed. Agent A won't know what Agent B is doing within the same operation. Their names aren't important. Information is passed out when anagent needs to know and not before. The notion that a rogue unit within the agency without the knowledge of the bosses killed Kennedy is not logical. The rogue unit would need resources and logistics to do the job and a supervisor would sign off to release the resources to the rogue unit. A private source of resources would need assurances that the operation would succeed and that can only come from someone higher up in the agency. They would want someone to be responsible if the operation fails so that they can recover some of their investment. The CIA would have too much to lose involving themselves in an operation to kill the president. If the operation fails an investigation may discover CIA involvement, even a hint of involvement, and the american public would require the new government to disband the CIA. Some in the CIA would be jailed or executed.

Michael You know my theory. You should be able to tell me why it is not logical. Forget about quotes or extending courtesy, putting anything in context. Be honest and stop with the BS.

Dean In the spirit of John Foster Dulles and his bro.

David Plumlee mentioning rogues and CIA in the same sentence means a rogue unit within the CIA killed Kennedy. That is a huge leap. Please explain. There are rogues everywhere, at work, in sports, politics. So what?

Mark Thank you for posting Plumlee's interview.

Michael It would have been simpler to say .. George I don't believe you and here's why. Please explain why my theory is illogical. Maybe we can learn something about the assassination from our discussion.

Michael Please explain the faulty logic. Why is my logic faulty? It's a cop out saying it was a rogue unit within the agency and not explaining where the rogue unit was located within the agency and which agents formed the unit. It's sounds great, but tell me who where and what. It means absolutely nothing if you can't back it up with names and departments within the agency.

Michael You don't impress me with your use of the English language. WTF does normative mean? I would respect your post if you would point out the faulty logic of my post. And also speak for yourself don't involve anyone. Have the courage of your convictions.

Michael I believe Allen Dulles had Kennedy killed. At the time of the assassination Dulles did not work for the CIA. So he could not have been the leader of or part of a rogue unit within the CIA that killed Kennedy. I believe two CIA agents helped with the planning and execution of the assassination. But I don't believe they were working under the direction of their CIA bosses when they helped plan the assassination. They were working under the direction of Allen Dulles. The above theme was the topic of my thread and I used Plumlee's trip to Dealey Plaza to bolster my belief that the CIA as an agency did not plan and execute the assassination of Kennedy. I thought I had made that clear but apparently you got hung up on innuendo and missed the point.

Michael It's not what you know it's what you can prove in court. So you may know something but it's not proof until it can be proven in court.

Michael I believe what Plumlee said about his trip to Dealey Plaza. He said it was an abort mission. You can find his quotes on what he said on the internet. I have read what he said on thr internet so I know that his quotes are there. I meant no disrepect to Plumlee. And since I believe Plumlee, it follows that he was sent there by the CIA to abort the assassination. That is what he said. It's on the internet look it up. Now it's possible the CIA decided to abort their own mission, i.e., the CIA planned the assassination and then at the last minute decided to stop it but that's not what Plumlee said. It's common knowledge what he said look it up. But if you are not interested enough to find out what he said I'm don't believe I should have to do the research for you. Plumlee said the CIA found out about the assassination and sent an abort team to Dallas. Plumlee said he was the pilot on the plane which carried the abort team to Dallas. James Files basically backs up what Plumlee said about the abort team. If you want to know what Files said it's on youtube. If you don't think Files is credible and you don't want to see and listen to the video on youtube I can't help you.

Jim Anyone who believes that proving Oswald innocent is good enough, IMO, is not credible. That is what you said in a recent interview and you left it at that. You have given up or so it seems. I don't respect that attitude.

If Lansdale was involved in the assassination and he walked near the three tramps to assure them all was well, then the tramps are involved also.

David Thank you for your article "The evidence is the conspiracy". Much respect for you ... that is a lot of work. You are to be commended for your work in seeking the truth.