Larry Hancock Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 The HSCA investigated that charge in detail and recovered the records from New York, it proved to be a totally unsubstantiated rumor. You should be able to find the HSCA reports on line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 (edited) The HSCA investigated that charge in detail and recovered the records from New York, it proved to be a totally unsubstantiated rumor. You should be able to find the HSCA reports on line. LARRY HANCOCK+++++++++++++ Havent found it yet. http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/select-committee-report/part-1d.html Seems more rumor then fact. I went with Skolnick. http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/S%20Disk/Skolnick%20Sherman%20Part%202/Item%2012.pdf Skolnick also says that Vallee's car, bearing New York license plate 311 ORF, was "linked or registered to Lee Harvey Op wald." Attempts by a Chicago TV station to trace the plates turned up an FBI "freeze, on this vital information. Others who have tried to learn about these license plates have had sodden threatening visits from the FBI, accord- Eng to Skolnick. ====== Skolnick isnt the best source at times.+++++++++ From JFK and the Unspeakable, by James W Douglass https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.assassination.jfk/qVHNU8sWDxQ Thomas Arthur Vallee was arrested on suspicion of planning theassassination of President Kennedy on the day Kennedy was due toparticipate in a motorcade through Chicago. Briefly, Vallee shared thefollowing similarities with Oswald: he was an ex-Marine with anunstable history and he had been assigned to a U-2 base in Japan, CampOtsu. Page 205: "In August 1963, as Oswald was preparing to move from NewOrleans back to Dallas, Vallee moved from New York back to Chicago.Just as Oswald got a job in a warehouse right over Kennedy's futuremotorcade route in Dallas, so, too, did Vallee get a job in awarehouse right over Kennedy's future motorcade route in Chicago. LikeOswald in Dallas (before his summer in New Orleans), Vallee foundemployment as a printer. He was hired by IPP Litho-Plate, located at625 West Jackson Boulevard in Chicago. " Douglass goes on to say, after personally visiting the site, Vallee'slocation at IPP Litho-Plate gave him a "nearer, clearer" view of theNovember 2 Chicago Motorcade, as it was on the third floor. Lieutenant Moyland, a member of the Chicago PD, was responsible forVallee being put under Secret Service surveillance, and therefore hisarrest. Moyland ate in a cafeteria on Wilson Avenue, Chicago,regularly. The manager informed him one day in late October, 1963 thata regular customer had been making threatening remarks against Kennedyfor some time. Moyland waited for the customer at the appropriate timeand went over to his table to engage him in conversation. "He told theman firmly that nothing good could come from the remarks he was makingabout President Kennedy. His behaviour could in fact lead to seriousconsequences." Lieutenant Moyland then left the cafetaria and phonedthe Secret Service. Berkely Moyland was then phone back by an official in the TreasuryDept (with jurisdiction over the Secret Service) who committed him toabsolute silence on the matter. He was given stringent orders not towrite anything about it, talk with anyone about it, and just to forgetall about it. Netherless in his final years Moyland shared the storywith his son, who shared it with Douglass in an interview. Thomas Arthur Vallee was arrested on a pretext 2 and a half hoursbefore Kennedy was due to touch down in Dallas. Evidence of an intelligence connection with Vallee? from page 203 -"Vallee drove a 1962 Ford Falcon with the New York licence plate31-10RF. After JFK's assassination, NBC news learned of Vallee'sarrest on Nov 2nd in Chicago. Luke Christopher Hester, an NBC Chicagoemployee, asked his father in law, Hugh Larkin, a retired New YorkCity police officer, to check on Vallee's licence plate. Larkin askedhis old friends in the New York PD to do a check on the plate. Theycame back to Larkin saying the licence plate was "frozen" and "onlythe FBI could obtain the information." The registration for thelicence plate on the car Thomas Arthur Vallee was driving at the timeof his arrest was classified - restricted to US intelligenceagencies." So we have another "Lone Nut" with a Marine background, who had beenstationed at a U-2 airbase in Japan (the U-2 was commandered by theCIA), links to the intelligence services and who just happened to finda job in a warehouse conveniently overlooking the proposed motorcaderoute of Kennedy through downtown Chicago. Just another coincidence I suppose, in a long, long line of'coincidences" regarding this case. PS Regarding the curious four-man sniper team in Chicago, of which twowere arrested, Douglass has this to say - "However, it was not Moylandbut an FBI informant named "Lee" whose alert disrupted the morecritical four-man rifle team that represented the real threat toKennedy, and thus to potential patsy Vallee as well." ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ TIPSTER LEE ?????? = Jim DiEugenio ==== The man who was supposed to be accused of the crime was Thomas Vallee. Like Oswald, Valle was a former Marine who was stationed at a U-2 base in Japan. Vallee supposedly was resentful toward Kennedy because of the Bay of Pigs disaster. Curiously, the codename of the FBI informant who tipped off the Secret Service was “Lee.” The existence of a prior assassination plot with parallels to Kennedy’s killing in Dallas would seem to be relevant if one were exploring a wider conspiracy, but there was not one word about this episode in the Warren Report //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// .http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/20557-16-mind-blowing-facts-about-who-really-killed-jfk === On November 2, 1963, Kennedy was set to appear at the Army/Air Force football game in Chicago at 11:40 a.m. At the Chicago Secret Service Bureau, Special Agent