Jump to content
The Education Forum

David Morales


Recommended Posts

Thanks for the plugin Jim.

David Morales was in Dallas on November 22, 1963. I have two living witnesses who say he was there, Commander Nino Diaz and Rudy Junco who drove my father to the CIA's headquarters in Miami where my father stole photographs recording their stay outside a motel in Dallas.

I have also discovered that the Eugenio found in my father's address book was not Eugenio Martinez. I have made that mistake, and made a public announcement of that mistake in my book. I have questioned Mr. Martinez a number of times asking him if that was his name and number found in my father's little black book. He has denied ever working with my father, he went on to say that his sons have worked with my father, but he has not.

The Eugenio found in my father's address book is Eugenio Saldivar Xiques. This proves my father's early travels to Miami in the 60's. This Eugenio was caught in a firefight 10 miles off the coast of Cuba along with Tony Cuesta in 1966. In my father's address book under Eugenio's name is the word Dallas, and the only place the word Dallas is found is only under Eugenio's name. My father would later work with Eugenio Saldivar's father to plot infiltrations into Cuba, assassinate Fidel Castro, and free the political prisoners.

This information was provided by Richard Poyle who left Cuban prison before Eugenio or Tony was released, those two were released in 1978 a year after my father's murder. More about Tony Cuesta who was head of Comando L signed a unity agreement with RECE, Tony Calatayud was a leader in RECE who was a friend of my father who also signed a unity agreement with the Cubanos Unidos. I do hope I'm not confusing anyone.

Moving along, Mrs Joan Mellen is correct about a lot of things, but please allow me to point out it wasn't David Phillips who was the "mastermind" behind the counterintelligence on the FPCC, it was James McCord, who was also involved in the Big Project known as Watergate which was set into motion by both McCord and Barker. McCord CRP security coordinator worked for the Central Intelligence Agency, and in 1961, under his direction, started up a counterintelligence program which was launched against Oswald and the Fair Play for Cuba Committee.

The person who was head of CIA security at Langley and at JM/WAVE was James McCord, McCord is the man who created the counterintelligence against FPCC and Banister was reporting to McCord.

My father had photos of Hunt, Sturgis, Morales, Liddy and Barker. These photos were stamped 11/22/1963 on the reverse side of the photos. Folks who have seen these photos include, but are not limited to Richard Poyle, who was in Mexico on 11/21/1963 under orders of Oliver Fortson whose handler was Win Scott, station chief of Mexico, Poyle's cover was to visit his wife in Mexico at that time, problem is, she wasn't there, in Mexico, she was in Miami.

Others who have seen these photos are Nino Diaz, Rudy Junco, Aldo Vera, Tony Calatayud, Wilfredo Navarro, Jose Pujol, and my mother including many others. It is my belief that Tony Cuesta and Eugenio was in Dallas and they were the shooters. I know that they were there, Morales, Sturgis and Hunt. These guys would have been nowhere near the scene, and their involvement was delivering weapons and money, had Morales or Sturgis been caught in Dallas, or even questioned, a guy like Barker who was identified by Constable Seymour Weitzman as Secret Service would have had everything under control.

Hope this helps,

Scott Kaiser

Edited by Scott Kaiser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 395
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Back to the film. I would say his movements seem contrived because he doesn't really appear to be scratching anything to me. Perhaps it is a signal. I believe the theorized thin camera strap on his collar are really just the shadows because if you look at the man in front of him, he also appears to have a ring lining his collar.

You may be on to something, Thom. It could be Morales, the man in the film does have a rather long head as does Morales.

Hmmm, Paul T., if you're reading this. Perhaps in your hiatus, you might go to a city with a sizable black population, such as Houston, walk up to a black man there and inobtrusively ask to look at his palm.

Just a suggestion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to the film. I would say his movements seem contrived because he doesn't really appear to be scratching anything to me. Perhaps it is a signal. I believe the theorized thin camera strap on his collar are really just the shadows because if you look at the man in front of him, he also appears to have a ring lining his collar.

You may be on to something, Thom. It could be Morales, the man in the film does have a rather long head as does Morales.

Hmmm, Paul T., if you're reading this. Perhaps in your hiatus, you might go to a city with a sizable black population, such as Houston, walk up to a black man there and inobtrusively ask to look at his palm.

Just a suggestion.

Kirk,

Thanks for the feedback.

Regarding the "camera strap," I'm basing my conclusion on the following two things in the video:

1 ) the strap's brownish color as compared to the grey-blue color of the jacket

2 ) the strap's shininess, which is barely visible on one part of the strap, in certain frames

The key to being able to see what I'm talking about is to very quickly "freeze-frame" (click-click, click-click, ...) the heck out of it, starting around 3:54, and continuing on for several seconds. What I'm talking about is more obvious in certain frames than in others.

