Jump to content
The Education Forum

Hosty's Reports


Recommended Posts

Greg

You wrote:

"The decision on the parade route was a foregone conclusion since the Host committee was never going to allow the luncheon to be anywhere but the Trade Mart. Look at the connections to the Host committee and see where that leads. Or not."

There were at least three different routes that the motorcade could have taken through the downtown to the Trade Mart. The one choosen was the longest and, along the longest route taken, the last building passed was the TSBD where Oswald worked. The motorcade was then to get on the freeway to backtrack to the Trade Mart, which was about half the distance back toward the airport from where the parade had began.

I continue to believe that the importance of the MISSING Hosty note is twofold. It proves that people in Washington were aware of where Oswald worked and that that note has now disappeared from histoy. We know it existed, we know it was sent and we know it provided to whoever had acces to it exactly where Oswald was working..........it was only after that note had been sent that a route was established that made the last building to be passed, the TSBD, would be the building where Oswald was working.

I must also point out that the Belin note shows that had people known that Oswald had attempted to assassinate General Walker, it could have been predicted that Oswald would kill the President.

I have shown the connection to George DeM (who according to Marina Oswald guessed that Lee had attempted to kill Walker by the time he visited the Oswald's on April 11) via his brother Demitri and a group of SI operatives that seem to surround the Kennedy assassination. I mean, Richard Helms, Frank Rowlett, Meredith Gardner, John J. McCloy, Edwin Walker himself, even GP Hemming and his interpen group can be connected. Then a note that we know existed has never shown up on any CIA document list......why the coverup??????

Jim root

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 40
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Greg

You wrote:

"The decision on the parade route was a foregone conclusion since the Host committee was never going to allow the luncheon to be anywhere but the Trade Mart. Look at the connections to the Host committee and see where that leads. Or not."

There were at least three different routes that the motorcade could have taken through the downtown to the Trade Mart. The one choosen was the longest and, along the longest route taken, the last building passed was the TSBD where Oswald worked. The motorcade was then to get on the freeway to backtrack to the Trade Mart, which was about half the distance back toward the airport from where the parade had began.

Jim, the Host Committee was never going to lose the fight with the USSS on the Trade Mart being the site of the luncheon. The TSBD had moved into place on Elm, and the route would take the motorcade past that building. The other routes were not suitable for a vareity of reasons.

I continue to believe that the importance of the MISSING Hosty note is twofold. It proves that people in Washington were aware of where Oswald worked and that that note has now disappeared from histoy. We know it existed, we know it was sent and we know it provided to whoever had acces to it exactly where Oswald was working..........it was only after that note had been sent that a route was established that made the last building to be passed, the TSBD, would be the building where Oswald was working.

So Helms got the Dallas Host Committee to choose this route? Can you show how this was done?

I must also point out that the Belin note shows that had people known that Oswald had attempted to assassinate General Walker, it could have been predicted that Oswald would kill the President.

Well, you're locked in to believing Oswald was the "perp" in the Walker matter. It's crucial to the path you're on. Walker was directed by an old hand at psyops,- Robert Morris. When reporters arrived at Walker's residence after the "attempt", they reported he started dusting debris out of his hair. Ham acting at it's best.

Apart from that, this "prediction" that Oswald could become an assassin seems all too similar to the phony claim that Hartogs had "found schizophrenic tendencies and said that Oswald was 'potentially dangerous'. in his report at Youth House.

see: http://reopenjfkcase.dockearth.com/?q=node/36

I have shown the connection to George DeM (who according to Marina Oswald guessed that Lee had attempted to kill Walker by the time he visited the Oswald's on April 11)

GDeM also "guessed" that their baby looked like Kruschev.

via his brother Demitri and a group of SI operatives that seem to surround the Kennedy assassination. I mean, Richard Helms, Frank Rowlett, Meredith Gardner, John J. McCloy, Edwin Walker himself, even GP Hemming and his interpen group can be connected. Then a note that we know existed has never shown up on any CIA document list......why the coverup??????

My guess is to save embarrassing questions and suspicion. Like yours.

There is probably a more direct link between GDeM and Morris. Morris worked for a law firm on Park Ave that specialised in helping White Russians get out of Europe. This was at the same time that George lived in an apartment on Park Ave with Dmitri - thus begging the question, did Morris help George and/or any family members move to the US? Did they hook up again in Dallas years later?

http://reopenjfkcase.dockearth.com/?q=node/12

Jim root

Edited by Greg Parker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with Peter that both Jim and Greg are asking important questions and this is an important thread.

As for Jim's question, "...Then a note that we know existed has never shown up on any CIA document list......why the coverup?"

Jim, if Hosty is an FBI agent, even though two of his previous reports went as far as Helms, why would they be among the CIA records?

It should be among the FBI records.

Have you filed an FOIA request for the missing Hosty report?

Thanks,

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The communiqué was sent by MAIL

The CIA FBI mail openings were operational with Postal Inspectors in Dallas and New Orleans handling the mail.

If the note is missing AND Helms was aware of it it COULD have bypassed normal channels and not end up in a public archive. (Day* was replaced by Gronowski(sic?) mid '63 in a cloud of misbehaviour.)

JFK's new appointee, G, refused Helms' approach to participate, but :

who was the head of the USPO Postal Inspection Division that Holmes was in constant contact with in Washington on the day?

Who were the PI's with Holmes watching the fireworks? Who were the USPO personell who handled the note in Dallas and NO? Most were FBI informants.

The entire USPO was redacted by Nixon and replaced with the USPS and many PI's were dispensed with in various ways, Holmes resigned a year or so previously. Holmes was DA-T7. Many, likely in this area, dating bach to the confederate PO, had solid southern sympathies, as well as ex FBI personell like Zack VanLandringham, ex Hoover assistant, Bannister et.c. in the area (Bannister died after being employed by the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission). And while Hosty saying he was mostly focusing on right wing groups, the Pres. Comm. did not, and an analysis of COINTEL:PRO shows an overwhelming focus on anything left wing, particularly Civil Rights agitation, as opposed to Hate groupings.

(One of the last things found by Holmes in Oswalds box was copy of time with a renewal slip (correctly addressed in spite of Oswalds statement that he did not pass changes on to subscribers as he depended on redirections yet the subscription (acc to Holmes) ended up adressed correctly after the box had been Oswalds for what seems to me to be less than a subscription period))

*After two weeks in office, PMG James E. Day had a visit from Helms, Dulles, and another (rockefeller from memory???). It was a clandestine induction of J.E. Day into the USPO. USPO-PI's participation in the CIA/FBI illegal mail opening campaigns likely used the extensive database the FBI had developed and ALL communication between Oswald and the US and within the US were with little doubt intercepted. (Day resigned over a race issue which did not sit well with JFK's plans.). That Gronowski rejected the CIA approach is telling. JFK must have known of it and approved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Greg

You wrote:

"The decision on the parade route was a foregone conclusion since the Host committee was never going to allow the luncheon to be anywhere but the Trade Mart. Look at the connections to the Host committee and see where that leads. Or not."

There were at least three different routes that the motorcade could have taken through the downtown to the Trade Mart. The one choosen was the longest and, along the longest route taken, the last building passed was the TSBD where Oswald worked. The motorcade was then to get on the freeway to backtrack to the Trade Mart, which was about half the distance back toward the airport from where the parade had began.

Jim, the Host Committee was never going to lose the fight with the USSS on the Trade Mart being the site of the luncheon. The TSBD had moved into place on Elm, and the route would take the motorcade past that building. The other routes were not suitable for a vareity of reasons.

Exactly my point, "the other routes were not suitable for a variety of reasons." On at least one of the alternative routes there was construction taking place which quickly eliminated that particular route. As fas as the others they were eliminated, as best I can find because of the time aloted for the motorcade route to reach the Trade Mart. The "time alloted" was not dictated by the host committee but by the arrival time of Airforce One in Dallas which was dictated by the departure time, etc. etc. etc. It was very easy to control the "alloted time" in Washington which would dictate the route, from Washington. We know that factually the route was dictated from Washington and it was dictated after the Hosty note would have been received which stated exactly where Lee Harvey Oswald worked.

Greg even you will not consider that Oswald could be a shooter an essential element necessary to setting Oswald up as a Patsy is that he be in a position, along the motorcade route, where he could be made the Patsy. Even if the Hosty note did make it to the hands of the conspirators and it was Mrs. Paine who prepared the way (Bell Hellicopter, Vietnam and all that scenario) it was still necessary fot the motorcade to run past where Oswald was working.......requiring manipulation by conspirators. My added caveat is that the Warren Commission (McCloy in particular) then did not even take the time to give the Hosty note an Exhibit Number....suggesting that this document needed to disapear.

I continue to believe that the importance of the MISSING Hosty note is twofold. It proves that people in Washington were aware of where Oswald worked and that that note has now disappeared from histoy. We know it existed, we know it was sent and we know it provided to whoever had acces to it exactly where Oswald was working..........it was only after that note had been sent that a route was established that made the last building to be passed, the TSBD, would be the building where Oswald was working.

So Helms got the Dallas Host Committee to choose this route? Can you show how this was done?

I have never suggested that "Helms got the Dallas Host Committee to choose this route" I will suggest that it seems that the overwhelming evidence suggests that the final decission about the motorcade route was made in Washington....this seems to be a fact and I believe if we had access to the Hosty note and could see exactly who had access to the information contained within that note we could show how it was done. As I stated above it seems that the overridding element in the decission was the "time alloted" and that was dictated by the landing in Dallas, which was dictated by the departure, etc., etc., etc. something that was ultimately controllable, I believe, by Maxwell Taylor in his position as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

I must also point out that the Belin note shows that had people known that Oswald had attempted to assassinate General Walker, it could have been predicted that Oswald would kill the President.

Well, you're locked in to believing Oswald was the "perp" in the Walker matter. It's crucial to the path you're on. Walker was directed by an old hand at psyops,- Robert Morris. When reporters arrived at Walker's residence after the "attempt", they reported he started dusting debris out of his hair. Ham acting at it's best.

Apart from that, this "prediction" that Oswald could become an assassin seems all too similar to the phony claim that Hartogs had "found schizophrenic tendencies and said that Oswald was 'potentially dangerous'. in his report at Youth House.

see: http://reopenjfkcase.dockearth.com/?q=node/36

You are right that my research began from a point that began when I learned of the Walker incident. It has been a long path that has taken me in many directions which I find to be very consistant. I apprecitate your questions! This is the reason why I joined this forum to have people question my thoughts and allow me to research further either to defend or discard my theories. At present I hold to the fact that even to this day Marina Oswald still believes that her husband attempted to assassinate Maj. Gen. Edwin Walker. Her reason, "because he told me so."

Greg you state, "your locked in to believing Oswald was the 'perp' in the Walker matter. It's crucial to the path you're on." That was in fact my beginning point some 15 years ago. When I discovered Walker's complete military record the direction that path has taken me has been extrodinary. For example, Walker becoming involved with John Hurt as early as 1934, Walker doing two specific missions for John J. McCloy during WWII, discovering correspondence between McCloy and Walker dated five months prior to the assassination, Walkers close relationship with Max Taylor, Walker traveling in Euorpe at the same time as Oswald and the missing passenger lists from Oswald's travel, speculating on whom Oswald called while in custordy (the Raleigh Call) and uncovering a cache of material that was restricted from researcher for 20 years that shows that in the months prior to Oswald's trip to Helsinki Richard Helms was gathering information for former SI folks, whom Walker had worked with and who were all involved in Operation Stella Polaris which one person then speculated was for an upcomming operation that would go through Helsinki........etc., etc. Yes Greg that path has taken me to many destinations and has helped me to develop a story that is consistant with the facts that we do know and can name names of conspirators who were in posititons to make sure that the "time alloted" for the motorcade route would allow the motorcade to pass the TSBD and that same gourp would include a person that could be positioned to make sure that loose ends, such as the Hosty note, would never see the light of day!