in Charge Maurice Martineau informed agents about reports of assassins on October 30. Martineau was repeating a tip from the FBI, in which an informant identifying as "Lee" talked about a four-man sniper team of "rightwing para-military fanatics" with high-powered rifles, who would shoot at Kennedy as his motorcade was driving from O'Hare down the Northwest Expressway, around a slow loop off the highway exit of what is now ironically known as the JFK Expressway. Edited July 11, 2014 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 (edited) Per Bolden the Secret Service coverup was orchestrated by the Secret Service HDQ in Washington DC. There were the Tampa and Chicago plots (which I have already mentioned in this THREAD) indicating a larger organizational operation. Lopez fits a pattern. Thomas Vallee in Chicago drove 1962 Ford Falcon that registered in the name of Lee Harvey Oswald. THUS THERE IS NO RUSH TO JUDGEMENT. I dont know why you dont see the higher level CIA operation. Its possible that your conservative ideology precludes you from criticism of police/military (CIA) organizations. (Gaal) Steve, I'll begin by saying that the term 'Conservative' has many meanings -- as many as the term, 'Liberal.' Some of the qualifiers of 'Conservative' include 'ultra-Conservative' and 'extreme Conservative' and 'moderate Conservative' -- so it's an ambiguous term. I'm Conservative enough to belong to a Methodist Church. I'm not so Conservative as to belong to a so-called Tea Party, or to believe that the CIA must always be right and correct in everything it has done, or even that it should exist under the US Constitution. I don't willy-nilly defend Allen Dulles and the CIA. My position is that if somebody is going to ATTACK Allen Dulles and the CIA, I will expect a SOLID case -- not one based on rumor and innuendo, e.g. the kind of case upon with the Lone Nut theory was based. Those who object to convicting Lee Harvey Oswald as the Lone Nut murderer of JFK on the basis of the weak evidence presented by the Warren Commission, should also be held to their own high standards of evidence if they are going to charge somebody ELSE. I admit that you raise some interesting and important questions, Steve, but I still think you're too quick to draw the conclusions that you draw. Take for example the Chicago plot, which like the Florida plota, has much evidence to confirm it. In my reading of the history, there were (conservatively speaking) DOZENS of plots to kill JFK going on in 1963. More to your point, let's look at the testimony of Bolden, which was discredited by the HSCA, and look deeper into the Ford Falcon that was driven by Thomas Valee, allegedly registered to Lee Harvey Oswald. One can try to make a quick conclusion -- that the very name of Lee Harvey Oswald circulating among the CIA before the JFK murder is "proof" of a high-level CIA plot to murder JFK. But there are many other explanations. For one, we know from FBI reports that the name of Lee Harvey Oswald was already circulating in the USA regarding gun-running in 1959, when Lee Oswald was still in the USSR. Rather than jump to the absurd conclusion that the CIA was plotting to kill JFK as early as 1959, before he was even President -- one should pause. The CIA admitted that they were interested in interviewing Lee Harvey Oswald for possible employment as a bona fide CIA Agent. Oswald was very cooperative with the CIA, and evidently wanted very much to enjoy the high salaries (and the prestige) of working for the CIA as a full-time Agent. It is likely that Oswald gave them this impression before he entered the USSR -- and even gave them permission to use his name and birth certificate as they saw fit. I say this is likely because Lee Harvey Oswald's cooperation in his own sheep-dipping (framing) as a Communist officer of the Fair Play for Cuba Committee in NOLA (where there was no such genuine chapter of the FPCC) is best explained by a bogus offer by fake CIA Agents (e.g. boasting, low-level CIA assets) that Oswald was being groomed for a job with the CIA. So -- based on this scenario, it is not impossible that Oswald's name would be used in CIA activities. AND THEN ONCE THAT BALL STARTED ROLLING, THE STREET-PUNKS AND OTHER LOW-LEVEL CIA ASSETS INVOLVED IN THE FIDEL CASTRO CRISIS, would also begin to exploit the name of Lee Harvey Oswald for their own illegal (and non-CIA) activities. (This is also a viable explanation for the Oswald "doubles" that has such a wide literature.) In other words, Steve, all by itself the Thomas Valee episode with the Ford Falcon does not PROVE that the CIA was setting up Lee Harvey Oswald as a patsy. (I will go further and note that Thomas Valee was once a member of the John Birch Society.) I'll go even further than that. After re-reading Joan Mellen's excellent, FAREWELL TO JUSTICE (2005) I find too many gaps in her theory that Fred Crisman was a CIA Agent who was grooming Thomas Edward Beckham to be a patsy. There are simply too many other interpretations of the same data. Fred Crisman was clearly a boasting xxxx who worked as a LOW-LEVEL CIA asset AT BEST. I agree with Joan Mellen that he, along with Jack S. Martin and Thomas Beckham were CERTAINLY involved in the JFK murder. I only disagree with her as regards their CIA status -- I say they were below the level of ROGUES. Best regards, --Paul Trejo Edited July 11, 2014 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 (edited) The HSCA investigated that charge in detail and recovered the records from New York, it proved to be a totally unsubstantiated rumor. You should be able to find the HSCA reports on line. LARRY HANCOCK +++++++++++++ Havent found it yet. http://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/select-committee-report/part-1d.html Seems more rumor then fact. I went with Skolnick. http://jfk.hood.edu/Collection/Weisberg%20Subject%20Index%20Files/S%20Disk/Skolnick%20Sherman%20Part%202/Item%2012.pdf Skolnick also says that Vallee's car, bearing New York license plate 311 ORF, was "linked or