I'm also taking into consideration the fact that the "strap" looks identical in its thinness to the one visible in this 1966 photo of Morales in Peru. Note the shininess at the very top.

Pict_rfkstory_morales_1_2_sml.jpg

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to the film. I would say his movements seem contrived because he doesn't really appear to be scratching anything to me. Perhaps it is a signal. I believe the theorized thin camera strap on his collar are really just the shadows because if you look at the man in front of him, he also appears to have a ring lining his collar.

You may be on to something, Thom. It could be Morales, the man in the film does have a rather long head as does Morales.

Hmmm, Paul T., if you're reading this. Perhaps in your hiatus, you might go to a city with a sizable black population, such as Houston, walk up to a black man there and inobtrusively ask to look at his palm.

Just a suggestion.

Kirk,

Thanks for the feedback.

Regarding the "camera strap," I'm basing my conclusion on the following two things in the video:

1 ) the strap's brownish color as compared to the grey-blue color of the jacket

2 ) the strap's shininess, which is barely visible on one part of the strap, in certain frames

The key to being able to see what I'm talking about is to very quickly "freeze-frame" (click-click, click-click, ...) the heck out of it, starting around 3:54, and continuing on for several seconds. What I'm talking about is more obvious in certain frames than in others.

I'm also taking into consideration the fact that the "strap" looks identical in its thinness to the one visible in this 1966 photo of Morales in Peru. Note its shininess, especially in the area immediately below his hand..

https://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/8/86/Pict_rfkstory_morales_1_2_lrg.jpg

--Tommy :sun

In December of 1961, Morales was described in a CIA document as being 5'10" tall and weighing 220 lbs. He was 36 years old at the time.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=27001#relPageId=2&tab=page

--Tommy :sun

merged and bumped

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though Oswald, is foregrounded in the films and stills, he's walking downhill from neck-scratcher. Yet he still seems taller. Is not Oswald listed at 5' 9", and Morales at 5' !0". Call them both the same height on paper; is Oswald not taller on film?

Maybe there's a jet effect that can explain this.

See this film at about 1:20-1:24:

Edited by David Andrews
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Though Oswald, is foregrounded in the films and stills, he's walking downhill from neck-scratcher. Yet he still seems taller. Is not Oswald listed at 5' 9", and Morales at 5' !0". Call them both the same height on paper; is Oswald not taller on film?

Maybe there's a jet effect that can explain this.

See this film at about 1:20-1:24:

[...]

Wrong leafletting incident, David. The one in your film starting around 1:20 was on August 16, 1963, whereas the one I've been talking about was one week earlier, on August 9th (the one at which Oswald and the three Cubans were arrested).

Thanks for sharing this interesting "Oswald in New Orleans" viedo, though!

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back to the film. I would say his movements seem contrived because he doesn't really appear to be scratching anything to me. Perhaps it is a signal. I believe the theorized thin camera strap on his collar are really just the shadows because if you look at the man in front of him, he also appears to have a ring lining his collar.

You may be on to something, Thom. It could be Morales, the man in the film does have a rather long head as does Morales.

Hmmm, Paul T., if you're reading this. Perhaps in your hiatus, you might go to a city with a sizable black population, such as Houston, walk up to a black man there and inobtrusively ask to look at his palm.

Just a suggestion.

Kirk,

Thanks for the feedback.

Regarding the "camera strap," I'm basing my conclusion on the following two things in the video:

1 ) the strap's brownish color as compared to the grey-blue color of the jacket

2 ) the strap's shininess, which is barely visible on one part of the strap, in certain frames

The key to being able to see what I'm talking about is to very quickly "freeze-frame" (click-click, click-click, ...) the heck out of it, starting around 3:54, and continuing on for several seconds. What I'm talking about is more obvious in certain frames than in others.

I'm also taking into consideration the fact that the "strap" looks identical in its thinness to the one visible in this 1966 photo of Morales in Peru. Note its shininess, especially in the area immediately below his hand..

https://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/images/8/86/Pict_rfkstory_morales_1_2_lrg.jpg

--Tommy :sun

In December of 1961, Morales was described in a CIA document as being 5'10" tall and weighing 220 lbs. He was 36 years old at the time.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=27001#relPageId=2&tab=page

In a 1949 CIA document, he described himself as a football player, basketball player, baseball player, boxer, and swimmer.

In the same document he said he was 5'10" tall and weighed 190 pounds.

edited and bumped

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While it's certainly valid to question whether the individual in this video might be Morales, my opinion is that it's unlikely. It's difficult to believe that an experienced operator at David Morales' level would put himself in such close proximity to the designated patsy, out in public and with a video camera rolling. Oswald would have been handled strictly though the use of cut-outs and intermediaries. Morales was many things, but I don't think sloppy or foolish were among them.

Edited by Greg Wagner
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...