I have shown the connection to George DeM (who according to Marina Oswald guessed that Lee had attempted to kill Walker by the time he visited the Oswald's on April 11)

GDeM also "guessed" that their baby looked like Kruschev.

What GDeM thought Oswald's baby would look like does not diminish the fact that his brother Demitri was involved with the OSS and more importantly SI during WWII and that Demitri was a relatively close associate of John J. McCloy. The fact that GDeM would have speculated that Oswald did shoot at Walker together with the fact that only days later the FBI is then assigned to follow and report upon the movements of LHO does in fact suggest a direct trail to Hosty's third note that I believe was essential for planning the motorcade route that would run right past where Oswald was working.

What can be said with certainty is that Kennedy was shot, Oswald was in the vacinity, the FBI was monitoring the moverments of Oswald prior to the assasination and the motorcade did pass where Oswald was working......all essential elements for the conspirators.....assuming of course that we can prove that there was in fact a conspiracy.

via his brother Demitri and a group of SI operatives that seem to surround the Kennedy assassination. I mean, Richard Helms, Frank Rowlett, Meredith Gardner, John J. McCloy, Edwin Walker himself, even GP Hemming and his interpen group can be connected. Then a note that we know existed has never shown up on any CIA document list......why the coverup??????

My guess is to save embarrassing questions and suspicion. Like yours.

There is probably a more direct link between GDeM and Morris. Morris worked for a law firm on Park Ave that specialised in helping White Russians get out of Europe. This was at the same time that George lived in an apartment on Park Ave with Dmitri - thus begging the question, did Morris help George and/or any family members move to the US? Did they hook up again in Dallas years later?

http://reopenjfkcase.dockearth.com/?q=node/12

You state, "My guess is to save embarrassing questions and suspicion. Like yours." It could be that simple or perhaps it was done to protect the identity of the conspirators......a possibility worth persuing wouldn't you agree?

Jim root

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully

From an earlier thread:

Jane Roman and T-2, T-2 used again by the office of Richard Helms?

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...&pid=156466

Pleas refer to:

ATTEMPTS TO OBTAIN PERMISSION TO DECLASSIFY PORTION OF UNIDENTIFIED FBI DOCUMENT

RIF#: 104-10005-10228 (10/21/64) CIA#: 201-289248

for this post located at:

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...o?docSetId=1095

During the Testimony of James Patrick Hosty we find a reference to "T-2" as a source of information of Lee Harvery Oswald.

Mr. STERN. If you will look at page 2 of the report we have marked for identification No. 829

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir.

Mr. STERN. The last paragraph on that page relates--well, tell us what information that refers to.

Mr. HOSTY. It says, "On April 21, 1963, Dallas confidential informant T-2 advised that Lee H. Oswald of Dallas, Tex, was in contact with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New York City at which time he advised that he passed out pamphlets for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. According to T-2, Oswald had a placard around his neck reading, 'Hands Off Cuba, Viva Fidel.'"Mr. STERN. Did you attempt to verify that information?

Mr. HOSTY. When I got it, it was approximately 6 or 7 weeks old, past the date it allegedly took place, and we had received no information to the effect that anyone had been in the downtown streets of Dallas or anywhere in Dallas with a sign around their neck saying "Hands Off Cuba, Viva Fidel." It appeared highly unlikely to me that such an occurrence could have happened in Dallas without having been brought to our attention. So by the time I got it, it was, you might say, stale information and we did not attempt to verify it.

Mr. STERN. When you record this as something that an informant advised about on April 21, that doesn't mean he advised you or the Dallas office on April 21?

Mr. HOSTY. That is right.

Mr. STERN. Did this information come from another part of the FBI?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; it came from the New York office of the FBI. They were advised on the 21st of April.

Mr. STERN. But the information didn't get to you until some time after?

Mr. HOSTY. In June, I believe.

Mr. STERN. Did you have any information apart from this that there was an organization active in the Dallas area called, "The Fair Play for Cuba Committee"?

Mr. HOSTY. No, sir; we had no information of any organization by that name.

Mr. STERN. Had you at this time ever heard of such an organization?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; I had.

Mr. STERN. In what connection?

Mr. HOSTY. The New York office had advised all offices of the FBI to be on the alert for the possible formation of chapters of this organization which was headquartered in New York.

Mr. STERN. Had you investigated the Dallas area in that connection?

Mr. HOSTY. We had checked our sources, I had and other agents assigned to the internal security division had checked sources. We were on the alert for it.

Mr. STERN. And you found what?

Mr. HOSTY. We found no evidence that there was any such organization in Dallas.

Eleven days after the assassination attempt on the life MAj. General Edwin Anderson Walker (April 10, 1963) an informant identifies Lee Harvey Oswald as having "advised that he passed out pamphlets for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. According to T-2, Oswald had a placard around his neck reading, 'Hands Off Cuba, Viva Fidel."

From CIA#: 201-289248:

"On Friday, 9 October 1964, Jane Roman (office of Richard Helms) brought in to me a thermofax reproduction of one paragraph on page 10 of an FBI report which concerned the OSWALD case and which she said the Bureau vanted to have declassified because they had declassified their entire report in preparation for passing it to the Warren Commission. The informationin that paragraph was ours and was given by us to the Bureau in Miami. Jane wanted to know if it could be declassified."

This report goes on to outline the attempts to figure out how to present this information without giving away the CIA as the provider of the information.

At the conclusion we find these words:

As I gather, CIA will not appear in this report as the FBI's source. The information is source"...NY T-2 advised the Miami office of the FBI..."

MPHartman

Compared with:

"On April 21, 1963, Dallas confidential informant T-2 advised that Lee H. Oswald of Dallas, Tex, was in contact with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in New York City at which time he advised that he passed out pamphlets for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. According to T-2, Oswald had a placard around his neck reading, 'Hands Off Cuba, Viva Fidel."

Followed by:

"Mr. STERN. Did this information come from another part of the FBI?

Mr. HOSTY. Yes, sir; it came from the New York office of the FBI.

Seems that NY T-2 was really the CIA office of Richard Helms and that they seemed to know that Lee Harvey Oswald would be doing work for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee before he actually began doing work for the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. And imagine that this all took place just eleven days after Oswald had alledgedly taken a shot at Walker and 10 days after George DeMohrenschildt, brother of Demitri (who was a close associate of Whitney Shepardson, former head of SI and the founder of the Council on Foreign Relations) had guessed that Oswald had attempted to assassinate Oswald and asked, how could you miss.

I continue to speculate, just as Edwin Walker did, that people in very high places knew immediately that it had been Oswald that attempted to assassinate Walker. It is very possible that, if the above is true, these same people would have a complete psych profile on Oswald and would, according to the CIA (Bellin note) could have know that Oswald would assassinate the President if given the opportunity.

Hosty's missing third note provided this opportunity. From the Hosty testimony:

Mr. STERN. Now, tell us in detail of your interview with Mrs. Paine starting from the time you rang the doorbell.

Mr. HOSTY. All right. As I say, when I entered the house I immediately identified myself. I showed her my credentials, identified myself as a special agent of the FBI, and requested to talk to her. She invited me into the house.

Mr. STERN. Did she seemed surprised at your visit?

Mr. HOSTY. No, she didn't. She was quite friendly and invited me in, said this is the first time she had ever met an FBI agent. Very cordial As I say, it is my recollection I sat here on the couch and she sat across the room from me.

I then told her the purpose of my visit, that I was interested in locating the whereabouts of Lee Oswald.

She readily admitted that Mrs. Marina Oswald and Lee Oswald's two children were staying with her. She said that Lee Oswald was living somewhere in Dallas. She didn't know where. She said it was in the Oak Cliff area but she didn't have his address. I asked her if she knew where he worked. After a moment's hesitation, she told me that he worked at the Texas School Book Depository near the downtown area of Dallas. She didn't have the exact address, and it is my recollection that we went to the phone book and looked it up, found it to be 411 Elm Street.

....Mr. DULLES. Did you clear or notify the Dallas office either before or after?

Mr. HOSTY. You mean after I determined this?

Mr. DULLES. Yes.

Mr. HOSTY. Oh, yes, sir. This occurred on the 1st. This was a Friday. I returned to the Dallas office. I covered a couple of other leads on the way back. I got in shortly after 5 o'clock and all our stenos had gone home. This information has to go registered mail, and it could not go then until Monday morning.Monday morning---shall I continue?

Mr. STERN. Yes.

Mr. HOSTY. On Monday morning, I made a pretext telephone call to the Texas School Book Depository, I called up and asked for the personnel department, asked if a Lee Oswald was employed there. They said yes, he was. I said what address does he show? They said 2515 West Fifth Street, Irving, Tex., which I knew not to be his correct address.

I then sent a communication, airmail communication to the New Orleans office advising them--and to the headquarters of the FBI advising them--and then instructing the New Orleans office to make the Dallas office the office of origin. We were now assuming control, because he had now been verified in our division.

The procedure followed by Hosty for this note sent on November 4. 1963 was the same procedure followed for his previous two notes that made it to the office of Richard Helms via the same Jane Roman mentioned above.

A logical explanation for the above sequence, suggests that the office of Richard Helms (himself a former SI man who worked with Whitney Spepardson) decides to initiate surveilance of Lee Harvey Oswald within days of the assassination attempt on the life of General Walker. This surveilance is initiated 10 days after George DeMohrenschildt (brother of Whitney Spepardson's close associate Demitri) guesses that Oswlad had attempted to kill Walker. Knowledge of the assassination attempt on the life of Walker would provide anyone with access to an Oswald psych file with enough information to predict that Oswald would kill the President (according to a CIA report). When it is finally learned where Oswald is working these same people would have that information prior to the fianalization of the motorcade route (which would be decided in Washington). It was then decided that the last building passed before the motorcade route would enter the expressway onramp would be the same Texas School Book Depository where a man (Oswald) was working that the same people who had all the above information could have guessed would kill the President.

Jim Root

http://books.google.com/books?um=1&q=%...nG=Search+Books

The Unanswered Questions about President Kennedy's Assassination‎ - Page 67

by Sylvan Fox - 1965 - 221 pages

The FBI knew on Nov. 1, 1963, that Lee Oswald was working at the Texas School

Book Depository. FBI agent James Hosty learned of this from Mrs. Ruth Paine ...

Jim,

The HSCA testimony of Asst. FBI Director Gale, including the FBI documents describing the discipline meted out to James Hosty and 16 other FBI men

influence me to ask you if you have a theory as to why neither Hosty or any of the other 16, through both the WC and HSCA investigations refer to Hosty's November 5, 1963 communication to FBI HQ of Oswald's new employer and 411 South Elm St. work address? Was it simply a case of Hoover intimidation?

Although Sylvan Fox was writing in 1965 about Hosty's pre-assassination awareness that Oswald was working at 411 South Elm St., the FBI was seemingly only concerned with punishing him for not following procedure. THe documents in the HSCA .pdf I include below show that 17 in the FBI were disciplined weeks after Nov. 22, 1963, and that Hoover wanted to discipline some of them even further, including Hosty, after the Warren Commission took their testimony and released it's final report.. The HSCA later took the testimony of the FBI Inspections assistant director, Mr. Gale, who, along with his HSCA inquisitors, had no interest in examining what was revealed by Dulles's 1964 questioning of James Hosty. All other censured FBI names in both 1963 and 1964 sets of disciplinary records are redacted, except for Hosty's.