registered to Lee Harvey Opwald." Attempts by a Chicago TV station to trace the plates turned up an FBI "freeze, on this vital information. Others who have tried to learn about these license plates have had sodden threatening visits from the FBI, according to Skolnick. [emphasis added by T. Graves] ====== Skolnick isnt the best source at times. +++++++++ From JFK and the Unspeakable, by James W Douglass https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/alt.assassination.jfk/qVHNU8sWDxQ Thomas Arthur Vallee was arrested on suspicion of planning the assassination of President Kennedy on the day Kennedy was due to participate in a motorcade through Chicago. Briefly, Vallee shared the following similarities with Oswald: he was an ex-Marine with an unstable history and he had been assigned to a U-2 base in Japan, Camp Otsu. Page 205: "In August 1963, as Oswald was preparing to move from New Orleans back to Dallas, Vallee moved from New York back to Chicago. Just as Oswald got a job in a warehouse right over Kennedy's future motorcade route in Dallas, so, too, did Vallee get a job in a warehouse right over Kennedy's future motorcade route in Chicago. Like Oswald in Dallas (before his summer in New Orleans), Vallee found employment as a printer. He was hired by IPP Litho-Plate, located at 625 West Jackson Boulevard in Chicago." Douglass goes on to say, after personally visiting the site, Vallee's location at IPP Litho-Plate gave him a "nearer, clearer" view of the November 2 Chicago Motorcade, as it was on the third floor. Lieutenant Moyland, a member of the Chicago PD, was responsible for Vallee being put under Secret Service surveillance, and therefore his arrest. Moyland ate in a cafeteria on Wilson Avenue, Chicago, regularly. The manager informed him one day in late October, 1963 that a regular customer had been making threatening remarks against Kennedy for some time. Moyland waited for the customer at the appropriate time and went over to his table to engage him in conversation. "He told the man firmly that nothing good could come from the remarks he was making about President Kennedy. His behaviour could in fact lead to serious consequences." Lieutenant Moyland then left the cafetaria and phoned the Secret Service. Berkely Moyland was then phone back by an official in the Treasury Dept (with jurisdiction over the Secret Service) who committed him to absolute silence on the matter. He was given stringent orders not to write anything about it, talk with anyone about it, and just to forget all about it. Netherless in his final years Moyland shared the story with his son, who shared it with Douglass in an interview. Thomas Arthur Vallee was arrested on a pretext 2 and a half hours before Kennedy was due to touch down in Dallas. Evidence of an intelligence connection with Vallee? from page 203 - "Vallee drove a 1962 Ford Falcon with the New York licence plate 31-10RF. After JFK's assassination, NBC news learned of Vallee's arrest on Nov 2nd in Chicago. Luke Christopher Hester, an NBC Chicago employee, asked his father in law, Hugh Larkin, a retired New York City police officer, to check on Vallee's licence plate. Larkin asked his old friends in the New York PD to do a check on the plate. They came back to Larkin saying the licence plate was "frozen" and "only the FBI could obtain the information." The registration for the licence plate on the car Thomas Arthur Vallee was driving at the time of his arrest was classified - restricted to US intelligence agencies." So we have another "Lone Nut" with a Marine background, who had been stationed at a U-2 airbase in Japan (the U-2 was commandered by the CIA), links to the intelligence services and who just happened to find a job in a warehouse conveniently overlooking the proposed motorcade route of Kennedy through downtown Chicago. Just another coincidence I suppose, in a long, long line of 'coincidences" regarding this case. PS Regarding the curious four-man sniper team in Chicago, of which two were arrested, Douglass has this to say - "However, it was not Moyland but an FBI informant named "Lee" whose alert disrupted the more critical four-man rifle team that represented the real threat to Kennedy, and thus to potential patsy Vallee as well." ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ TIPSTER LEE ?????? = Jim DiEugenio ==== The man who was supposed to be accused of the crime was Thomas Vallee. Like Oswald, Valle was a former Marine who was stationed at a U-2 base in Japan. Vallee supposedly was resentful toward Kennedy because of the Bay of Pigs disaster. Curiously, the codename of the FBI informant who tipped off the Secret Service was “Lee.” The existence of a prior assassination plot with parallels to Kennedy’s killing in Dallas would seem to be relevant if one were exploring a wider conspiracy, but there was not one word about this episode in the Warren Report //////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// .http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/20557-16-mind-blowing-facts-about-who-really-killed-jfk === On November 2, 1963, Kennedy was set to appear at the Army/Air Force football game in Chicago at 11:40 a.m. At the Chicago Secret Service Bureau, Special Agent in Charge Maurice Martineau informed agents about reports of assassins on October 30. Martineau was repeating a tip from the FBI, in which an informant identifying as "Lee" talked about a four-man sniper team of "rightwing para-military fanatics" with high-powered rifles, who would shoot at Kennedy as his motorcade was driving from O'Hare down the Northwest Expressway, around a slow loop off the highway exit of what is now ironically known as the JFK Expressway. Oh My God! The FBI threatened to sodomize the people looking into the issue of Vallee's license plates??? That's horrible! LOL --Tommy Edited July 11, 2014 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 Jack S. Martin and Thomas Beckham were CERTAINLY involved in the JFK murder. I only disagree with her as regards their CIA status -- I say they were below the level of ROGUES. // Paul Trejo +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Low level assets can be run by high level CIA officers. RE: HUNT and the burglar assistants Watergate. +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ I agree with Jim DeEugenio assessment ROGUES have TSD help ?? Got to be kidding. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ NEXUS by Larry Hancock Reviewed by Jim DeEugenio Then came the icing on the cake: the back channel. This refers to Kennedy’s negotiations with Castro through reporter Lisa Howard, diplomat William Attwood, and French journalist Jean Daniel. The goal was to normalize relations with Cuba. This began in January 1963 and continued all the way up to Kennedy’s death. National Security Advisor McGeorge Bundy and Helms were opposed to it. Defense Secretary Robert McNamara looked at it as a way of weaning Castro from the Soviets. In fact, McNamara said the end result could be an ending of the American trade embargo in return for Castro removing all Soviet personnel from the island. (Hancock, pgs. 99-100) Averill Harriman from the State Department was also for it. But he said, “Unfortunately, the CIA is still in charge of Cuba.” (ibid, p. 102) Hancock interestingly notes that Bundy was part of the movement to block any continuance of the back channel when LBJ became president.Since Helms knew about the back channel, and since the NSA likely was picking up some of Howard’s phone calls, Hancock here makes an interesting assumption. Since Angleton and Helms were good friends, and since Angleton’s domain was counter-intelligence, Angleton very likely knew about the back channel. Through both Helms and the NSA. Since he and Harvey were close in 1963, Angleton had to have told him.Hancock then advances some interesting evidence that at least three of the Cuban exiles knew about the back channel. They were Rolando Otero, Felipe Vidal Santiago, and Bernardo DeTorres. (Ibid, pgs. 114-15, 122)Hancock then begins to lay out the plotting around Oswald in the summer of 1963. He clearly implies that this was done to kill off the back channel, which it did. As the time comes to move the plot to Mexico City and Dallas, the occurrences of Oswald “doubles” begin to manifest itself. The author notes the famous Sylvia Odio incident and states that the Odio family was associated with Ray’s group called JURE. And, in fact, Sylvia had just visited with Ray and his assistant that summer. So this may have been an attempt to associate Oswald with the CIA’s least favorite exile group. From here on in, which is about the last thirty pages or so of the book, I thought Hancock lost sight of his goal. He now begins to lose the macro view of the assassination, that is, from the top down; and he begins a micro view. That is how the ground level worked in Dallas with Ruby as a featured player. Not to say that this information is not interesting. Much of it is. I was especially taken by the work of Anna Marie Kuhn Walko on Roy Hargraves. The substance of this is that Hargraves had Secret Service credentials and was in Dallas in November of 1963. Hancock does not really recover the macro focus until the very end where he mentions that Harvey’s files were gone through after his death. (Hancock, p. 186) And he finalizes the work with a nice closing quote from Phillips saying that JFK was likely killed in a conspiracy, likely utilizing American intelligence officers. (ibid)I have some other disagreements. Hancock apparently buys the part of the CIA Inspector General report saying that Roselli met with Jim Garrison in Las Vegas in 1967. In a private letter I saw, Garrison says it never happened. And he would not know Roselli if he saw him.I disagree with part of Hancock’s analysis on Mexico City. He seems to think Oswald was actually there and did most all the things attributed to him. My view is that Oswald may have been in Mexico City, but the weight of the evidence says he did not do most of the things attributed to him. I also thought the author did not make enough of what was going on with Oswald in New Orleans. After all, the CIA program to counter the Fair Play for Cuba Committee was being run by Phillips. And that is what it appears Oswald was up to in New Orleans. At one point in the narrative Hancock says there is no evidence that Ruby knew JFK was going to be killed in the motorcade route. Well then, what about Julia Ann Mercer? And I would be remiss if I did not say that the book is studded with numerous typos and pagination errors. Apparently, there was a rush to get the volume out for the 48th anniversary.But overall, I think this is an interesting and worthwhile work. As I said, it has a unique approach to it, and Hancock’s analysis of the crime has sophistication, intelligence and nuance to it. Which, in these days of Lamar Waldron, Tom Hartmann and Mark North, is not all that common. ######################## ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ######################## http://www.ctka.net/reviews/last_word_lane.html One of the more interesting facts that Lane relies upon was first revealed by Jim Douglass in his excellent book JFK and the Unspeakable. It is widely accepted that moments after a bullet tore through President Kennedy's head, Dallas policeman Joe Marshall Smith confronted a fake Secret Service agent behind the picket fence atop the grassy knoll. As Smith stated in his Warren Commission testimony, after he heard the shots, “...this woman came up to me and she was just in hysterics. She told me, 'They are shooting the President from the bushes.' So I immediately proceeded up there...I looked in all the cars and checked around the bushes.Of course, I wasn't alone. There was some deputy sheriff with me, and I believe one Secret Service man when I got there. I got to make this statement, too. I felt awfully silly, but after the shot and this woman, I pulled my pistol from my holster, and I thought, this is silly, I don't know who I am looking for, and I put it back. Just as I