Jump to content
The Education Forum

David Morales


Recommended Posts

Tommy - please remind and elaborate on the photographer who took video at Walkers home and at Oswalds leafleting.

As for what I think, assuming it was Morales, I would say he was there on orders from CIA, probably Miami Station, perhaps Shackley, or McCord. Why? As part of the new anti fpcc operation, which Oswald was most likely part of. Inotherwords, at this point in time Oswald and Morales were on the same team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 395
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Tommy - please remind and elaborate on the photographer who took video at Walkers home and at Oswalds leafleting.

As for what I think, assuming it was Morales, I would say he was there on orders from CIA, probably Miami Station, perhaps Shackley, or McCord. Why? As part of the new anti fpcc operation, which Oswald was most likely part of. Inotherwords, at this point in time Oswald and Morales were on the same team.

Well, yes, Paul.

I only wonder (if it was Morales in the Jim Doyle's film) whether he had "gone rogue" at this point, of it he was there on the orders of his higher-ups in The Agency.

The other amateur photographer who got Oswald and the police (and a glimpse of Bringuier) on film that afternoon in New Orleans was a guy by the name of John T. Martin (fwiw, I've found a guy by the name of John Timothy Martin of the right age living in Saint Paul, Minnesota). Google "Jack S. Martin Sr." on our JFK Assassination Debate search engine and you'll find a thread which has a lot of information on all of the Jack / John Martins associated with the assassination, including this John T. Martin. You can view his footage of Walker's house and Oswald's arrest here: http://emuseum.jfk.org/view/objects/asitem/86/8/title-desc?t:state:flow=8ab3f9e7-268b-4cf8-861a-42b540fb31d8

Thanks for your continuing interest,

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given his job and daily duties its difficult to see Morales in New Orleans, in the vicinity of Oswald in anything related to a sanctioned CIA operation....related to joint CIA / FBI operations against Cuba or even any

of the new propaganda operations. You don't use a Chief of Operations for that sort of thing, not when you still had missions going into and out of Cuban waters on a daily basis as well as a lot of other

intel collection activities going on.

On the other hand, Morales was known to be very hands on in those things that he was personally involved with and if someone had proposed using Oswald for some action against JFK I can

see him wanting to take a personal look at how the kid behaved on the street and under pressure....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given his job and daily duties its difficult to see Morales in New Orleans, in the vicinity of Oswald in anything related to a sanctioned CIA operation....related to joint CIA / FBI operations against Cuba or even any of the new propaganda operations. You don't use a Chief of Operations for that sort of thing, not when you still had missions going into and out of Cuban waters on a daily basis as well as a lot of other intel collection activities going on.

On the other hand, Morales was known to be very hands on in those things that he was personally involved with and if someone had proposed using Oswald for some action against JFK I can see him wanting to take a personal look at how the kid behaved on the street and under pressure....

Yet IMHO, Larry, given David Morales' job and daily duties -- i.e. assassinating Communist leaders in South America, and failing utterly to assassinate Fidel Castro, though he tried for YEARS -- I find it easier to see David Morales in New Orleans.

The action in New Orleans -- as Jim Garrison revealed in 1968 -- circled around 544 Camp Street. This was Guy Banister's stomping grounds, partially financed by Carlos Marcello in a personal battle with RFK. It was white hot.

Guy Banister may not have been working directly with Operation Mongoose anymore -- but the memories were still fresh, and the vocabulary was still in the air, given what Jack S. Martin told Jim Garrison. Also, there were plenty of Cuban Exiles at the refugee training camp near Lake Pontchartrain.

It's easy for me to imagine David Morales taking an interest in this operation -- not necessarily to kill JFK (at first) -- but certainly as a covert means of killing Fidel Castro -- even though JFK had overtly renounced such plots.

It's easy to believe that David Morales would disrespect JFK's mandate simply because of the pain that David Morales had suffered during the Bay of Pigs.

So, we don't need to presume that the CIA high-command sanctioned these Civilian Plots against Fidel Castro which would eventually be twisted back against JFK, as Jim Garrison ably traced it.

Jim Garrison made lots of mistakes -- but he also got a lot of things exactly right. The identification of 544 Camp Street was one of them. It's easy for me to imagine David Morales paying some attention to Guy Banister and the Cuban Exiles in Louisiana.

If Tommy is right and David Morales was Neck-Scratcher, then we all seem to be on the same page with this one.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul, you still need to do some homework on Morales...and since you have SWHT you should be easily be able to do better than what you just posted. What you described was not at all Morale's job at JMWAVE, other than the fact that his operational duties would have provided supplies, transportation, housing and logistics for the very limited Roselli/Harvey projects ...limited in both manpower and the number of its actual missions. And those had dropped off to virtually nothing by the summer of 1963, if anything the exiles involved were simply in a holding pattern in their own camp. You have to pay attention to the chronology, what Morales was actually doing in the summer of 1963....and that's fairly easy today unlike back when Fonzi was working on it. You can find dozens of JMWAVE operations documents involving Morales and they give a good view of his job - which was as the manager of the largest CIA base in the world at that point in time. Second in command to Shackley and operationally responsible for all the missions from infiltration and exfilitration to the activities of the AMMOTs. And no doubt swamped with paperwork and budget issues like any manager at that level. Just read the TILT memos that are signed and countersigned by Morales and get a real feel for his activities....for that matter, somebody might want to go through those memos, do some date stamping against the NO photo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul, you still need to do some homework on Morales...and since you have SWHT you should be easily be able to do better than what you just posted. What you described was not at all Morale's job at JMWAVE, other than the fact that his operational duties would have provided supplies, transportation, housing and logistics for the very limited Roselli/Harvey projects ...limited in both manpower and the number of its actual missions. And those had dropped off to virtually nothing by the summer of 1963, if anything the exiles involved were simply in a holding pattern in their own camp. You have to pay attention to the chronology, what Morales was actually doing in the summer of 1963....and that's fairly easy today unlike back when Fonzi was working on it. You can find dozens of JMWAVE operations documents involving Morales and they give a good view of his job - which was as the manager of the largest CIA base in the world at that point in time. Second in command to Shackley and operationally responsible for all the missions from infiltration and exfilitration to the activities of the AMMOTs. And no doubt swamped with paperwork and budget issues like any manager at that level. Just read the TILT memos that are signed and countersigned by Morales and get a real feel for his activities....for that matter, somebody might want to go through those memos, do some date stamping against the NO photo.

Well, Larry, I realize that you wish to give a lop-sided preference to released CIA documents -- yet one must still bear in mind that there are unreleased CIA documents allowing much room for speculation.

The released CIA documents tell us what David Morales was doing in the CIA during the summer of 1963 -- as far as the CIA high-command knew it.

Yet it's fairly certain that those same CIA documents would never tell us what David Morales was doing in his SPARE TIME, without any knowledge of the CIA high-command.

I think it's naïve to imagine that David Morales logged every hour with the CIA high-command, given his personal animosity towards JFK and RFK. It seems to me that if (and only if) David Morales was involved in a Civilian Plot to get JFK and RFK, that he would NEVER ADMIT IT OFFICIALLY.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul, you really do throw terms like "CIA high command" around in a pretty broad fashion. The documents I'm talking about are everyday work documents, the sort any manager deals with

on a routine basis. They tell you when Morales is in the office and what he was working on at the time. And of course they only tell you bits and pieces of that... But they do tell you

what his day job was - and give you some clue as to when he might have been away from Miami. This has nothing to do with animosity, or attitude, it has to do with holding a job.

For those who want to know what Morales was really doing in the summer of 63 and when he might have been able to work in his own private agenda to check out Oswald based on

info coming back from New Orleans though his exile contacts....there is work that could be done on that....if you wanted to dig into it; then again just speculating is easier and probably

more enjoyable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul, you really do throw terms like "CIA high command" around in a pretty broad fashion. The documents I'm talking about are everyday work documents, the sort any manager deals with on a routine basis. They tell you when Morales is in the office and what he was working on at the time. And of course they only tell you bits and pieces of that... But they do tell you what his day job was - and give you some clue as to when he might have been away from Miami. This has nothing to do with animosity, or attitude, it has to do with holding a job.

For those who want to know what Morales was really doing in the summer of 63 and when he might have been able to work in his own private agenda to check out Oswald based on info coming back from New Orleans though his exile contacts....there is work that could be done on that....if you wanted to dig into it; then again just speculating is easier and probably more enjoyable.

Well, Larry, I think you're partly agreeing with me here.

You already know that I'm a part-time JFK buff, and not a full-time researcher. So of course, I'll wait for serious researchers to dig deeper into David Morales' schedule and locations in 1963.

I realize that David Morales had to hold down his job -- yet a job is only 40 hours a week -- and IMHO the interesting stuff is what David Morales did in his SPARE TIME.

I'm not entirely alone in my speculations. Bill Simpich has named David Morales as a suspect in the Impersonation of LHO in Mexico City in early October 1963 (State Secret: Wiretapping in Mexico City (2014)).

That's crucial.

Now, the CONTENT and the DATES of what David Morales was doing in that Impersonation matches closely with the CONTENT and the DATES of what Guy Banister was doing with LHO in New Orleans just weeks before that.

The close match of the CONTENT and DATES of activity between David Morales (if Bill Simpich is correct) and Guy Banister with regard to LHO is as close as I've been able to locate these two enemies of JFK.

I think this is interesting, and I want to look deeper into it. I realize there won't be any official CIA documents on it -- for one thing, it might just be that David Morales did this entirely on his own accord -- without any knowledge whatsoever on the part of anybody higher than him inside the CIA.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited by Paul Trejo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Given his job and daily duties its difficult to see Morales in New Orleans, in the vicinity of Oswald in anything related to a sanctioned CIA operation....related to joint CIA / FBI operations against Cuba or even any

of the new propaganda operations. You don't use a Chief of Operations for that sort of thing, not when you still had missions going into and out of Cuban waters on a daily basis as well as a lot of other

intel collection activities going on.

On the other hand, Morales was known to be very hands on in those things that he was personally involved with and if someone had proposed using Oswald for some action against JFK I can

see him wanting to take a personal look at how the kid behaved on the street and under pressure....

Larry,

You know I highly respect your opinions, so ...

That's encouraging!

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul, that's the sort of question that requires a much fuller answer than can be given on a forum post....I need to ask you if you have read either NEXUS or Shadow Warfare, where I deal with Morales' career

at length over decades?

The short answer lies in how you define "rogue". I find no evidence that he conceived of any major operation using CIA assets entirely outside his various assignments. On the other there is a good body of at least

circumstantial evidence that he enabled and incited individuals the Agency was working with to go way beyond the charter and personally endorsed those activities...activities that would

be interpreted as unsanctioned at headquarters level extending to torture, murder and political assassination. As a devout anti-communist I think its fair to say the Morales felt that there was war

going on and such activities were realities of warfare....to be perfectly honest if you read the report of the Lindbergh study group you find pretty much the same attitude, the necessity to abandon ethics

and morals to fight on a level playing field.

So...I find Morales involved with third party activities going way beyond those sanctioned in CIA operations. I suspect that in Latin America Morales may even have become personally involved on occasion,

oversight was virtually non-existent there when he was essentially doing the formative work that evolved into Condor. What he might have personally done in a similar vein in Vietnam is a matter of

opinion. I also suspect Morales directly influenced a number of individuals who themselves were involved in a good number of things the Agency would never have sanctioned....or at least wanted

to see reported back up the chain of command.

Edited by Larry Hancock
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paul, that's the sort of question that requires a much fuller answer than can be given on a forum post....I need to ask you if you have read either NEXUS or Shadow Warfare, where I deal with Morales' career

at length over decades?

The short answer lies in how you define "rogue". I find no evidence that he conceived of any major operation using CIA assets entirely outside his various assignments. On the other there is a good body of at least

circumstantial evidence that he enabled and incited individuals the Agency was working with to go way beyond the charter and personally endorsed those activities...activities that would

be interpreted as unsanctioned at headquarters level extending to torture, murder and political assassination. As a devout anti-communist I think its fair to say the Morales felt that there was war

going on and such activities were realities of warfare....to be perfectly honest if you read the report of the Lindbergh study group you find pretty much the same attitude, the necessity to abandon ethics

and morals to fight on a level playing field.

So...I find Morales involved with third party activities going way beyond those sanctioned in CIA operations. I suspect that in Latin America Morales may even have become personally involved on occasion,

oversight was virtually non-existent there when he was essentially doing the formative work that evolved into Condor. What he might have personally done in a similar vein in Vietnam is a matter of

opinion. I also suspect Morales directly influenced a number of individuals who themselves were involved in a good number of things the Agency would never have sanctioned....or at least wanted

to see reported back up the chain of command.

Larry,

Thanks for your continuing input on this thread.

--Tommy :sun

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find no evidence that he conceived of any major operation using CIA assets entirely outside his various assignments.

And, no one ever will, that part of his operations are shrouded in secrecy, no need to mention his position in Laos

.

"On the other there is a good body of at least circumstantial evidence that he enabled and incited individuals the Agency was working with to go way beyond the charter and personally endorsed those activities."

No need to mention Operation Tilt, Tide PBSUCCESS otherwise known as Bayo-Pawley where an entire commando team was loss during infiltration.

"So...I find Morales involved with [third party activities] going way beyond those sanctioned in CIA operations."

What do you call Alpha 66 and the Cubanos Unidos?

"What he might have personally done in a similar vein in Vietnam is a matter of opinion. "

​What do you consider the assassination of the Diem brothers carried out by the CIA with Morales in VN over the same weekend Kennedy released his poorly drafted cable? Just a matter of opinion?

" I also suspect Morales directly influenced a number of individuals who themselves were involved in a good number of things the Agency would never have sanctioned"

Again, you mean like the Bayo-Pawley mission?

Edited by Scott Kaiser
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know Gordon Winslow personally knows Eugenio Martinez, he tells me he has complete confidence in Mr. Martinez and is one of the few he would believe, that's what he tells me. I wonder how many people here besides Mr. Winslow sat down with Mr. Martinez and asked him about his mission in the Bayo-Pawley plot, and since my father worked with Pawley, Martino and Morales in 1973 and perhaps even at some earlier point in time. How much information do you suppose Mr. Martinez was willing to share?

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...