Only the New Orleans office is described (abbreviated) in the WCR (page 438, linked below) as a destination of Hosty's Nov. 5, 1963 outgoing communication containing information and location of where Oswald was working, in the HSCA transcript and display of FBI internal documents.

Both your post quoted above, and your earlier post on this thread show this as Hosty's actual WC testimony:

Mr. HOSTY. .....I then sent a communication, airmail communication to the New Orleans office advising them--and to the headquarters of the FBI advising them--[/b]and then instructing the New Orleans office to make the Dallas office the office of origin. We were now assuming control, because he had now been verified in our division.

On the surface, what I incliude below seems to paint more of a case of incompetence and incuriousness than it does a coverup. It seems there was no mechanism to get the 411 South Elm St. address that Hosty had obtained on Nov. 1, to Winston Lawson or to the SS PRS. If your theory that the info went to Richard Helms in a timely fashion, it leaves Helms as the only figure who could have made the SS aware of it in time. If Oswald was a CIA "asset", it is obviously doubtful Helms would share Hosty's report of Oswald's new Dallas work location.

It is surprising that the HSCA, appears not to have noticed, or chose not to....the answers you quote from from Hosty to Dulles in 1964. The FBI either covered it up or inspector Gale was as rigid and programmed as his HSCA testimony made him out to be....

http://books.google.com/books?um=1&q=%...nG=Search+Books

The Unanswered Questions about President Kennedy's Assassination‎ - Page 67

by Sylvan Fox - 1965 - 221 pages

The FBI knew on Nov. 1, 1963, that Lee Oswald was working at the Texas School

Book Depository. FBI agent James Hosty learned of this from Mrs. Ruth Paine ...

http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warre.../chapter-8.html

or http://books.google.com/books?id=TpzGMAmH2...y+%22411+elm%22

Chapter 8: The Protection of the President

Page 438

...I asked her if she knew where he worked. After a moment's hesitation, she told me that he worked at the Texas School Book Depository near the downtown area of Dallas. She didn't have the exact address, and it is my recollection that we went to the phone book and looked it up, found it to be 411 Elm Street.107

Mrs. Paine told Hosty also that Oswald was living alone in Dallas because she did not want him staying at her house, although she was willing to let Oswald visit his wife and children.108 According to Hosty, Mrs. Paine indicated that she thought she could find out where Oswald was living and would let him know.109 At this point in the interview, Hosty gave Mrs. Paine his name and office telephone number on a piece of paper.110 At the end of the interview, Marina Oswald came into the room. When he observed that she seemed "quite alarmed" about the visit, Hosty assured her, through Mrs. Paine as interpreter, that the FBI would not harm or harass her.111

On November 4, Hosty telephoned the Texas School Book Depository and learned that Oswald was working there and that he had given

Page 439

as his address Mrs. Paine's residence in Irving.112 Hosty took the necessary steps to have the Dallas office of the FBI, rather than the New Orleans office, reestablished as the office with principal responsibility.113 On November 5, Hosty was traveling near Mrs. Paine's home and took the occasion to stop by to ask whether she had any further information. ....

http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsc...0920_4_Gale.pdf

TESTIMONY OF JAMES H. GALE

533

r

i

until after whe assassi,ation.

stated that on November. l, 1963, he received a

copy o f: :e New Orleans report which reflected that Oswalci had given false biographic

i.fortnat :on and

stated he knew he would eventually have to investibate this and

was "quite interested in determining the nature of his contact with the Soviet Embassy

in Mexico City . " Y. -hen asked ..;hat his nest step would have been!,

replied:

."Well, as I had previously stated, I have between 25 and 40 cases

assigned to me it any one time .

I had other matters to take care

of .

I had now established that Lee Oswald was not employed in a.

sensitive industry .

I can row afford to wait until New Orleans

forwarded the necessary papers to me to show me I now had all

the information.

It was then my plan to interview Marina OsNvald

in detail concerning both herself and her husband's background.

"Q. Had you planned any steps beyond that point?

"A.

No.

I would have to wait until I had talked to Marina to see

what I could determine, and from there I could make my plans.

"Q. Did you take any action on this case between November 5 and

November 22?

No, sir. "

When questioned by Commission concerning why he did not disseminate- the

information on Oswaldto Secret Service,a

. testified'.^_e interpreted his instructipn:

as requiring some indication that the person planned to take some action against the

safety of the President or Vice President before making such dissemination.

He

estified he participated in transmitting two pieces of information to Secret Service

pertaining to President's visit.

He further stated he did not realize the motorcade

would pass the Texas School Boolc Depository Building .

He testified he did not read

the ne%vspaper artaele describing the motorcade route in detail since he was innteeested

only in the facf that the motorcade was coming .up main street "where maybe I could

,,vratch it if I hada chance ." Inspector feels that',

.testir,ony as quoted in the

Commission report makes the FBI look ridiculous and definitely hints our public imag

or effciency.

If we had made a proper investigation of Oswald we vauld not have

been so vulnerable .

534

\Ienno for :Dr. Tolson

`

Re: ~ee Harvey C.svald

In connection with interview of VIrs . Ruth Paink or. November. 1 and 5, 1903,

the Commission indicates that Mrs . Paine advised a Bureau Agent that she did not

know OswLld°s address .

Siie was not asked nor did she volunteer Oswald's telephone

number, which she did know.

The Commission intimates that Agent should have

asked her specifically re phone number so Oswal~ls current residence could be locat.

This interview was conducted by.9000-12W !>

advised lie did not ask

hors . Paine re Oswald'.s telephone number inasmuch as Mrs. Paine informedZ'

she did not know Oswald! s address or howhe could be located.

Inspector feels

should have bejjn more specific in his interrogation and asked Mrs. Paine if she had

Os":rald's telephone number.

also testified that conditions in the Dallas police station- at time of

detention and interrogation of Oswald were "not too much unlike Grand Central

Station at rush hour, maybe li ::e the Yankee Stadium during the World Series games.

It is questionable whether

should have described conditions in such an

editorializing and flamboyant manner but rather should have indicated conditions

were crowded and if called upon to give an esti .late of how many people were

located therein, to give said estimate .

535

0BSEERVATIO\S:

\;'e previously took administrative action. against those responsible for the

invest ;hive shortcomings in this case some of which

were brought out by the

Co: ::c:assion.

It is felt that it is appropriate at this tire to consider further

ad~n :n-tzative action against those pririarily culpable for the derelictions in this

case ~ :: .iclt ha-,e now had the effect of publicly enlbarrassi-l.tire Bureau .

it is felt

that SA` Hosty ^_ ., tile primary iavesti,ative responsibility in this case,

the p:

ry field supervisory responsibility, and Special Agents

.

y

the primary Bureau supervisory responsibility.

536

I is also felt that the information on Os~*rald should~:ave been disseminated

-

to t'-e S2crct Service.

Oswald should have been on the Security Index but was not.

L. this rc~;ard it appears that prior to the assassination we were unduly restrictive L1 n

ma!d .^.~ a" ;a :=ble the nar.` s of Securiy Index subjects to Secret Service.

It is felt

t'-at Inns lector

who has off or-all charge of the Security Index in the

Doraest:c Intelligence Division, should be censured for not having sufficient imagination

and feresi ,.t to initiate action to havesuch material disseminated to Secret Service.

It is likewise felt Assistant to the Director

should be censured for

the same reason as ;-*soft as well as for his-over-all responsibility in the entire

matter.

RECC-.-.=SDA`I'IONS:

1.

SA

""~

(Veteran), Dallas, be censured, placed on probat

anal sas-:_cdad for 30 days for his derelictions in this mat-ier.

(As noted above, he was

censured a.-.d put on probation in December, 1933, and removed 3/25104 .

He was orde

~ansferred from Dallas 9/23/64.) If approved, to b' handled by the Administrative

In regard to°

the Director said, "I want

case shown the Civil

Service Board since he is .a veteran and ascertain whether they will sustain a dismissal

since his derelictions have now publicly disgraced the Bureau."

541

Mr. GENZMAN. Mr. Gale, can you identify, JFK exhibit F-461,

Mr. GALE. Yes; JFK F-461 is a memorandum from me to Mr.

Tolson dated September 30, 1964.

Mr. GENZMAN. What is the subject of that memorandum?

Mr. GALE. It is captioned "Shortcomings in Handling Lee Harvey

Oswald Matter by FBI Personnel."

Mr. GENZMAN. Why did you write this report?

Mr. GALE. I wrote this report because Mr. Hoover had noted that

he wanted this matter carefully reviewed insofar as it pertains to

FBI shortcomings by Gale. He said that the Warren Commission

report tears us to pieces.

He also wanted a memorandum as to what had been done to

plug our gaps, and he also wanted to make certain that we check

and make certain that proper disciplinary action had been taken

against those responsibile for derelictions charged to us.

Mr. GENZMAN. Were you just now reading from the first paragraph

of this report?

Mr. GALE. Yes, sir.

Mr. GENZMAN. I direct your attention to the bottom paragraph at

page 5. Would you read the first two sentences?

Mr. GALE [reading]:

We previously took administrative action against those responsible for the investigative

shortcomings in this case, some of which were brought out by the Commission

. It is felt that it is appropriate at this time to consider further administrative

actions against those primarily culpable for the derelictions in this case, which have

now had the effect of publicly embarrassing the Bureau.

Mr. GENZMAN. What conclusion did you reach concerning the

testimony of FBI witnesses before the Warren Commission?

Mr. GALE. The conclusion reached by me was that some of this

testimony was not adequately handled . We felt that they were

testifying in too flamboyant a fashion and were not confining

themselves to the facts and testifying the way they were supposed

to as FBI personnel.

Mr. GENZMAN. Directing your attention to page 5, would you

read in the middle of the page the three sentences beginning with

"The Bureau"?

Mr. GALE [reading] :

The Bureau by letter to the Commission, indicated that the facts did not warrant

placing a stop on the passport as our investigation disclosed no evidence that

Oswald was acting under the instructions of or on behalf of any foreign government

or instrumentality thereof. Inspector feels that it was proper at that time to take

this public position. However, it is felt that with Oswald's background we should

have had a stop on his passport, particularly since we did not definitely know

whether or not he had any intelligence assignments at that time.

Mr. GENZMAN. Why was this public position taken?

Mr. GALE. I don't know. I didn't write that particular letter to

the Commission. However, I might say that in analyzing this, this

was not something that was black and white. Whether or not we

should have had the passport or the stop on his passport was

subject to interpretation . In other words, there were shades of gray

involved here and apparently those that wrote the letter to the

Commission took a different view than I took, and I felt that there

should have been a stop placed on that, but apparently the people

who wrote the letter to the Commission did not feel that there was

a-did not warrant placing a stop on his passport when they sent

542

that to the Commission, the same as they felt that, I guess, that it

was not proper to have him on the security index, and I differed

and I felt that he should be on the security index.

Mr. GENZMAN. Would you reread the last sentence of that paragraph?

Mr. GALE [reading]:

However, it is felt that with Oswald's background we should have had a stop on

his passport, particularly since we did not know definitely whether or not he had

any intelligence assignments at that time .

Mr. GENZMAN. Mr. Gale, according to some individuals, this sentence

implies that the FBI did at some point determine that

Oswald had connections with some U.S. intelligence agency.

Mr. GALE. That is not what I meant. What I meant in writing

that sentence was that we did not know definitely whether he had

any intelligence assignments at that time, but I felt in my mind

that he possibly could have had intelligence assignments based on

his Russian background, his defection to Russia, and the fact that

he would not take the polygraph examination, and also because of

his activities with the Fair Play for Cuba Committee. However, I

had no concrete information to establish any of those possibilities .

Mr. GENZMAN. Thank you.

As a result of your memorandum were additional disciplinary

actions taken against various agents?

Mr. GALE. Yes, they were. I want to say at this time that disciplinary

action was not unusual in the Bureau.....

...Chairman STOKES. Thank you, counsel .

At this point, the Chair will yield himself such time as he may

consume, after which we will operate under the 5-minute rule.

Mr. Gale, I understand you to say that disciplinary action within

the Bureau was not unusual?

Mr. GALE. No; it was not.

Chairman STOKES. And would disciplinary action always be

taken for, what you have described here today, as deficiencies?

Mr. GALE. Sometimes. We had a rule in the FBI, Mr. Chairman,

and some of the orders of censure that were sent out in this case,

we had a rule that all leads had to be covered in 30 days and a

report had to be submitted in 45 days.

543

Now, this particular investigation, a number of instances, as I

recall, were not handled properly. It was not obeyed .

Chairman STOKES. How much time did you devote to the investigation

that you made that resulted in your report finding these

deficiencies?

Mr. GALE. I can't recall exactly, but it must have been approximately

1 1/z or 2 weeks.

Chairman STOKES. I see. You have made some mention of agents

being flamboyant and not-let's see what language you used-not

acting as FBI agents should, or testifying as they should .

Tell us what you mean by that?

Mr. GALE. The memorandum reflects that one of the agents

testified that conditions in the Dallas police station at the time of

detention and interrogation of Oswald were not too much unlike

Grand Central Station at rush hour, maybe like Yankee Stadium

during the World Series games, and I said it was questionable

whether the agent whould have described in such an editorialized

and flamboyant manner, but rather should have indicated conditions

were crowded and if called upon to give an estimate of how

many people were located therein to give such an estimate....

...Chairman STOKES. Did any of the deficiencies come about as a

result of a man just disregarding rules and regulations of the

Department?

Mr. GALE. Of course, these rules, the 45th day reporting deadline,

for example, the 30-day investigative coverage deadline, were disregarded.

Also we felt that good judgment was not used in a number

of instances in the failure to take prompt investigative action after

they had received information. Of course, I cited that in this memorandum

that I wrote....

545

..Chairman STOKES. Now, your finding that Oswald had not been

placed on the security index was an important finding, was it not?

Mr. GALE. It was. I felt all the findings were important, but that

was one of the important findings.

Chairman STOKES. One of the more important ones, I would say.

How would that have changed Dallas, had he been placed on the

security index?

Mr. GALE. In my opinion, it would not have changed Dallas at

all.

Chairman STOKES. What is the relative importance of it?

Mr. GALE. Because we had a criteria that individuals of this type

should have been placed on the security index and, therefore, the

agents and employees handling that should have complied with

that.

Chairman STOKES. Then had he been on the security index, in

your opinion, the Secret Service or no other agency would have

looked at him differently in Dallas at that time?

Mr. GALE. I don't think so. We had an awful lot of people on the

security index. I don't believe that would have looked at him any

differently...

..Chairman STOKES. During the course of your investigation of the

assassination, did you find any evidence that Oswald had been an

FBI informant?

Mr. GALE. Absolutely not. I had all the files pulled on Mr.

Oswald when I made my inquiry and I received no files indicating

that he had been an informant. If, of course, I had, I would have

taken an entirely different attack on this thing.

Chairman STOKES. I see. So the bottom line is that you have no

information?

Mr. GALE. Absolutely none of it.

Chairman STOKES. All right. Now, did you come to find out about

the threatening note that Oswald had left at the Dallas FBI office?

Mr. GALE. Only after I had left the FBI and I w

Chairman STOKES. Now, was James Hosty one of the men that

you recommended disciplinary action on?

Mr. GALE. Yes; he was.

Chairman STOKES. Tell us why.

Mr. GALE. I don't recall offhand. I would have to look at this

report. For certain investigative and reporting delinquencies, I believe,

the late reporting, failure to put subject on the security

index. The report states :

For holding, for failure, including the earlier interview of Oswald's wife, for

holding investigation in abeyance after being in receipt of information that subject

had been in contact with the Soviet Embassy in Mexico City.

Chairman STOKES. Now, I suppose these findings came about as a

direct result of direct contact you had with Hosty himself?

Mr. GALE. No, that wasn t how it was done in the Bureau.

Almost on a daily basis, every couple of days anyhow, almost all

field offices would receive communications from the headquarters

asking for explanations . They would come by teletype or else by

546

airtel, and they would ask for explanations from the agent as to his

investigative shortcomings .

They would send back an explanation to the headquarters . It

would go to the individual investigative division . Many times the

divisions themselves would raise the question . Other times Mr.

Hoover would raise the question on an investigation. Why wasn't

this done, why wasn't that done, why didn't we do it this way, why

did we do it that way.

A teletype would go out to the field or a telephone call would go

out to the field, explanations would be required. And in this instance,

if I recall correctly, to the best of my recollection, I either

telephoned the agent in charge in Dallas or else I sent a teletype

out, I am not sure which, or airtel, probably a telephone call or

teletype, asking for certain explanations as to how this case was

handled. Thereafter memoranda came in to me and the memoranda

reflected what the agent said in his defense.

I asked him for explanation as to why he wouldn't do this and

why he did that and why he did the other thing. That was the

usual inspection procedure, and all matters of that type we would

write up the matter itself, set forth what we felt were delinquencies,

and ask for a written explanation. Very seldom was the agent

ever interviewed in a situation like this personally.

Chairman STOKES. Well, now, you seem to have found Hosty

deficient in several areas, then, as a result of the reports that came

in to you?

Mr. GALE. Yes Sir.

Chairman STOKES. And when did you learn of the note that had

been left for Hosty in the Dallas field office .

Mr. GALE. I only learned of that after I had been retired about 4

years.

Chairman STOKES. Had you learned about such a note, what

would have been your reaction to that during the course of your

investigation?

Mr. GALE. If I had learned that a note had been left and that

nothing had been done with it, or what is the question?

Chairman STOKES. That it had been destroyed.

Mr. GALE. If I had learned that a note had been left and it had

been destroyed I would have certainly made an inquiry as to the

whys and wherefores and who had been responsible for destruction

of it.

Chairman STOKES. Would you have probably at that point also

talked directly with that agent?

Mr. GALE. No; I probably would not. Very seldom did an official

from the headquarters talk to an agent in the field. We dealt with

them through their supervisors or through the agent in charge . We

very seldom dealt directly with the agent...

551

...Mr. FITHIAN. I asked Mr. Malley earlier this morning about some

other kinds of infractions which seemed more serious than the ones

you recommended discipline for.

What would you have recommended, had you conducted an investigation

and found that a subordinate had concealed from his

superior certain pertinent evidence?

Mr. GALE. I have no idea what I would have recommended at

this stage of the game. That is a highly speculative question, I

think.

Mr. FITHIAN. In all of your inspections--

Mr. GALE. I am sitting here in 1978 and you are asking me what

I would have recommended in 1963.

Mr. FITHIAN. I understand that. You had some standards for

inspection, didn't you?

Mr. GALE. Of course we had standards, yes sir.

Mr. FITHIAN. In your inspections, in any inspection you ever

covered, did you ever uncover a situation in which a subordinate

had intentionally concealed from his superior any pertinent evidence?

Mr. GALE. I don't recall anything like that.

552

Mr. FITHIAN. And did you ever uncover in any inspection you

conducted a situation where anyone had destroyed evidence?

Mr. GALE. No, I don't recall ever discovering in any inspection

that I conducted anything where anybody destroyed any evidence.

Mr. FITHIAN. And did you ever discover a case where an FBI

employee's personnel had altered evidence?

Mr. GALE. I have no recollection of ever discovering anything

like that in any of my inspections.

Mr. FITHIAN. So that if you never discovered that in all of your

inspections, may we now, 15 years later, say that any one of those

actions would be considered very serious?

Mr. GALE. I would say yes.

Mr. FITHIAN. And would we conclude properly that some kind of

significant discipline might be in order?

Mr. GALE. Yes, I would say so....

...Mr. FITHIAN. Do you know whether it was the policy of the FBI

to share the information contained on the security index with any

other Federal agency?

Mr. GALE. I don't recall that offhand, no.

Mr. FITHIAN. You don't know whether it would have been policy

to share that with the Secret Service?

Mr. GALE. I don't have any present recollection of that.

Mr. FITHIAN. Is it your judgment that the FBI should have

shared that information with the Secret Service when the President

was going to Dallas, or at any other time?

Mr. GALE. I think that there should be a free exchange of information

between the FBI and the Secret Service concerning any

individuals who have a subversive background. I believe that is

being done now.

Mr. FITHIAN. So it would not surprise you then that the Secret

Service felt that it should have indeed had that information from

the FBI?

Mr. GALE. I wouldn't know what the Secret Service would be

surprised at or what they wouldn't be surprised at.

Mr. FITHIAN. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman STOKES. Mr. Gale, is it not conceivable that when we

take the deficiencies that you found relating to Oswald, and in

particular the deficiencies surrounding the deficient manner in

which James Hosty treated the Oswald case, is it not conceivable

that had he been handled in accordance with the rules and regulations

that Oswald would have been then known he was under close

surveillance by the FBI and, therefore, that might have been a

deterrant to his actions in Dallas on November 22, 1963?

Is that not conceivable?

Mr. GALE. Well, of course, anything is conceivable, Mr. Chairman,

and I think that is strictly speculative as to whether or not

that would have taken place. I don't know whether the investigative

deficiencies here would have caused him to reach that conclusion

or not, because undoubtedly one of the things that you are

553

doing in making an investigation is trying to handle it in such a

way that the person does not know that he is under such intensive

scrutiny, and most of the investigations of subversives are done in

a manner whereby you do not place them under close surveillance

or don't let them know that they are under investigation. You are

not advertising to people you have under investigation that they

are under investigation .

Chairman STOKES. Yes, but according to Hosty, he said he was

waiting until a certain time had elapsed after the beating or whipping,

or something.

Mr. GALE. Of his wife.

Chairman STOKES. His wife, before he would contact him further.

It is just conceivable to me and since you felt that was improper

action, did you not?

Mr. GALE. Yes.

Chairman STOKES. You felt the proper time to have talked with

Marina was when she was angry.

Mr. GALE. Yes.

Chairman STOKES. With Oswald, and she might have told them

something of value; isn't that true?

Mr. GALE. If they knew anything about it . Whatever she knew,

she might have told them, yes.

Chairman STOKES. Whatever she knew, she would have told

them, and that is what you felt should have been done?

Mr. GALE. Right.

Chairman STOKES. Is it not also conceivable that had Hosty done

his job properly, he would have been able to advise the Secret

Service that Oswald was working at the Texas Book Depository

which was on the direct parade route.

Mr. GALE. I don't know whether he would have done that. Just

the fact that he would have discovered that, I don't know whether

he would have advised them of that or not. I don't know what he

would have done. In other words, I am not the proper person, I

don't think, to ask what Hosty would have done....

554

...Chairman STOKES. Well, then, how do you come to the conclusion

that if the Bureau had performed on par with the excellence demanded

by the Director that this still would have occurred? I don't

understand how you arrive at that conclusion.

Mr. GALE. Of course, if Hosty knew that Oswald was going to go

to the book building with a gun, naturally, he would have advised

Secret Service. But he didn't know that. We are sitting back here

after the fact and it is much easier to see what you would have

done after the fact than it is before the fact.