did, he showed me that he was a Secret Service agent...he saw me coming with my pistol and right away he showed me who he was.” (7H535) Commission lawyer Wesley Liebeler, who took Smith's deposition, did not ask for a description of the man with the Secret Service credentials because, as Liebeler well knew, there were no genuine Secret Service personnel on foot in Dealey Plaza. Although Commission apologists like Vincent Bugliosi have attempted to blunt Smith's testimony by asserting that he “doesn't say how the person showed him who he was” and therefore he could have been mistaken because he probably just saw a badge and “assumed it was a Secret Service badge” (Bugliosi, p. 865), this ignores what Smith told author Anthony Summers: “The man, this character, produces credentials from his hip pocket which showed him to be Secret Service. I have seen those credentials before, and they satisfied me and the deputy sheriff.” (Summers, italics added, Conspiracy, p. 37) There is no doubt that the man on the grassy knoll seconds after the shooting was brandishing fake Secret Service credentials. The question is, who in 1963 had the know-how to create them? The answer, as Douglass reveals, is the CIA. Douglass quotes from a document written by Stanley Gottlieb, chief of the CIA's Technical Services Division, that was finally declassified in 2007 in response to a 15-year-old Freedom of Information Act lawsuit: “...over the years” the TSD “furnished this [secret] Service” with “gate passes, security passes, passes for presidential campaign, emblems for presidential vehicles; a secure ID photo system.” (JFK and the Unspeakable, p. 266) This is a remarkable revelation, and could be said to show that the CIA and its Cuban exile guerrillas not only had the motive, but had the means to pull off the assassination in broad daylight, and then to escape unhindered. But for me, the Mexico City legend aside, this as good as Lane gets when it comes to filling in the details and connecting the CIA to the assassination. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 (edited) Oh My God! The FBI threatened to sodomize the people looking into the issue of Vallee's license plates??? That's horrible! LOL // THOMAS GRAVES ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ When a car registration is a national security issue ,I think the people of the USA are getting the treatment that the FBI threatened. NO LOL PLEASE IF YOU CAN POST WERE THE HSCA FOUND THAT THERE WAS NO LHO CAR REGISTRATION. (ISNT THAT YOUR CONTENTION ?? ) Edited July 11, 2014 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 Of all the things we don't know, we have some pretty good circumstantial information on at least one person who had good looking Secret Service credentials in the fall of 1963, who hated JFK, who was connected to the peripheral set of OP 40 players around David Morales, who had been one of the very few independents to actually conduct combat missions into Cuba and who later admitted that he had gone to Dallas in November as part of the conspiracy against JFK - Roy Hargraves. Hoover managed to duck the report on Hargraves just as he tried to do on Odio, with the questions of witness reliability. Its a darn shame Gaeton Fonzi didn't know about the Hargraves lead as he did Odio. And of course for those who like photos, I'm still saying that one of the mystery men down on the curb looks a lot like Hargraves. Given that Morales had worked CI at JMWAVE, had actually worked with Angleton, had trained the AMMOTS who ran counter intel in Miami and did work in Mexico City and that they were equipped with false identification for such tasks - not to mention that Morales good friend Sforza was actually their boss in 1963 I'm pretty comfortable if that gang wanted to send Hargraves and others to Dallas with fake SS identification it would have been no big challenge. Heck, they had worked directly with the Secret Service in the enhanced protective services in Miami that fall - and if memory serves Vince has even dug up indications that some SS ID had gone missing at that point in time. Might be as simple as lifting it during a side trip to the right sort of bar in Miami, something known to be a practice of the WHD. -- Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 (edited) Oh My God! The FBI threatened to sodomize the people looking into the issue of Vallee's license plates??? That's horrible! LOL --Tommy @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ When a car registration is a national security issue, I think the people of the USA are getting the treatment that the FBI threatened. NO LOL PLEASE, IF YOU CAN, POST WERE THE HSCA FOUND THAT THERE WAS NO LHO CAR REGISTRATION. (ISN'T THAT YOUR CONTENTION?? ) [emphasis and correct punctuation added by T. Graves] "Were" ??? Are you dyslectic, Gaal? And by the way, how do you know that it was a "national security issue, Gaal?" --Tommy Edited July 11, 2014 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 In response to posting the HSCA material, here's the way it goes...about 1998 I ordered a ton of files from NARA in regard to Vallee, it included all the contemporary Chicago material from 1963, follow on SS annual investigative reports because they checked on him for years afterwards, all the HSCA related documents etc. I spent month examining the whole story - many years later I located and talked to Vallee relatives. At the moment, the HSCA reports I refer to are smashed together amoung a ton of other folders in tertiary storage in my garage and honestly I have nither the time nor energy to go looking for them. And if I did I don't have a scanner... Perhaps someone else can find copies of them online, I myself only saw paper copies and I assumed they would be among what is on line at MFF. The HSCA did seriously consider the Vallee story because there had been media coverage of it, and there were Chicago documents. But I'm afraid all I can do is give you my recollection on it. I'll also mention one more time that Vallee himself came to the attention of the SS because he shot off his mouth about the fact that something needed to be done about JFK while he was having a meal in a bowling alley - the guy next too him thought he was a nut case and might be dangerous so he reported it..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted July 11, 2014 Share Posted July 11, 2014 (edited) And by the way, how do you know that it was a "national security issue, Gaal?" --Tommy Edited by Thomas Graves, Today, 10:13 PM. ************************************************************** "Vallee drove a 1962 Ford Falcon with the New York licence plate 31-10RF. After JFK's assassination, NBC news learned of Vallee's arrest on Nov 2nd in Chicago. Luke Christopher Hester, an NBC Chicago employee, asked his father in law, Hugh Larkin, a retired New York City police officer, to check on Vallee's licence plate. Larkin askedhis old friends in the New York PD to do a check on the plate. They came back to Larkin saying the licence plate was "frozen" and "only the FBI could obtain the information." =========== Does seem some info Car in Vallee's name http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=62272&relPageId=50 http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=62272&relPageId=51 Edited July 12, 2014 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted July 12, 2014 Share Posted July 12, 2014 (edited) JFK Assassination: First JFK Conspiracy Theory Was Paid For By The CIA By Joseph Lazzaro@JosephLazzaroon December 05 2013 2:23 PM CIA Miami Chief of Covert Operations George Joannides’ actions in 1963 provide strong evidence that certain Central Intelligence Agency personnel manipulated Lee Harvey Oswald (pictured above) for propaganda purposes both before and after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy on Nov. 22, 1963. Above: Oswald handing out leaflets for his "Fair Play For Cuba" committee in New Orleans in Aug. 1963. WikiCommons Less than one day after the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dallas, a Central Intelligence Agency-funded organization in Miami published a special edition of its monthly magazine in which it linked the accused assassin, Lee Harvey Oswald, to Cuban President Fidel Castro. According to JFKFacts.org moderator Jefferson Morley, this was the first JFK assassination conspiracy theory to reach the public in print. Moreover, the CIA propaganda effort remains exactly that -- a lie and an attempt to spread a conspiracy theory -- because there has never been a preponderance of evidence -- let alone incontrovertible evidence -- that Castro or Castro-backed groups organized or implemented a plot to murder the U.S. president. The Nov. 23, 1963, special edition of the magazine, Trinchera (in English: Trenches), was published by members of the Cuban Student Directorate, a CIA-funded organization based in Miami. Leaders of the Directorate, also known as the DRE, its Spanish acronym, received $51,000 per month in 1963 dollars ($389,000 per month in 2013 dollars), or roughly $4.8 million per year, from the CIA, according to an April 1963 memo found in the JFK Library in Boston. Declassified CIA records prove that the publication was paid for by undercover CIA Officer George Joannides, who was chief of psychological operations in the CIA’s Miami station. Ongoing Suit To Make Public JFK Assassination Files Held By CIA Morley is the plaintiff in the ongoing Morley v. CIA suit, which seeks to make public Joannides’ classified files. Morley believes Joannides’ files -- and at least some of the information in the more than 1,100 other related classified files from key CIA officers -- will provide more information regarding the Nov. 22, 1963, assassination of President Kennedy. The CIA, which said the files are “not believed relevant” to the JFK assassination, has refused to make public the files, citing “national security.” However, the CIA's claim has never been independently verified. In Morley’s suit, his attorney has responded to the CIA’s latest brief, on the issue of court fees. Having won on appeal twice, the plaintiff Morley argues that the standard practice of the U.S government paying court fees for a successful appeal should apply. The CIA counters that the litigation has not generated any significant new information, and therefore the government should not have to pay the court fees. The issue is now in the hands of U.S. Judge Richard Leon. Other files related to the JFK assassination that the CIA refuses to make public include the files of CIA Officers David Atlee Phillips, Birch D. O’Neal, E. Howard Hunt, William King Harvey and Anne Goodpasture. Regarding the Directorate (DRE), within the CIA, the south Florida Anti-Castro group was known by its code name AMSPELL. The group was “conceived, created and funded by the Agency in September 1960 and terminated in December 1966,” according to a CIA memo, dated April 1967. CIA Miami Psychological Warfare Operations Chief Joannides handled contacts with the DRE, according to Joannides’ July 1963 job evaluation. With the CIA’s support, the DRE engaged in “intelligence collection, political action and propaganda.” In its Nov. 23, 1963, special edition, the DRE's Trinchera focused on comments Oswald made during a debate on a New Orleans radio program with DRE Delegate Carlos Bringuier in August 1963. The DRE asserted that Oswald and Castro were “the presumed assassins.” Also, earlier, in August 1963, Joannides’s AMSPELL had a series of encounters with a Castro supporter named Oswald in New Orleans. The Cuban students confronted and publicized Oswald’s one-man chapter of the pro-Castro Fair Play for Cuba Committee, which generated newspaper, radio and TV coverage of Oswald’s obscure, tiny political action group. Hence, two objective facts stemming from the above are: 1) Joannides was running “psychological warfare” operations aimed at discrediting Castro supporters in the United States in the summer of 1963. 2) Members of Joannides’ AMSPELL network played a leading role in publicizing Oswald’s pro-Castro views both before and after Kennedy was assassinated. The question Morley v CIA seeks to answer is: are the two facts related? The CIA could clarify the situation, but, as noted, the CIA won’t make public or release the aforementioned files on Joannides, nor will it make public the files of the other key CIA officers. CIA: Pattern Of Obstruction Regarding Joannides, Et Al. So what, one may ask, is the CIA hiding? What is in the Joannides’ file and the other CIA officers’ files that the Agency is so worried about? It might be something as minor as an operation or project that was mismanaged or had failed despite a large amount of money, time, energy or resources allocated to it. No U.S. government department wants to be seen foundering or mismanaging public dollars -- particularly not in the current era of fiscal austerity. That said, given the CIA’s history of failing to tell the truth and obfuscation, the Joannides’ files may indicate something more substantial, something that reflects adversely -- or worse -- on the Agency. That’s because the CIA’s latest refusal to make public the files represents the fourth time the Agency has opposed a public interest effort to obtain the full truth on the assassination of President Kennedy. Those incidences: 1) Warren Commission: delay and obstruct. In 1964, CIA Deputy Director Richard Helms, “the man who kept the secrets,” and Joannides’ boss, never told the Warren Commission that Kennedy’s alleged assassin had scuffled with the CIA-backed Cubans in New Orleans. Helms also never disclosed that Joannides -- and other CIA agents who were under his supervision and funding -- had helped communicate the story of Oswald’s pro-Castro activities. It wasn’t until 1998 -- when the CIA was forced to disclose Joannides’ support for Oswald’s antagonists among the anti-Castro students -- that the public learned of this psychological warfare operation. The Agency has resisted further disclosure about the nature, focus and objective of Joannides’ operations in 1963 ever since. 2) HSCA: lie, deflect, delay and obstruct. In 1978, Joannides served as CIA liaison to the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA), which re-investigated the JFK assassination, but he did not disclose the obvious conflict of interest to the HSCA in regard to his role in the events of 1963. HSCA Chief Counsel G. Robert Blakey said that had he known who Joannides was at that time, Joannides would have not continued as CIA liaison, but would have become a witness who would have been interrogated under oath by the HSCA staff or by the committee. In addition, Joannides’ failure-to-disclose occurred despite the fact that Blakey and the CIA had a pre-investigation agreement between the HSCA and the CIA that CIA personnel who were operational in 1963 could not be involved in the committee’s investigation. Many would consider the above deception by the CIA audacious, to put it diplomatically. When Morley first informed Blakey about a decade ago about Joannides’ role in the very anti-Castro activities from 1963 that the HSCA was investigating, Blakey was flabbergasted: “If I’d known his [Joannides’] role in 1963, I would have put Joannides under oath -- he would have been a witness, not a facilitator,” Blakey, now a law professor at the University of Notre Dame, told The New York Times. “How do we know what he didn’t give us?” 3) ARRB: lie again, delay and obstruct. After Oliver Stone’s seminal 1991 film “JFK” increased debate about who was behind Kennedy’s murder, the public pressured Congress to declassify more files related to the JFK assassination, and Congress created the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) to oversee the release of more documents. However, incredibly, the CIA once again failed to tell the ARRB about Joannides’ 1963 work, and the board was blinded to a legitimate and germane investigation area. U.S. Judge Jack Tunheim, ARRB chairman from 1994-1995, said that had the board known about Joannides’ activities in 1963, it would have been a no-brainer to investigate him: “If we’d known of his role in Miami in 1963, we would have pressed for all his records,” Judge Tunheim said, the New York Times reported. 4) Obstruction No. 4: Morley v CIA Fast-forward 18 years into the now postmodern era, and the CIA’s response to petitions for pubic disclosure in the Morley v CIA case looks a lot like its stance versus the Warren Commission, the HSCA and the ARRB: refuse to make public the documents, seek to delay, obfuscate the issues, and do not confirm or deny. Moreover, the CIA’s stance versus Morley looks all the more problematic due to the fact that it has been 50 years since the assassination of President Kennedy. The Cold War is over: the United States won. There is no existential threat to the United States. Russia, the world's second strongest military power, while not a U.S. ally, is not an enemy, either, but a rival. Cuba’s centrally planned communist economic model has been discredited for decades, and it will likely become a market-oriented economy in the decade ahead. Cuba also poses no threat to the U.S. or its interests in the region -- i.e., don’t expect Cuba to invade Florida or export its centrally planned economic system to Brazil or Mexico any time soon. Even so, the CIA argues that making public the classified JFK assassination files would cause “extremely grave damage” to U.S. national security. JFK Assassination Investigation Status It must be underscored that, to date, there is no smoking gun or incontrovertible evidence of a plot or conspiracy to assassinate President Kennedy, but there is a pattern of suspicious activity, along with a series of anomalies and a commonality of interests among key parties, that compel additional research and the release of non-public documents. Further, the CIA probably is not covering up some tectonic, systemic crisis-triggering secret about the assassination of President Kennedy, or even evidence of a colossal Agency operational failure that would prompt the American people to call for a dismantling of the national security state apparatus. But you would not know it from the CIA’s stance toward the old, still-classified JFK assassination files. See Also: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ The Reissue of Oswald and the CIA By John Newman Reviewed by James DiEugenioOswald and the CIA is not an easy book to read. And I think this is one of the reasons that it was underappreciated when it was first published in 1995. One would expect this result in the mainstream press. But even the research community was not up to the task of understanding the true value of this important work when it was originally published. Jerry Rose's The Fourth Decade discussed the book twice: once directly and once indirectly. That journal specifically reviewed the book in late 1995 (Vol. 3 No. 1). The reviewer was a man named Hugh Murray. His review was completely inadequate. He gave the book less than two pages of discussion. Murray never even addressed the volume's two crucial chapters on Mexico City, which are the key to the book. (This would be like criticizing the Warren Report and never addressing the single bullet theory.) In the summer of the following year (Vol. 3 No. 3), Peter Dale Scott did something that may have been even worse. He wrote a long article for Rose's publication entitled "Oswald and the Hunt for Popov's Mole". This piece seriously distorted and misinterpreted both the book itself and some of the important information Newman had unearthed. This sorry performance partly explains why the book's achievement was never really comprehended even within the critical community. But to be honest, Newman made some mistakes that contributed to the book's disappointing reception. The author felt it was important to get the book out quickly. He thought he should do so while the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB)) was still operating in order to draw attention to its work. I thought this was an error at the time. I still do. For there were some documents, not fully processed at the time, which would have been useful to the endeavor. For instance, The House Select Committee's Mexico City Report, aka the Lopez Report, had not yet been fully declassified. And to his credit, Newman updated his work on Mexico City with a 1999 article for Probe (Vol. 6 No. 6 ). This is included in The Assassinations. Secondly, because of this haste, the book is--to put it gently--not adroitly composed. Newman's previous book, JFK and Vietnam, also deals with a complex topic: President Kennedy's intent to withdraw from the Vietnam conflict. Yet that book is skillfully arranged and written. When I asked the author about the comparison between the two, he said, "But Jim, that book was ten years in the making." I should also add that he had an editor on the first book. Something he did not have, at least to my knowledge, on the second. Third, Major John Newman was an intelligence analyst for twenty years. And he approached Oswald and the CIA in that vein. In other words, he played to his strengths. Therefore the book is a study of Oswald as he is viewed through the intelligence apparatus of the United States government. Or, as the author notes, it's about "Oswald the file". The author rarely tries to fill out the story or the personage. For instance, the alleged attempted suicide of Oswald in Russia is not mentioned here. Ruth Paine is mentioned once; Michael Paine not at all. Only a highly disciplined, almost obsessed mind, could hew to that line almost continuously. Or the mind of a former intelligence analyst. Consequently, because of its inherent longeurs, the book makes some demands on the reader. Which some, like Scott and Murray, were not up to. IINow, with caveats out of the way, lets get to the rewards in this valuable, and undervalued, book. No person, or body, not even the House Select Committee on Assassinations (HSCA), has ever dug more deeply into what the American intelligence community knew about Oswald prior to the assassination. What Newman reveals here literally makes the Warren Commission look like a Model T Ford. All the denials issued to that body by the likes of John McCone and J. Edgar Hoover are exposed as subterfuges. Contrary to their canards, there was a lot of interest in Oswald from the time he defected to Russia until the assassination. Newman first discovered this when he was hired by PBS to work on their ill-fated Frontline special about Oswald in 1993. And it was this discovery that inspired him to write the book. The CIA Director at the time of the debate in Congress over the creation of the Assassination Records Review Board had testified there were something like 39 documents at CIA about Oswald. Most of them were supposed to be clippings. Newman discovered there was many, many times that amount. Further, he discovered the Agency held multiple files on Oswald. And finally, and perhaps most interestingly, there were some puzzling irregularities within the record. (When the author expressed his continuing bewilderment about this to the archivist, the archivist replied, "Haven't you ever heard of Murphy's Law?" To which Newman shot back, "Every time I turn around I'm walking into Mr. Murphy.") Mr. Murphy makes his appearance right at the start. Once Oswald defected to Russia in 1959 the FBI opened up a file on him for security purposes. But at the CIA there is a curious, and suspicious, vacuum. Richard Snyder of the American Embassy in Moscow sent a cable to Washington about Oswald's defection. But the exact date the CIA got it cannot be confirmed (p. 24). Further, the person who received it cannot be determined either. Since Oswald was a former Marine, the Navy also sent a cable on November 4th. This cable included the information that Oswald had threatened to give up radar secrets to the Soviets. But again, no one knows exactly when this cable arrived at CIA. And almost as interesting, where it was placed upon its immediate arrival. (p. 25) This is quite odd because, as Newman points out (Chapter 3), