JFK's American University Speech

[John Simkin]

[Jim Root]

John

Kennedy's American University Speech on June 10, 1963 was a shift in US policy toward nuclear arms negotiations between the Soviets and the United States. Up until that time John J. McCloy had been John F. Kennedy's chief arms negotiator. McCloy had been the first man Kennedy introduced at his very first press conference shortly after being sworn in as President.

McCloy steped asside as Chief Arms negoiator when he disagreed with Kennedy's "new" approach to arms negotiaions in the days preceding the American University Speech.

It is my belief that Kennedy's change of policy in nuclear arms discussions was the trigger point that started the ball rolling toward that dreadful day in Dallas.

I believe that it was not a coincidence that John J. McCloy would write this letter to Maj. General Edwin Anderson Walker on June 12, 1963 and make sure that it would be placed in several locations that would make it easy to discover. If, as Gerald P. Hemming assured me was true, Walker was a part of the team that assisted Oswald to enter the Soviet Union in October 1959. If true the research that I have done, with the help of others on Oswald's travel from London to Helsinki, would explain why the passenger lists for Oswald's air flights have never seen the light of day.....Walker was traveling at the same time in Europe and I believe that I have proven that they could have been on the same flight for at least one leg of the journey.

If the above is true Walker would have recognized Oswald after the assassination and Walker would have known who Oswald was working for. I believe that Walker's actions in the 24 hours following the assasination are consistant with the above scenario. It would have been imparative for any conspirator to nutralize Walker and it is my belief that the letter below was designed to do exactly that.

McCloy sent a two page letter to Walker dated June 12, 1963

My dear General:

I received through the mail the other day a copy of your resignation from the Association of Graduates of the United States Military Academy, prompted by my selection for the Colonel Thayer Award for this year.

You are a graduate of the Academy and for you to resign because a group of graduates duly selected to make an award and did so according to their best judgment, in a manner which resulted in an award to me, seems a rather fantastic expression of your disapproval of what you term "new frontier policy" as contrasted to the traditions of West Point.

Whether my selection was deserved or not, I was very much warmed by it. I was in the regular service in World War I, here and in France. I served as The Assistant Secretary of War during World War II. All during this period and since, I have been closely associated with graduates of the Academy and among them are my warmest friends. I am also very familiar with your very fine record in World War II and in Korea and I had been distressed that a leader of your qualifications should have been lost to the service, whatever the reason.

I have served the country according to my lights and opportunities, just as you have according to yours. I very much doubt that I have ever been less concerned with the security of the country than you.

I was called in form abroad in the Cuban emergency to express my views as to what should be done in regard to the presence of missiles in Cuba. I did so and I think no one misunderstood my position. Thereafter, I was asked to arrange with the Russians for the removal of the missiles. This I did and I also arranged for the removal of the bombers, though they were not part of the original agreement -- both under condidtions far better for the security of the country, in my judgment, than the form of United Nations inspection which was originally contemplated. Apart from this, I have had nothing whatever to do with Cuban policy, either under President Kennedy or General Eisenhhower. I have not been what you term a "New Frontiersman" in the sense that I have been a Republican all my life and I was born in the last century, not this one.

All this is written to you not to justify my selection, in any sense, but to urge you to reconsider your resignation from your own Graduate Association on any account with which I am Concerned. I suggest that you tell whomever you want, as vigourously as you care to, that, in your opinion, I do not deserve the Award, but to sever your relations with the Graduates of West Point on this account, though I recognize in the last analysis it is entirely your own business, does seem to me to be a hasty and perhaps ill-advised action.

Sincerely,

John J. McCloy

Major General Edwin A. Walker

4011 Turtle Creek Boulevard

Dallas 19, Texas

P.S. In the possibility that it might be of some interest to you, I am sending

to you herewith a copy of the remarks I made tot he Cadets at the time of

Award.

Jim Root

[Ron Ecker]

If the above is true Walker would have recognized Oswald after the assassination and Walker would have known who Oswald was working for. I believe that Walker's actions in the 24 hours following the assasination are consistant with the above scenario. It would have been imparative for any conspirator to nutralize Walker and it is my belief that the letter below was designed to do exactly that.

Jim,

I'm not sure what you mean by "neutralize Walker," and how the letter does that. The letter is relevant to what?

[Steve Rosen]

Jim,

Same question as Ron: How in your view does McCloy's letter neutralize Walker?

Steve

[Jim Root]

Jim,

Same question as Ron: How in your view does McCloy's letter neutralize Walker?

Steve

Steve and Ron

My research has led me to many different areas in search of conspirators involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy and the whole tale that I have uncovered is rather complicated. The McCloy letter is of interest to me for many reasons, one of which is the date that it was written in comparison to the American University Speech (two days after).

There are certain undeniable facts that can here be associated to that particular time in history:

1. Kennedy's speech of June 10, 1963 was a public announcement of a policy change that was not at all accepted by John J. McCloy. In fact McCloy refused to engage the Soviets based upon Kennedy's change of policy and I believe it was Harriman that would negotiate the Limited Test Ban Treaty that came about in August of 1963 based upon this new position.

2. In Kennedy's first press conference upon being sworn in as President he, in the first paragraph, announced the the resumption of American Nuclear testing and introduced John J. McCloy as his chief arms negotiator.

3. In November of 1959 McCloy, at a meeting of the Principle US arms negotiators discussed the international mood that was pressing the State Department to move toward a Limited Test Ban Treaty to be signed at the Paris summit that would take place in May of 1960. It was McCloy's view that this treaty would be detrimental to the security of the United States.

4. The Paris Summit did not take place after the U-2 incident derailed the detente that was moving forward at that time.

5. Lee Harvey Oswald defected to the Soviet Union in October of 1959.

6. Lee Harvey Oswald had been a radar operator who dwelt with U-2 operations and threatened, when he defected to the Soviet Union, to provide information on the U-2 to the Soviets.

7. The passenger list/s for Oswald's flight/s to Helsinki Finland were never provided to the Warren Commission which had as a member John J. McCloy who had cracked the Black Tom case, in part, by making a careful study of the international travel of the primary participants involved in the Black Tom case.

8. Major General Edwin Walker was traveling in Europe at the same time that Oswald was making his mysterious trip to Helsinki

9. Oswald could have gotten to Helsinki by going frome LaHarve to Paris by rail and taking the Paris, Stockholm, Helsinki route. If he would have done so Oswald would have spent less money and arrived in Helsinki one day earlier.

10. On the "extra" travel day where Oswald spent "extra" money, the US Ambassador in Helsinki, John Hickerson, sent a note to the State Department that remained classifiedt till uncovered by the House Select Comm. on Assissinations which state that a traveler could receive a visa into the Soviet Union via the Soviet Embassy in Helsinki within 24 hours if that traveler would first purchase Intourist Vouchers befor applying for their visa. This was the only Soviet Embassy in the world where this could be done and when Oswald showed up at the Soviet Embassy he had already purchased Soviet first class intourist vouchers.

11. G. P. Hemming, whom John Newman in his book "Oswald and the CIA" gives alot of credibility, told me in an email that Walker was in fact part of the insertion team that was used to put Oswald into the Soviet Union.

12. In June of 1959 Richard Helms was meeting with Whitney Shepardson in an effort to collect information about former WWII intelligence assets in and around Helsinki, Finland. This effort led to speculation by Wilho Tikander, former OSS Station Chief (and Dick Helms boss at the time) to speculate that Helms was about to run an off track intelligence operation via Helsinki some time in the near future. When Tikander's speculation was offered it was decided to keep him at arms length from the collection of further information.

13. Whitney Shepardson, along with his associate Dimitri de Mohrenschildt, started Radio Liberty, better known as Radio Free Europe.

14. Dimitri de Mohrenschildt's brother George would befriend Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas, Texas.

15. Whitney Shepardson was a founder of the Council on Foreign Relations and very close associate of John J. McCloy

16. John J. McCloy, as Asst. Sec. of War during WWII, would be in overall control of the development of US Intelligence including the creation of Secret Intelligence (with Whitney Shepardson in control and Richard Helms a part of). This organization and its fuction during and after WWII are only now having light shed upon it.

17. John J. McCloy was receiving intelligence information directly from John B. Hurt during WWII. This information was, for example, used by McCloy to suggest to President Truman that the Japanese would be willing to surrender to the US without the use of the A-Bomb if the US would agree to keep the Japanese Emperor....a condition or term that we ultimately did accept.

18. Lee Harvey Oswald attempted to contact someone named John Hurt while in custody after the assassiantion of JFK and only hours before he himself was killed.

19. Richard Helms was monitoring the movements of Lee Harvey Oswald prior to the assassiation of JFK

20. The Oswald 201 File is all screwed up!

From these fact some speculation based upon fact:

1. Fact: Edwin Walker performed several missions during WWII that John J. McCloy took a particularly keen interest in that included the recovery of the most sophisticated radar machine that the Japanese possesed and the recovery of Nazi Loot from Merker Mine.

2. Walker was positioned to assign the ship Stella Polaris to recover the Finnish Crypto Team that would be the foundation for the Venona Project, one of the most important Cold War Espionage coups of the time. The Venona Project was led by Frank Rowlett and Meridith Gardner who would later be tasked with investigating Lee Harvey Oswald for intelligence contacts.

3. Fact: Both Gardner and Rowlett worked closely with John B. Hurt during WWII.

4. Fact: John B. Hurt's post WWII intelligence work is still classified to this day.

5. Fact: Edwin Walker was repeatedly tasked by General Maxwell Taylor to do some of the most important and sensitive work dealing with National Security, including 2 of the 4 most important issues that Taylor had to deal with as Chief of Staff of the Army during the Eisenhower mission.

6. I speculate that Walker was on a plane with Oswald while he traveled toward Helsinki and would have been the type of trusted person that would have been tasked with making contact with Oswald

7. If true Walker would be one of the few people that would have meet face to face with Oswald and would have recognized him after the assassiation of JFK

8. If true, when Oswald first began his attempt to return to the USA from the Soviet Union a very few people would know that Oswald could identify Walker as the man who had provided the necessary information to enter the Soviet Union

9. If true, the possibility that Oswald, if he provided information that was used by the Soviets to successfully down the U-2 and scuttle the Paris Summit, could identify Walker could compromise US National Security....therefor Walker would have to be discredited, which he was!

10. If Oswald was used by McCloy in the conspiracy to assassinate JFK, Walker may have been the one man that, having met Oswald, could have known exactly who was behind the assassination of JFK and would therefor need to be somehow nutralized. The letter, placed in several easy to find places would be available to be found if Walker somehow decided to blow the whistle on the conspirators.

I have more but my computer time just ran out.....

Jim Root

[William Kelly]

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot.com/2009/12...university.html[/url]

Same question as Ron: How in your view does McCloy's letter neutralize Walker?

Steve

Steve and Ron

My research has led me to many different areas in search of conspirators involved in the assassination of John F. Kennedy and the whole tale that I have uncovered is rather complicated. The McCloy letter is of interest to me for many reasons, one of which is the date that it was written in comparison to the American University Speech (two days after).

There are certain undeniable facts that can here be associated to that particular time in history:

1. Kennedy's speech of June 10, 1963 was a public announcement of a policy change that was not at all accepted by John J. McCloy. In fact McCloy refused to engage the Soviets based upon Kennedy's change of policy and I believe it was Harriman that would negotiate the Limited Test Ban Treaty that came about in August of 1963 based upon this new position.

2. In Kennedy's first press conference upon being sworn in as President he, in the first paragraph, announced the the resumption of American Nuclear testing and introduced John J. McCloy as his chief arms negotiator.

3. In November of 1959 McCloy, at a meeting of the Principle US arms negotiators discussed the international mood that was pressing the State Department to move toward a Limited Test Ban Treaty to be signed at the Paris summit that would take place in May of 1960. It was McCloy's view that this treaty would be detrimental to the security of the United States.

4. The Paris Summit did not take place after the U-2 incident derailed the detente that was moving forward at that time.

5. Lee Harvey Oswald defected to the Soviet Union in October of 1959.

6. Lee Harvey Oswald had been a radar operator who dwelt with U-2 operations and threatened, when he defected to the Soviet Union, to provide information on the U-2 to the Soviets.

7. The passenger list/s for Oswald's flight/s to Helsinki Finland were never provided to the Warren Commission which had as a member John J. McCloy who had cracked the Black Tom case, in part, by making a careful study of the international travel of the primary participants involved in the Black Tom case.

8. Major General Edwin Walker was traveling in Europe at the same time that Oswald was making his mysterious trip to Helsinki

9. Oswald could have gotten to Helsinki by going frome LaHarve to Paris by rail and taking the Paris, Stockholm, Helsinki route. If he would have done so Oswald would have spent less money and arrived in Helsinki one day earlier.

10. On the "extra" travel day where Oswald spent "extra" money, the US Ambassador in Helsinki, John Hickerson, sent a note to the State Department that remained classifiedt till uncovered by the House Select Comm. on Assissinations which state that a traveler could receive a visa into the Soviet Union via the Soviet Embassy in Helsinki within 24 hours if that traveler would first purchase Intourist Vouchers befor applying for their visa. This was the only Soviet Embassy in the world where this could be done and when Oswald showed up at the Soviet Embassy he had already purchased Soviet first class intourist vouchers.

11. G. P. Hemming, whom John Newman in his book "Oswald and the CIA" gives alot of credibility, told me in an email that Walker was in fact part of the insertion team that was used to put Oswald into the Soviet Union.

12. In June of 1959 Richard Helms was meeting with Whitney Shepardson in an effort to collect information about former WWII intelligence assets in and around Helsinki, Finland. This effort led to speculation by Wilho Tikander, former OSS Station Chief (and Dick Helms boss at the time) to speculate that Helms was about to run an off track intelligence operation via Helsinki some time in the near future. When Tikander's speculation was offered it was decided to keep him at arms length from the collection of further information.

13. Whitney Shepardson, along with his associate Dimitri de Mohrenschildt, started Radio Liberty, better known as Radio Free Europe.

14. Dimitri de Mohrenschildt's brother George would befriend Lee Harvey Oswald in Dallas, Texas.

15. Whitney Shepardson was a founder of the Council on Foreign Relations and very close associate of John J. McCloy

16. John J. McCloy, as Asst. Sec. of War during WWII, would be in overall control of the development of US Intelligence including the creation of Secret Intelligence (with Whitney Shepardson in control and Richard Helms a part of). This organization and its fuction during and after WWII are only now having light shed upon it.

17. John J. McCloy was receiving intelligence information directly from John B. Hurt during WWII. This information was, for example, used by McCloy to suggest to President Truman that the Japanese would be willing to surrender to the US without the use of the A-Bomb if the US would agree to keep the Japanese Emperor....a condition or term that we ultimately did accept.

18. Lee Harvey Oswald attempted to contact someone named John Hurt while in custody after the assassiantion of JFK and only hours before he himself was killed.

19. Richard Helms was monitoring the movements of Lee Harvey Oswald prior to the assassiation of JFK

20. The Oswald 201 File is all screwed up!

From these fact some speculation based upon fact:

1. Fact: Edwin Walker performed several missions during WWII that John J. McCloy took a particularly keen interest in that included the recovery of the most sophisticated radar machine that the Japanese possesed and the recovery of Nazi Loot from Merker Mine.

2. Walker was positioned to assign the ship Stella Polaris to recover the Finnish Crypto Team that would be the foundation for the Venona Project, one of the most important Cold War Espionage coups of the time. The Venona Project was led by Frank Rowlett and Meridith Gardner who would later be tasked with investigating Lee Harvey Oswald for intelligence contacts.

3. Fact: Both Gardner and Rowlett worked closely with John B. Hurt during WWII.

4. Fact: John B. Hurt's post WWII intelligence work is still classified to this day.

5. Fact: Edwin Walker was repeatedly tasked by General Maxwell Taylor to do some of the most important and sensitive work dealing with National Security, including 2 of the 4 most important issues that Taylor had to deal with as Chief of Staff of the Army during the Eisenhower mission.

6. I speculate that Walker was on a plane with Oswald while he traveled toward Helsinki and would have been the type of trusted person that would have been tasked with making contact with Oswald

7. If true Walker would be one of the few people that would have meet face to face with Oswald and would have recognized him after the assassiation of JFK

8. If true, when Oswald first began his attempt to return to the USA from the Soviet Union a very few people would know that Oswald could identify Walker as the man who had provided the necessary information to enter the Soviet Union

9. If true, the possibility that Oswald, if he provided information that was used by the Soviets to successfully down the U-2 and scuttle the Paris Summit, could identify Walker could compromise US National Security....therefor Walker would have to be discredited, which he was!

10. If Oswald was used by McCloy in the conspiracy to assassinate JFK, Walker may have been the one man that, having met Oswald, could have known exactly who was behind the assassination of JFK and would therefor need to be somehow nutralized. The letter, placed in several easy to find places would be available to be found if Walker somehow decided to blow the whistle on the conspirators.

I have more but my computer time just ran out.....

Jim Root

[William Kelly]

Deja Vous all over again?

Obama's nuclear-free vision mired in debate</H1><H2 style="BACKGROUND: white; MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt">Pentagon officials have pushed back against the president's goals to shrink the U.S. stockpile and reduce the role of such weapons in foreign policy, sources say.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-na-obama-nuclear4-2010jan04,0,1799502.story

Thanks to David Mantik and Doug Horne for passing this story on.

By Paul Richter

January 4, 2010

Reporting from Washington - President Obama's ambitious plan to begin phasing out nuclear weapons has run up against powerful resistance from officials in the Pentagon and other U.S. agencies, posing a threat to one of his most important foreign policy initiatives.

Obama laid out his vision of a nuclear-free world in a speech in Prague, Czech Republic, last April, pledging that the U.S. would take dramatic steps to lead the way. Nine months later, the administration is locked in internal debate over a top-secret policy blueprint for shrinking the U.S. nuclear arsenal and reducing the role of such weapons in America's military strategy and foreign policy.

Officials in the Pentagon and elsewhere have pushed back against Obama administration proposals to cut the number of weapons and narrow their mission, according to U.S. officials and outsiders who have been briefed on the process.

In turn, White House officials, unhappy with early Pentagon-led drafts of the blueprint known as the Nuclear Posture Review, have stepped up their involvement in the deliberations and ordered that the document reflect Obama's preference for sweeping change, according to the U.S. officials and others, who described discussions on condition of anonymity because of their sensitivity and secrecy.

The Pentagon has stressed the importance of continued U.S. deterrence, an objective Obama has said he agrees with. But a senior Defense official acknowledged in an interview that some officials are concerned that the administration may be going too far. He described the debate as "spirited. . . . I think we have every possible point of view in the world represented."

The debate represents another collision between Obama's administration and key parts of the national security establishment, after scrapes over troop levels in Afghanistan and missile defenses in Eastern Europe.

But more than those issues, the future of U.S. nuclear weapons policy is directly tied to a series of initiatives Obama has advanced as a prime goal of his presidency.

"This is the first test of Obama's nuclear commitments," said former U.S. Ambassador Nancy E. Soderberg, who held senior foreign policy positions in the Clinton administration. "They can't afford to fall short at the outset."

Congress called for the nuclear review, the third such study since the end of the Cold War, placing the Pentagon in charge. Similar reviews were conducted near the beginning of the Clinton and the George W. Bush administrations, but Obama's is the first in which substantial changes stand to be made both in the number of U.S. nuclear weapons and in how they are used.

The government maintains an estimated 9,400 nuclear weapons, about 1,000 fewer than in 2002. But Obama believes that stepping up efforts to reduce the stockpile will give U.S. officials added credibility in their quest to strengthen the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, the cornerstone international arms-control pact.

The timing of the administration debate on the nuclear review is crucial, because a key international meeting on the treaty is planned for May in New York.

Also looming this year are other elements of Obama's nuclear agenda, including renewal of an arms-reduction treaty with Russia and a push for Senate ratification of a global ban on nuclear testing.

The nonproliferation treaty has been weakened in recent years by the spread of nuclear technologies to countries such as North Korea, Pakistan and Iran. But nonnuclear countries are wary of intrusive new rules, arguing that though the United States preaches nuclear arms control to others, it has failed to live up to its own promises to disarm.

For Obama, the stakes are high. The difficulties posed by challenges in Afghanistan, Pakistan, North Korea and the Middle East underscore the need for progress on arms control.

Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in part because of expectations that he would make good on his pledge to reduce the nuclear threat.

Obama would not be the first president to suffer setbacks on nuclear policy at the hands of politics and the U.S. bureaucracy. President Clinton and Defense Secretary Les Aspin had ambitious plans to overhaul nuclear policy. But their 1994 review quickly bogged down in internal disagreement, and ended largely by preserving the status quo.

Obama has vowed to move toward abolishing American nuclear weapons, but has acknowledged that the process may not be completed in his lifetime.

The president told world leaders at the United Nations General Assembly meeting in September that his administration would soon set out a new nuclear posture policy statement that "opens the door to deeper cuts and reduces the role of nuclear weapons."

But the process of doing so in Washington has encountered difficulty on several scores, according to those who described the talks.

A core issue under debate, officials said, is whether the United States should shed its long-standing ambiguity about whether it would use nuclear weapons in certain circumstances, in hopes that greater specificity would give foreign governments more confidence to make their own decisions on nuclear arms.

Some in the U.S. argue that the administration should assure foreign governments that it won't use nuclear weapons in reaction to a biological, chemical or conventional attack, but only in a nuclear exchange. Others argue that the United States should promise that it would never use nuclear weapons first, but only in response to a nuclear attack.

Pentagon officials question the value of such public declarations, contending that foreign governments may not even believe them, said the U.S. officials and others.

During the Cold War, Soviet officials declared that they would use nuclear weapons only in response to a nuclear attack. But when Soviet archives were opened, it became clear that "there were scenarios where they would have contemplated first use," said Charles Ferguson, a former State Department official who now heads the Federation of American Scientists.

The lingering skepticism that resulted could carry over to similar U.S. declarations, limiting their worth, some officials have argued.

A "no-first-use" policy may represent a bigger step than the Obama administration would be willing to take, private analysts said.

Instead, they think the administration might hedge its policy by saying, for instance, that the United States would use nuclear weapons only in situations that threatened its existence.

Another issue being debated is how to scale back the U.S. stockpile while continuing to provide nuclear protection to allies, in part to keep them from developing their own nuclear arsenals. The U.S. maintains hundreds of nuclear weapons overseas for such purposes.

For instance, some U.S. submarines in the Pacific carry nuclear-tipped torpedoes, which, Ferguson said, many Japanese officials like for their possible deterrent effect against a growing Chinese navy. Because nuclear weapons provide such assurance to a key ally, some U.S. officials are reluctant to cut back on the capability.

For similar reasons, some U.S. officials want to keep about 200 U.S. bombs at European bases, providing security for Eastern European countries.

Another debate is whether the U.S. needs three major delivery systems for its nuclear weapons -- long-range missiles, submarines and bombers. But eliminating one of them would face strong resistance from the affected military services and the lawmakers who support them.

The senior Defense official said the nuclear posture debate centers on the different ways toward the twin goals of nonproliferation and deterrence.

"We are not looking at whether to reduce the roles of nuclear weapons and whether to reduce [their numbers]," he said.

"We're looking at how."

paul.richter@latimes.com

Julian E. Barnes in the Washington bureau contributed to this report

Edited January 11, 2010 by William Kelly

[Jim Root]

William

Always appreciate you keeping these threads alive

Jim Root

[Jim Root]

Can I get any new observations on information I posted here?

Jim Root

[Paul Brancato]

Jim - nice to see you posting here. What evidence is there that a Helms was monitoring Oswald?

[Paul Brancato]

3 hours ago, Jim Root said:

Can I get any new observations on information I posted here?

Jim Root

Jim - I asked the question about Helms because he was one of the OSS agents stationed in Germany. If you suspect McCloy and Walker of colluding re Oswald, you must have considered the Nazi connection. Yet you don’t mention Dulles, who appears to be instrumental in setting up the connections to Nazis during and after WW2. The Gehlen organization became part of our Cold War strategy against the Soviets, and so many OSS and later CIA agents worked with Gehlen and other Nazis, including Helms, Shackley, Harvey. Operation Gladio and the Strategy of Tension appear to me to have grown out of this anti Soviet milieu. The French OAS had direct ties to Permindex and to European fascists, many living in Spain. Have you seen the recent posts here on new discoveries re Permindex by the Italian researcher Metta? 

 

[Jim Root]

Re Helms monitoring Oswald:  In the article titled, What Jane Roman Said by Jefferson Morely, we find that FBI agents monitoring Oswald's moves prior to the assassination of JFK had copies of their messages sent directly to the staff of Richard Helms. A problem with that is that a third note written by Agent Hosty (identifying exactly where Lee Harvey Oswald was working prior to the assassination) never became an official part of the Warren Commission report and has seemingly disappeared from the records. But that is a different subject.

Paul, I will differ with you as to Helms' OSS Station assignment during WWII (which is of particular interest to me).

Richard "Dick" Helms was assigned to the Stockholm OSS station and worked directly under a station chief named Wilho Tikander (sometimes spelled with a "Y").  Helms himself while at that station working under Timander was also part of "Special Intelligence" working under Whitney Shepardson. There was a person directly above Tikander in the OSS for Northern Europe who was named Calvin Bryce Hoover.  Together, this group was collectively involved and played key rolls in Operation Stella Polaris which led to the Venona Project.  It is this connection which so intrigues me.

Frank Roulett and Meredith Gardner would spend years in charge of the Venona Project but would, during the assassination investigation, be tasked with investigating Lee Harvey Oswald for intelligence connections.

Why is this strange?  Part of the intelligence that led to the Stella Polaris operation came through a man named John Hurt, whom both Rowlett and Gardner had worked with during WWII.

Jim Root