I frankly do not feel that these investigative shortcomings play

any part in the Dallas assassination . They were investigative

errors-if we felt they had played a part in that, believe me, the

disciplinary action would have been much stronger.

Chairman STOKES. Isn't it conceivable that if they had talked

with Marina, when they should have talked with Marina, they

might have found out that he had shot at General Walker.

Mr. GALE. I don't know what she would have told him.

Chairman STOKES. But it is conceivable, isn't it?

Mr. GALE. Anything is conceivable.

555

...Mr. FITHIAN . And before we close, would you repeat for me why

you were dissatisfied with Hosty's performance in Dallas? I know

what it says in the report . We have gone over that.

Mr. GALE. That's why.

Mr. FITHIAN. Is that it, the whole 9 yards?

Mr. GALE. That is as much as I can recall

Mr. GALE. That is as much as I can recall now. I only can recall

why I was dissatisfied with anybody's performance at this point

from reviewing the record . I certainly have no personal recollection

of anything like this as to an individual agent as to why a certain

course of action was taken against him 15 years later.

Mr. FITHIAN. What I am saying is, does your written recommendation

reflect your total thinking on Hosty's performance at that

time?

Mr. GALE. There possibly-at the time? To the best of my recollection,

yes.

Mr. FITHIAN. And you started to say something else.

Mr. GALE. It is possible there is some memoranda, other memoranda

in the file concerning this, I don't know. There must be some

explanations from him, and I don't know if there is something else

written by me or not. All I know right now is what I have here in

front of me. That is all I recall about the matter. If there is

anything else in the file, it could possibly refresh my recollection,

but I don't have any recollection of this other than what I have

here.

http://www.assassinationresearch.com/v4n1/v4n1chapter12.pdf

SURVIVOR’S GUILT / Chapter 12 by Vince Palamara

...(Winston G.) Lawson told the HSCA: “His pre-departure contact with PRS indicated that no reports were available from PRS about any threat subjects developed.” This much we already knew from testimony taken by the Warren Commission way back in 1964. However, Lawson added that this lack of threat information was “on the basis of President Kennedy’s visit to Texas for the funeral of Representa-tive Sam Rayburn in [November] 1961 [emphasis added].”2 The Secret Service was really using a two-year-old basis for their intelligence data and, from all places, Rayburn’s funeral in Bonham, Texas? In fact, Lawson further told the HSCA that he learned of the October 1963 attack in Dallas on U.N. Ambassador Adlai Stevenson “only by his own reading”. Incredible.

Edited by Tom Scully
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom

Nice collection of information.

What must be remembered here is until the 40th year release of documents (2004) information about the CIA receiving copies of FBI memos was not known. Thanks to John Newman's book "Oswald and the CIA" and the information obtained from Jane Roman that resulted from this release of information we now know about Hosty's notes making it to the office of Richard Helms.

To assume that agents such as Hosty et al would have known how the FBI moved information up the intelligence chain cannot IMO be supported and the discipline handed out at the time was nothing more than a CYA move!

In my opinion Oswald was on a CIA "watch list" which is why FBI information about Oswald was forwarded to the CIA. While we may each speculate when that placement was first made it is my suggestion that Oswald was identified and placed on the CIA "watch list" when he wrote his first letter to the Socialist Workers Party. This was done before Oswald enlisted in the Marines!

If I am correct all of Oswald's training and movements would have been watched and reported upon. Newman speculates that Oswald's 201 File was tampered with and, at best, mishandled and probably culled for sensitive material. This speculation by Newman seems to support my story.

Jim Root

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tom

Nice collection of information.

What must be remembered here is until the 40th year release of documents (2004) information about the CIA receiving copies of FBI memos was not known. Thanks to John Newman's book "Oswald and the CIA" and the information obtained from Jane Roman that resulted from this release of information we now know about Hosty's notes making it to the office of Richard Helms.

To assume that agents such as Hosty et al would have known how the FBI moved information up the intelligence chain cannot IMO be supported and the discipline handed out at the time was nothing more than a CYA move!

In my opinion Oswald was on a CIA "watch list" which is why FBI information about Oswald was forwarded to the CIA. While we may each speculate when that placement was first made it is my suggestion that Oswald was identified and placed on the CIA "watch list" when he wrote his first letter to the Socialist Workers Party. This was done before Oswald enlisted in the Marines!

If I am correct all of Oswald's training and movements would have been watched and reported upon. Newman speculates that Oswald's 201 File was tampered with and, at best, mishandled and probably culled for sensitive material. This speculation by Newman seems to support my story.

Jim Root

Regarding the elusive November 4th or perhaps November 5th, 1963 memorandum by Hosty and Wilson re Oswald, there are a myriad of methodisms that can be used to place a really important document in a very obscure place. I spend quite a bit of time these days at NARA's website, and if you enter Hosty last name only it pulls up over 1,300 documents, I would note that unless I missed it, which I am sure I didn't you will not find any document from both Hosty/Wilson with the date in question, barring the document being in a rather bulky file for example Lee Harvey Oswald's bulbous 201 file which has grown from its pre-assassination file of a relatively small amount of documents to a rather encyclopedic 67 Volumes or larger, my guess is that there is a good possibilty that said document resides below, but that is only hazarding a guess, and not mean to discourage another person taking a stab at it, which, by all means I encourage.

AGENCY : HSCA

RECORD NUMBER : 180-10110-10186

RECORDS SERIES : SECURITY CLASSIFIED FILES

DOCUMENT INFORMATION

ORIGINATOR : FBI

FROM : [No From]

TO : [No To]

TITLE : [No Title]

DATE : 11/14/1963

PAGES : 4

DOCUMENT TYPE : PAPER, TEXTUAL DOCUMENT

SUBJECTS : HOSTY, JAMES, STATEMENTS

CLASSIFICATION : SECRET

RESTRICTIONS : REFERRED

CURRENT STATUS : POSTPONED IN FULL

DATE OF LAST REVIEW : 08/16/1993

COMMENTS : Box 2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully

Robert,

I came to my interest in researching the JFK-Oswald murder conspiracies as an outgrowth of an interest in researching political backgrounds,

the principle backers of Obama's candidacy, in this instance.

I enjoyed reading your recent post on "The Present State Of The Critical Community", and I agree with all of your points.

I've just posted a new thread here:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=14282

My points in the new thread, and with these examples, make it plain, I think, that we need to make an earnest, unflinching demand

for our elected leaders to compel the CIA, FBI, and DOD, to make a case for their continued existence (funding levels) in their present forms.

IMO, it is "that bad"....these three organizations increasingly conduct their chartered activity in an obviously unaccountable and un-American

manner, at least outwardly, which is the sole way we citizens interact with these organizations.

The disclosure of enhanced interrogation practices even an elementary school student would recognize as treaty busting crimes against

humanity, and the impending release of 2000 or so photos of human rights abuses by CIA and DOD personnel and their hired contractors,

should help to make my proposals seem less radical, although they are not radical...radical is the excess, abuse, and planned unresponsiveness

as official policy, on display below. The patriot act, immunization of acts of illegal surveillance and physical abuses, and the general

tenor of corporatist militarization for profit of connected cronies, is the catalyst for this descent into abuse of the citizenry and the treasury.

We are informed because of our interest in the JFK cover up....let's voice our long simmering protests to the assault on our right to know

and our right to be "secure in our papers"!

Most likely, the attempted cover up of abuse described here is a direct result of the anti-constitutional, CIFA domestic spying by the military.

http://www.aclusandiego.org/news_item.php?article_id=000804

ACLU SUIT CHARGES FBI & JUSTICE WITH DODGING PENDLETON DOMESTIC SPYING FOIA

Seeks Immediate Processing of Freedom of Information Act Requests

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

April 21, 2009

SAN DIEGO – The Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Justice Department are illegally dragging their feet in responding to a Freedom of Information Act request seeking records from the Camp Pendleton domestic spying case sent in July 2008, according to a complaint filed late yesterday by the San Diego ACLU and the law firm Fish & Richardson The suit in U.S. District Court seeks to compel the FBI and Justice Department to respond to requests for records related to a security breach at Camp Pendleton’s Strategic Technical Operations Center first reported in May 2008.

The FOIA request was prompted by an article in the San Diego Union-Tribune, which reported that staff at the Center had been stealing classified surveillance files and giving them to local law enforcement agencies and defense contractors. According to reports, some of the stolen files indicated that the plaintiffs, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, California (CAIR-CA) and its San Diego chapter public relations director, and the Islamic Center of San Diego may have been monitored by a surveillance program targeting Muslim groups. They filed a FOIA request on July 14, 2008.

“It is unconscionable that nine months later, the government has engaged in a stall-them-til-they-give-up game,” said David Blair-Loy, legal director of the ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties. “It is urgent that these requests be expedited, because the potential remains that the government is monitoring or infiltrating religious organizations. It is urgent that possible Constitutional violations are immediately....

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=166376

....In 2004, three MZM employees served as staff consultants to the presidential commission investigating prewar Iraq intelligence, which was run by federal Judge Laurence H. Silberman and former senator Charles S. Robb (D-Va.). One of the three was retired Lt. Gen. James C. King, who then was a senior vice president of MZM for national security. King, who before joining MZM had been director of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, played a consultant's role in the establishment of CIFA in 2002 before MZM received its first contracts from that agency.

The Silberman-Robb commission report in 2005 recommended that CIFA play a bigger role in the government's counterterrorism activities. In an interview, Silberman said King was not involved in the commission's recommendation that CIFA get more work. "That recommendation was not from King," Silberman said. .....

EXCLUSIVE: CIA Nominee Hayden Linked to MZM

By Justin Rood - May 8, 2006, 11:33 AM

While director of the National Security Agency, Gen. Michael V. Hayden contracted the services of a top executive at the company at the center of the Cunningham bribery scandal, according to two former employees of the company.

Hayden, President Bush's pick to replace Porter Goss as head of the CIA, contracted with MZM Inc. for the services of Lt. Gen. James C. King, then a senior vice president of the company, the sources say. MZM was owned and operated by Mitchell Wade, who has admitted to bribing former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham with $1.4 million in money and gifts. Wade has also reportedly told investigators he helped arrange for prostitutes to entertain the disgraced lawmaker, and he continues to cooperate with a federal inquiry into the matter.

King has not been implicated in the growing scandal around Wade's illegal activities. However, federal records show he contributed to some of Wade's favored lawmakers, including $6000 to Rep. Virgil Goode (R-VA) and $4000 to Rep. Katherine Harris (R-FL).

Before joining MZM in December 2001, King served under Hayden as the NSA's associate deputy director for operations, and as head of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency.....

FBI cited for poor freedom of information work

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/2...shine-week-fbi/

MICHAEL J. SNIFFEN | March 12, 2009 10:56 PM EST | AP

WASHINGTON — The FBI tells two out of every three Freedom of Information Act requesters that it can't find the records they asked for _ a failure rate five times higher than other major federal agencies, a private study has found.

The FBI's performance results from an outdated and deliberately limited search process, according to the National Security Archive, a private group that publishes declassified government documents and files many FOIA requests.

The Archive awarded the FBI its Rosemary Award for the worst Freedom of Information Act performance by a federal agency. The award is named for former President Richard M. Nixon's secretary Rose Mary Woods, known for re-enacting her claim to have accidentally erased 18 1/2 minutes of a White House tape recording when she stretched to answer a phone. It's given annually around Sunshine Week, when journalism organizations promote open government and freedom of information.

"The FBI knowingly uses a search process that doesn't find relevant records," Archive director Tom Blanton said Thursday. "Not only does this woeful performance lead to unnecessary litigation, but the bureau apparently uses the same searches in its criminal investigations as well."

The Archive said FBI records show that over the past four years the bureau told 66 percent of requesters _ 37,342 out of 56,530 requests _ that it found no responsive records. The 33 large federal agencies which receive the bulk of all FOIA requests responded that way only 13 percent of the time on average, the archive calculated.

In 2008, only 89 requesters, 0.5 percent of the year's total, got everything they asked for from the FBI; 2,276, 13 percent, got part of what they sought.

David Hardy, chief of the FBI's FOIA section, has said the bureau checks FOIA requests against the names on an electronic index of its files.

Story continues below

The electronic index contains names of individuals, organizations, companies, publications, activities and counterintelligence programs. It includes the main name for each file and other names in the file _ or cross-references _ that case agents think might be useful in the future, but not all names in every file. The electronic index for searching only goes back to 1980s; earlier records have to be searched by hand on paper.

The FBI checks the main names on the index, Hardy has said. It does not check cross-reference names unless specifically asked to, and does not check the entire file. It won't look at paper or field office records unless specifically asked to.

Blanton said modern information systems use electronic search tools that scan the entire text of a document. "The FBI process, in contrast, is designed to send FOIA requesters away frustrated, and no doubt has the same effect on the FBI's own agents."

Hardy told The Associated Press on Thursday the indexing system is designed to support bureau investigations.

"The names our agents pick to put in the index mean something to our investigators," Hardy said. "We're not building a library. If you have something of meaning to the FBI, it's going to be there."

But Blanton responded: "No FBI agent is omniscient. They can't always know what names would be important to another field office or make or break an investigation in the future."

Two men who turned out to be Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist hijackers lived in San Diego and associated with an FBI informant before the attack, but if the agent only indexed the informant's name, they wouldn't find the two hijackers, Blanton said.

FBI spokesman Richard Kolko said "the reason for the huge number of no-records responses is that it's become a cult phenomenon to ask the FBI for records on yourself, and most people don't have FBI records."

But FBI searches frustrate other requesters. Salt Lake City lawyer Jesse Trentadue wanted to know whether bureau documents showed a link between his brother's death in custody and the 1995 bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building.

Trentadue asked for a Jan. 4, 1996, message from FBI Director Louis Freeh's office to the Oklahoma City and Omaha, Neb., offices that discussed the federal building bombers (the FBI's OKBOMB case). His request supplied the correct date for the memo, the names of the sender and two recipients and a newspaper story with direct quotes from it, but the FBI told him no records matched his request.

Trentadue later found the very memo he wanted had been released to another FOIA requester, so he sued the FBI for a better search. Hardy told the court the FBI had used the search term "OKBOMB" to try to find the January 1996 message; bureau officials couldn't say why that search failed to produce the Freeh message, in which the first listed subject was "OKBOMB."

Hardy told AP the law requires reasonable, not exhaustive, searches. "If we were to try to chase down every name with a full text search, the entire Russian army couldn't finish the work in a timely manner," Hardy said. "We think our system is reasonable."

Hardy said the FBI now has the shortest pending times for FOIA requests in its history, no backlogged requests older than three years and fewer than 1 percent older than two. But Blanton said the FBI's average response times of 109 days for an expedited request and 374 days for a complex request are still among the highest in government.

Blanton said the FBI has avoided processing requests by demanding privacy act waivers from any living individual referenced. He said the bureau stopped a student journalism project on the murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in Pakistan by requesting a privacy waiver from al-Qaida leader Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a U.S. prisoner in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

"We are supposed to use common sense and waive that rule," Hardy said. "But we correct our errors. We're processing the Pearl documents now."xposed and stopped.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Robert,

I came to my interest in researching the JFK-Oswald murder conspiracies as an outgrowth of an interest in researching political backgrounds,

the principle backers of Obama's candidacy, in this instance.

I enjoyed reading your recent post on "The Present State Of The Critical Community", and I agree with all of your points.

I've just posted a new thread here:

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=14282

My points in the new thread, and with these examples, make it plain, I think, that we need to make an earnest, unflinching demand

for our elected leaders to compel the CIA, FBI, and DOD, to make a case for their continued existence (funding levels) in their present forms.

IMO, it is "that bad"....these three organizations increasingly conduct their chartered activity in an obviously unaccountable and un-American

manner, at least outwardly, which is the sole way we citizens interact with these organizations.

The disclosure of enhanced interrogation practices even an elementary school student would recognize as treaty busting crimes against

humanity, and the impending release of 2000 or so photos of human rights abuses by CIA and DOD personnel and their hired contractors,

should help to make my proposals seem less radical, although they are not radical...radical is the excess, abuse, and planned unresponsiveness

as official policy, on display below. The patriot act, immunization of acts of illegal surveillance and physical abuses, and the general

tenor of corporatist militarization for profit of connected cronies, is the catalyst for this descent into abuse of the citizenry and the treasury.

We are informed because of our interest in the JFK cover up....let's voice our long simmering protests to the assault on our right to know

and our right to be "secure in our papers"!

Most likely, the attempted cover up of abuse described here is a direct result of the anti-constitutional, CIFA domestic spying by the military.

http://www.aclusandiego.org/news_item.php?article_id=000804

ACLU SUIT CHARGES FBI & JUSTICE WITH DODGING PENDLETON DOMESTIC SPYING FOIA

Seeks Immediate Processing of Freedom of Information Act Requests

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

April 21, 2009

SAN DIEGO – The Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Justice Department are illegally dragging their feet in responding to a Freedom of Information Act request seeking records from the Camp Pendleton domestic spying case sent in July 2008, according to a complaint filed late yesterday by the San Diego ACLU and the law firm Fish & Richardson The suit in U.S. District Court seeks to compel the FBI and Justice Department to respond to requests for records related to a security breach at Camp Pendleton’s Strategic Technical Operations Center first reported in May 2008.

The FOIA request was prompted by an article in the San Diego Union-Tribune, which reported that staff at the Center had been stealing classified surveillance files and giving them to local law enforcement agencies and defense contractors. According to reports, some of the stolen files indicated that the plaintiffs, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, California (CAIR-CA) and its San Diego chapter public relations director, and the Islamic Center of San Diego may have been monitored by a surveillance program targeting Muslim groups. They filed a FOIA request on July 14, 2008.

“It is unconscionable that nine months later, the government has engaged in a stall-them-til-they-give-up game,” said David Blair-Loy, legal director of the ACLU of San Diego & Imperial Counties. “It is urgent that these requests be expedited, because the potential remains that the government is monitoring or infiltrating religious organizations. It is urgent that possible Constitutional violations are immediately....

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...st&p=166376

....In 2004, three MZM employees served as staff consultants to the presidential commission investigating prewar Iraq intelligence, which was run by federal Judge Laurence H. Silberman and former senator Charles S. Robb (D-Va.). One of the three was retired Lt. Gen. James C. King, who then was a senior vice president of MZM for national security. King, who before joining MZM had been director of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, played a consultant's role in the establishment of CIFA in 2002 before MZM received its first contracts from that agency.

The Silberman-Robb commission report in 2005 recommended that CIFA play a bigger role in the government's counterterrorism activities. In an interview, Silberman said King was not involved in the commission's recommendation that CIFA get more work. "That recommendation was not from King," Silberman said. .....

EXCLUSIVE: CIA Nominee Hayden Linked to MZM

By Justin Rood - May 8, 2006, 11:33 AM

While director of the National Security Agency, Gen. Michael V. Hayden contracted the services of a top executive at the company at the center of the Cunningham bribery scandal, according to two former employees of the company.

Hayden, President Bush's pick to replace Porter Goss as head of the CIA, contracted with MZM Inc. for the services of Lt. Gen. James C. King, then a senior vice president of the company, the sources say. MZM was owned and operated by Mitchell Wade, who has admitted to bribing former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham with $1.4 million in money and gifts. Wade has also reportedly told investigators he helped arrange for prostitutes to entertain the disgraced lawmaker, and he continues to cooperate with a federal inquiry into the matter.

King has not been implicated in the growing scandal around Wade's illegal activities. However, federal records show he contributed to some of Wade's favored lawmakers, including $6000 to Rep. Virgil Goode (R-VA) and $4000 to Rep. Katherine Harris (R-FL).

Before joining MZM in December 2001, King served under Hayden as the NSA's associate deputy director for operations, and as head of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency.....

FBI cited for poor freedom of information work

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/2...shine-week-fbi/

MICHAEL J. SNIFFEN | March 12, 2009 10:56 PM EST | AP

WASHINGTON — The FBI tells two out of every three Freedom of Information Act requesters that it can't find the records they asked for _ a failure rate five times higher than other major federal agencies, a private study has found.

The FBI's performance results from an outdated and deliberately limited search process, according to the National Security Archive, a private group that publishes declassified government documents and files many FOIA requests.

The Archive awarded the FBI its Rosemary Award for the worst Freedom of Information Act performance by a federal agency. The award is named for former President Richard M. Nixon's secretary Rose Mary Woods, known for re-enacting her claim to have accidentally erased 18 1/2 minutes of a White House tape recording when she stretched to answer a phone. It's given annually around Sunshine Week, when journalism organizations promote open government and freedom of information.

"The FBI knowingly uses a search process that doesn't find relevant records," Archive director Tom Blanton said Thursday. "Not only does this woeful performance lead to unnecessary litigation, but the bureau apparently uses the same searches in its criminal investigations as well."

The Archive said FBI records show that over the past four years the bureau told 66 percent of requesters _ 37,342 out of 56,530 requests _ that it found no responsive records. The 33 large federal agencies which receive the bulk of all FOIA requests responded that way only 13 percent of the time on average, the archive calculated.

In 2008, only 89 requesters, 0.5 percent of the year's total, got everything they asked for from the FBI; 2,276, 13 percent, got part of what they sought.

David Hardy, chief of the FBI's FOIA section, has said the bureau checks FOIA requests against the names on an electronic index of its files.

Story continues below

The electronic index contains names of individuals, organizations, companies, publications, activities and counterintelligence programs. It includes the main name for each file and other names in the file _ or cross-references _ that case agents think might be useful in the future, but not all names in every file. The electronic index for searching only goes back to 1980s; earlier records have to be searched by hand on paper.

The FBI checks the main names on the index, Hardy has said. It does not check cross-reference names unless specifically asked to, and does not check the entire file. It won't look at paper or field office records unless specifically asked to.

Blanton said modern information systems use electronic search tools that scan the entire text of a document. "The FBI process, in contrast, is designed to send FOIA requesters away frustrated, and no doubt has the same effect on the FBI's own agents."

Hardy told The Associated Press on Thursday the indexing system is designed to support bureau investigations.

"The names our agents pick to put in the index mean something to our investigators," Hardy said. "We're not building a library. If you have something of meaning to the FBI, it's going to be there."

But Blanton responded: "No FBI agent is omniscient. They can't always know what names would be important to another field office or make or break an investigation in the future."

Two men who turned out to be Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist hijackers lived in San Diego and associated with an FBI informant before the attack, but if the agent only indexed the informant's name, they wouldn't find the two hijackers, Blanton said.

FBI spokesman Richard Kolko said "the reason for the huge number of no-records responses is that it's become a cult phenomenon to ask the FBI for records on yourself, and most people don't have FBI records."

But FBI searches frustrate other requesters. Salt Lake City lawyer Jesse Trentadue wanted to know whether bureau documents showed a link between his brother's death in custody and the 1995 bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building.

Trentadue asked for a Jan. 4, 1996, message from FBI Director Louis Freeh's office to the Oklahoma City and Omaha, Neb., offices that discussed the federal building bombers (the FBI's OKBOMB case). His request supplied the correct date for the memo, the names of the sender and two recipients and a newspaper story with direct quotes from it, but the FBI told him no records matched his request.

Trentadue later found the very memo he wanted had been released to another FOIA requester, so he sued the FBI for a better search. Hardy told the court the FBI had used the search term "OKBOMB" to try to find the January 1996 message; bureau officials couldn't say why that search failed to produce the Freeh message, in which the first listed subject was "OKBOMB."

Hardy told AP the law requires reasonable, not exhaustive, searches. "If we were to try to chase down every name with a full text search, the entire Russian army couldn't finish the work in a timely manner," Hardy said. "We think our system is reasonable."

Hardy said the FBI now has the shortest pending times for FOIA requests in its history, no backlogged requests older than three years and fewer than 1 percent older than two. But Blanton said the FBI's average response times of 109 days for an expedited request and 374 days for a complex request are still among the highest in government.

Blanton said the FBI has avoided processing requests by demanding privacy act waivers from any living individual referenced. He said the bureau stopped a student journalism project on the murder of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl in Pakistan by requesting a privacy waiver from al-Qaida leader Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, a U.S. prisoner in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

"We are supposed to use common sense and waive that rule," Hardy said. "But we correct our errors. We're processing the Pearl documents now."xposed and stopped.”

Thank's for the comments, I certainly agree that there is a relationship between the continual problems regarding the intelligence community that goes back well, to the reason this Forum exists actually, that is my view. To be more specific, another viewpoint I have you might find interesting, and on one of the same themes as in my post regarding the Critical State of the Research community, which is, that when a Democratic Administration occupies the Executive Branch, [maybe with something of an exception in the Clinton Era] there seems to be a tendency by the intelligence agencies to "wait it out," until the next Republican Administration comes in, and then when that happens the same issues creep up again, nowhere was this more prevalent than in the last Presidency. I certainly do not believe Democrats walk on water, and also being a believer in the concept of the Unitary Executive, briefly mentioned by VP Biden in one of his debate's last year, is to a great degree the reason, I alluded to there being a "lot of work to be done," in the same post yesterday. I also believe the media really gears it up a notch when there is a Republican administration, as far as lacking objectivity, couple that with the decline in the traditional voting blocks that existed for the Dem's in the 1960's, organized labor, unions, Jewish vote et cetera, and in my view you begin to understand why I believe that the Democratic Administration of Barrack Obama must succeed in the eyes of American's and for posterity.

I made efforts to be something of an activist, in what little spare time, I had during the Bush Presidency, but my focus is chiefly on resolving the remaining obscurities re the assassination of Pres. Kennedy, at this time.

Although I do certainly encourage anyone to follow their heart with their respective political and philosophical outlooks on the state of the union. Especially in regards to preserving civil liberties, however futile that may seem.

Robert

I have not given up on locating the Hosty memo's, but as my last post on this thread indicated, it certainly appears that the 11/4/63 memo re Oswald could be in there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

Hosty is maybe 85 years old now... wonder why I should be afraid of him Bill or you for that matter?

11/16/03

The Oswald scapegoat

Who killed JFK? Local ex-FBI agent says he knows

James Hosty says the FBI had an "open-and-shut case" on who killed President John F. Kennedy nearly 40 years ago.

Hosty knows the details and facts better than any man alive. He says eyewitnesses and recovered forensics give him "irrefutable proof." He is convinced the assassin was Lee Harvey Oswald, acting alone.

What gives him special knowledge?

Forty years ago, he was Special FBI Agent James P. Hosty Jr. He now lives in Burnt Store Marina, but worked as a counter-intelligence officer in the Dallas, Texas, FBI office at the time JFK was murdered.

He was assigned to investigate Lee Harvey Oswald before the Communist sympathizer pulled the trigger. He found no legal reason to put Oswald away. And that was the FBI man's downfall, according to J. Edgar Hoover, director of the FBI, and the Warren Commission, which investigated the assassination. Hosty didn't arrest Oswald before the president was shot.

And the Warren Commission concluded Oswald was the shooter.

To make matters worse for the retired agent, Hosty's name and address were in Oswald's address book when he was captured by the Dallas Police Department shortly after killing Kennedy. Hosty visited the Oswald home shortly before the president's assassination. He talked to Oswald's wife Marina about her husband when he wasn't home. She passed the agent's name and phone number on to Oswald, who put it in his address book.

Hosty says 40 years later that neither he nor anyone else in the law enforcement-intelligence business in the United States had reason to suspect that Oswald was going to assassinate JFK.

Hosty believes he became the fall guy when Hoover and the commission needed someone to blame. As a consequence for not arresting Oswald before the assassination, Hosty was banished by Hoover to the Kansas City, Kan., FBI bureau. In those days it was considered by the director as the graveyard for agents who failed in the line of duty.

But Hosty's opinion of Kansas City was that, "Hoover had thrown me in the briar patch," a reference to an Uncle Remus story by writer Joel Chandler Harris. The FBI agent meant Kansas City was a great place for him and his late wife, Janet, to raise their nine children, and a good place for an FBI agent to work.

"I was a special agent and the majority of my cases at the Dallas office were domestic intelligence," he said. "Klansmen and Gen. Edwin Walker and his Minutemen. I had to keep an eye on the general and his crew."

United Nations Ambassador Adlai Stevenson came to Dallas to make a speech a couple of weeks before Kennedy was shot. Stevenson was jeered and heckled by a group of Minutemen called the "Indignant White Citizens Council," known in earlier days as the Ku Klux Klan.

No one wanted a similar occurrence when the president arrived. So most of the Dallas Police Department's officers surrounded 30 or 40 of Walker's right-wingers stationed along the parade route. They were trying to keep the Minutemen from hassling the president or worse, according to Hosty.

"The truth of the matter is that security in Dallas (for the president) that day was nonexistent," he explained. "The Secret Service was undermanned and understaffed and they couldn't do the job.

"The night before Kennedy was killed, the Secret Service didn't have any manpower left to guard the president. So they brought in off-duty Fort Worth firemen to guard him after deputizing them.

"The Secret Service (in those days) had less than 300 men in the entire United States. To complicate things further, they had so much pride in what they did they wouldn't let any other federal agency help them. The FBI had 85 agents in the Dallas-Fort Worth area. We could have guarded Kennedy, but they wouldn't work with us," Hosty said.

A day or so before Kennedy arrived in town, one of the local papers published a map of his proposed parade route. Thus knowledge of where the president was going and how he was going to get there became common. JFK and his entourage would drive right by the FBI's headquarters and the Texas Book Depository, where Oswald had just gotten a job.

Hosty hoped he could catch a glimpse of the president as he drove by in the open Lincoln convertible. A Democrat and an Irishman just like John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Hosty thought the president was his man.

At 12:38 p.m., the FBI agent was eating a cheese sandwich in a restaurant near the department's headquarters in downtown Dallas when a waitress said, "Oh, my God, they've shot the president!" Hosty didn't know it at the time but her words would change his life.

It wasn't long before Oswald's name was mentioned as a potential suspect. Immediately, Hosty realized Oswald was one of his cases.

In an official censure letter to Hosty after Oswald was arrested, Hoover wrote on Dec. 13, 1963:

"It has been determined that your recent handling of a security-type case was grossly inadequate.

"In view of the slipshod manner in which you handled this (Oswald) investigation, you are being placed on probation. It will be incumbent upon you to handle your future duties at a higher level of competence so that future administrative action of this nature will not be necessary.

"Very truly yours,

"John Edgar Hoover, Director."

The result of the Warren Commission's 10-month investigation into the president's assassination was that the FBI hadn't sufficiently helped the Secret Service protect JFK. To take this logic one step further, Hosty reasoned "...I was directly responsible for the president's death," according to the commission.

Two days later, Hosty found out from his boss in the Dallas office that he was being transferred to the FBI's Kansas City office by direct order of Hoover.

To clear the air and set the record straight, Hosty wrote a book with his son, Tom, in 1995 about his experiences involving the Oswald case and the Kennedy assassination called, "Assignment: Oswald."

The 79-year-old former FBI agent finished his tale of intrigue and assassination by observing:

"I've raised nine fine kids with Janet, my wife, held the highest rank a street agent could hold in the FBI by the time I retired in 1979 and explained what really happened with the Oswald case in the book my son and I wrote. What else could a man ask for?"

You can contact Don Moore at: moore@sun-herald.com.

By DON MOORE

Senior Writer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

One very simplistic matter that has never been independently corroborated as far as I know, is verification of what both James Hosty and Ruth Paine stated, that they obtained the address for the Texas School Book Depository by checking the Dallas Telephone Directory.

There appears to be no deception in that matter, I physically checked the 1963 Dallas Telephone Directory and the statement is not a case of "slipping one over."

The listing reads:

May 1963 Dallas Residential Telephone Directory

page 760

Texas School Book Depository

411 Elm St.

RI 7-3521

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Although the document in question is the "Hosty note," there is something that is mentioned that in my opinion provides a clue to the wherabouts of the November 4th and 5th Hosty memo's, ie New Orleans.

In the Marsh/cheney collection, which is housed at the Gerald Ford Library, there is a Washington Star newspaper article dated Nov. 11, 1975, entitled

"Panel to Quiz FBI on Oswald" the following quotes are from the article. However, I believe there are clues re this memo which apply to the New Orleans memos.

[James B.] "Adams said Hosty said he destroyed the letter on instructions from Shanklin just two hours after Oswald was pronounced dead on Nov. 24."

"A private researcher Paul L Hoch of Berkeley Calif., offers circumstantial evidence in an unpublished manuscript that a page of the FBI memo was retyped to remove Hosty's name"

John T. "Kesler prepared the original memo which was later included in a longer memo by Gemberling."

See: Warren Data Inquiry Panel to Quiz FBI on Oswald

http://www.maryferre....do?docId=32063

But there is even more information that proves my assertion that there is a certain reality to what I am saying.

In RIF document 124-10369-10042

there is the following passage, "IT IS POINTED OUT THAT THE REPORT OF SA WARREN C. DE BRUEYS DATED

DECEMBER TWO, NINETEEN SIXTYTHREE ON PAGE ONE-THIRTY-EIGHT REFLECTS SA HOSTY'S CONTACT

WITH MRS. RUTH PAINE ON NOVEMBER ONE NINETEEN SIXTYTHREE AND NOVEMBER FIVE NINETEEN SIXTYTHREE.

See

ADMIN FOLDER G-5 HSCA ADMINISTRATIVE FOLDER, DOCUMENTS RE ADMIN ACTION

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=9940&relPageId=25

Edited by Robert Howard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Tom Scully

Coincidence, Robert? I was just about to post this reply over on Jim Root's thread (linked at the top of this quote box), and instead, since it is on the same subject, I will post it here.:

For years I have suggested that the primary conspirators may well have been John J. McCloy and Maxwell Taylor (and have more recently began to suspect Richard Helms as well).

Most recently I have concentrated on McCloy and his roll in both the assassination and the use of his position on the Warren Commission to insure that certain information was covered up passed gently over.

Several years ago I began a thread titled "Did the 'Big Fish" know" which centered on the fact that FBI Agent Patrick Hosty had sent a note on November 4, 1963 that detailed exactly where Lee Harvey Oswald was working and that that note was never given a Commission Exhibit Number and has never been uncovered althought two other Hosty notes were given Commission Exhibit Numbers and did make it to the office of Richard Helms.

Today I would like to take this information a step further and make some additional suggestions on how the machanics of murder may have been put in place by Maxwell Taylor in his position as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and control over Air Force One.

It is actually surprisingly simple.

Hosty note sent November 4, 1963 detailing where Oswald was working.

November 8, 1963 Mr. Killerman assigns Winston Lawson to the Dallas portion of the Presidential trip of November 22 and tells him that there would be a 45 minute time lapse for the motorcade trip although the location of the luncheon was still up in the air.

In his testimony Lawson states, "...This figuered a great deal in the parade route, the 45 minutes.

Mr Stern then asks: The 45 minute time interval?

Lawson: Yes, sir.

Stern: Was established for you by the White House?

Lawson: Yes, sir.

We find two other important facts. The Trade Mart Luncheon site was established by the White House and that the motorcade would go down Main Street.

Given the time factor, we learn that Lawson would know how far the motorcade would travel during the 45 minutes aloted (figuring "a great deal in the parade route, the 45 minutes"). At the end of this distance (dictated by time) the motorcade would go off Main onto Houston and then Elm to the Stimmons Fwy to backtrack to the Trade Mart luncheon leaving the TSBD as the last building passed.

Looking deeper into this we find that the 45 minutes was created by creating a delay in Fort Worth before the Presidential plane left for Dallas.

Looking at Mr. Kellerman's testimony we find the President giving a speech in the parking lot of his hotel at 8:25am followed by a breakfast with the Chamber of Commerce. We know that this was a short breakfast because Kellerman received a phone call from Dallas about the wheather at 10:00am while the President had returned to his Suite at the hotel.

For nearly an hour and a half there is very little activity except to travel the few miles to the airport.

(from the testimony of Roy Kellerman

Mr. Specter: Now, at about what time did President Kennedy depart from fort Worth?

Kellerman: We were airborne from fort Worth at 11:20 in the morning....we arrived in Dallas, Love Field, at 11:40am.

Kellerman mentions three times in his testimony the arrival time of 11:40 at Love Field.

I have had an opportunity to be present at a Vice Presidential landing....it arrived at exactly the minute that it was supposed to just as President Kennedy's plane landed at Love Field at exactly the time planned by Washinton and those in charge of military transportation said it would land on November 8, 1963.

The Presidential Plane could have left at anytime from Fort Worth after the Commerce Breakfast but an hour and a half interlude was provided so that the plane would land in Dallas at exactly 11:40am.

This hour and a half delay created exactly the right amount of time for the motorcade to travel past one last building on its way to the Trade Mart Luncheon and that one last building was the TSBD building where Oswald was working!

Once again, as Winston Lawson says, "This figuered a great deal in the parade route, the 45 minutes."

Jim Root

A wikipedia editor responds to this argument, and his response gives anyone reading this an opportunity to better understand how difficult it is to influence a supposedly well educated mind. My purpose in the lower part of the discussion on this page is to argue to how unfair it is to attack only the credibility of the HSCA investigation finding of conspiracy, while not qualifying the 1964 findings of the WC, FBI, and Dallas PD in a similar way.:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lee_Harvey_Oswald#Second_Break

(Near the bottom of the linked page)

Could you use fewer words? I cannot even tell what your thesis is. Yes, the 45 min trip from Love Field to the Trade Mart was carefully planned.....

...This is a guy [JFK] with back pain and colitis and you're not going to give him a mid-morning break in his hotel room, between speeches and eating and flying and handshaking and tour-driving and more eating and more speeches? You're a cold man.

I don't care if Hosty did know LHO worked at the TSBD. LHO had no history of violence so far as Hosty knew, had made no threats against the president, and Hosty didn't now he was armed. It's not clear to me if Hosty even knew where the TSBD was. Or realized that the motorcade would pass it, before the assassination. This is all clear in retrospect. As for the idea that somebody planned the motorcade to go past the TSBD, that's total nonsense. The motorcade was planned to go from Love Field through downtown Dallas on Main, and then as directly as possible, on the freeway to the Trade Mart. The route they took to do this, is totally the logical one. XXXxxxxx 04:27, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

(For background, here is an earlier comment by this editor (In the upper part of the same discussion page.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lee_Harvey_Oswald#Oswald.27s_Odd_Choice_of_Rifle

....When Oswald bought the rifle, I doubt he intended to assassinate anybody with it, much less JFK. He liked guns-- he'd accidently fired a pistol he wasn't supposed to have, while in the marines, remember. A firearm made him feel less powerless, and in Texas it wasn't all that odd for people to be gun owners and collectors. My guess is that Oswald's mood in gun ownership was rather playful, as you see on the backyard photos, one of which he even sent to de Mohrenschildt (not an assassin's act). What really set Oswald off at the end, I think, was being fired in April. He attempted assassination of Walker only a few days later-- about as soon as he could, after casing his house over a weekend. Clearly, he was nuts and a walking timebomb from that point on, fixated on getting to Cuba, and angry at anyone who wasn't a Cuban Communist. Then JFK, who had his own many problems with Cuba, decided to take a motorcade route right under the window of the place Oswald was working. He could not have known that would happen when he started there. But when he heard, it must have seemed like destiny. Revenge on the world for all his problems. And there was always Cuba, as a dream of where to escape to.

(This person does not seem to have ever added new material to a wikipedia article, but has confined his activity to only to challenge additions of others.)

Edited by Tom Scully
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coincidence, Robert? I was just about to post this reply over on Jim Root's thread (linked at the top of this quote box), and instead, since it is on the same subject, I will post it here.:

For years I have suggested that the primary conspirators may well have been John J. McCloy and Maxwell Taylor (and have more recently began to suspect Richard Helms as well).

Most recently I have concentrated on McCloy and his roll in both the assassination and the use of his position on the Warren Commission to insure that certain information was covered up passed gently over.

Several years ago I began a thread titled "Did the 'Big Fish" know" which centered on the fact that FBI Agent Patrick Hosty had sent a note on November 4, 1963 that detailed exactly where Lee Harvey Oswald was working and that that note was never given a Commission Exhibit Number and has never been uncovered althought two other Hosty notes were given Commission Exhibit Numbers and did make it to the office of Richard Helms.

Today I would like to take this information a step further and make some additional suggestions on how the machanics of murder may have been put in place by Maxwell Taylor in his position as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs and control over Air Force One.

It is actually surprisingly simple.

Hosty note sent November 4, 1963 detailing where Oswald was working.

November 8, 1963 Mr. Killerman assigns Winston Lawson to the Dallas portion of the Presidential trip of November 22 and tells him that there would be a 45 minute time lapse for the motorcade trip although the location of the luncheon was still up in the air.

In his testimony Lawson states, "...This figuered a great deal in the parade route, the 45 minutes.

Mr Stern then asks: The 45 minute time interval?

Lawson: Yes, sir.

Stern: Was established for you by the White House?

Lawson: Yes, sir.

We find two other important facts. The Trade Mart Luncheon site was established by the White House and that the motorcade would go down Main Street.

Given the time factor, we learn that Lawson would know how far the motorcade would travel during the 45 minutes aloted (figuring "a great deal in the parade route, the 45 minutes"). At the end of this distance (dictated by time) the motorcade would go off Main onto Houston and then Elm to the Stimmons Fwy to backtrack to the Trade Mart luncheon leaving the TSBD as the last building passed.

Looking deeper into this we find that the 45 minutes was created by creating a delay in Fort Worth before the Presidential plane left for Dallas.

Looking at Mr. Kellerman's testimony we find the President giving a speech in the parking lot of his hotel at 8:25am followed by a breakfast with the Chamber of Commerce. We know that this was a short breakfast because Kellerman received a phone call from Dallas about the wheather at 10:00am while the President had returned to his Suite at the hotel.

For nearly an hour and a half there is very little activity except to travel the few miles to the airport.

(from the testimony of Roy Kellerman

Mr. Specter: Now, at about what time did President Kennedy depart from fort Worth?

Kellerman: We were airborne from fort Worth at 11:20 in the morning....we arrived in Dallas, Love Field, at 11:40am.

Kellerman mentions three times in his testimony the arrival time of 11:40 at Love Field.

I have had an opportunity to be present at a Vice Presidential landing....it arrived at exactly the minute that it was supposed to just as President Kennedy's plane landed at Love Field at exactly the time planned by Washinton and those in charge of military transportation said it would land on November 8, 1963.

The Presidential Plane could have left at anytime from Fort Worth after the Commerce Breakfast but an hour and a half interlude was provided so that the plane would land in Dallas at exactly 11:40am.

This hour and a half delay created exactly the right amount of time for the motorcade to travel past one last building on its way to the Trade Mart Luncheon and that one last building was the TSBD building where Oswald was working!

Once again, as Winston Lawson says, "This figuered a great deal in the parade route, the 45 minutes."

Jim Root

A wikipedia editor responds to this argument, and his response gives anyone reading this an opportunity to better understand how difficult it is to influence a supposedly well educated mind. My purpose in the lower part of the discussion on this page is to argue to how unfair it is to attack only the credibility of the HSCA investigation finding of conspiracy, while not qualifying the 1964 findings of the WC, FBI, and Dallas PD in a similar way.:

http://en.wikipedia....ld#Second_Break

(Near the bottom of the linked page)

Could you use fewer words? I cannot even tell what your thesis is. Yes, the 45 min trip from Love Field to the Trade Mart was carefully planned.....

...This is a guy [JFK] with back pain and colitis and you're not going to give him a mid-morning break in his hotel room, between speeches and eating and flying and handshaking and tour-driving and more eating and more speeches? You're a cold man.

I don't care if Hosty did know LHO worked at the TSBD. LHO had no history of violence so far as Hosty knew, had made no threats against the president, and Hosty didn't now he was armed. It's not clear to me if Hosty even knew where the TSBD was. Or realized that the motorcade would pass it, before the assassination. This is all clear in retrospect. As for the idea that somebody planned the motorcade to go past the TSBD, that's total nonsense. The motorcade was planned to go from Love Field through downtown Dallas on Main, and then as directly as possible, on the freeway to the Trade Mart. The route they took to do this, is totally the logical one. XXXxxxxx 04:27, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

(For background, here is an earlier comment by this editor (In the upper part of the same discussion page.)

http://en.wikipedia....Choice_of_Rifle

....When Oswald bought the rifle, I doubt he intended to assassinate anybody with it, much less JFK. He liked guns-- he'd accidently fired a pistol he wasn't supposed to have, while in the marines, remember. A firearm made him feel less powerless, and in Texas it wasn't all that odd for people to be gun owners and collectors. My guess is that Oswald's mood in gun ownership was rather playful, as you see on the backyard photos, one of which he even sent to de Mohrenschildt (not an assassin's act). What really set Oswald off at the end, I think, was being fired in April. He attempted assassination of Walker only a few days later-- about as soon as he could, after casing his house over a weekend. Clearly, he was nuts and a walking timebomb from that point on, fixated on getting to Cuba, and angry at anyone who wasn't a Cuban Communist. Then JFK, who had his own many problems with Cuba, decided to take a motorcade route right under the window of the place Oswald was working. He could not have known that would happen when he started there. But when he heard, it must have seemed like destiny. Revenge on the world for all his problems. And there was always Cuba, as a dream of where to escape to.

(This person does not seem to have ever added new material to a wikipedia article, but has confined his activity to only to challenge additions of others.)

One flaw in the reasoning of the Wiki editor is that Oswald bought the gun before he decided to shoot at Walker, since he cased out Walker's house and took photos of it and the alley and rail road tracks nearby days before he ordered the rifle.

I am going to mention the missing Nov. 4, 1963 Hosty Note in the list of know but missing records for NARA, but would like more info about it if anyone can provide more details.

Thanks to Jim, Robert and Tom for all the research you have done on this,

BK

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...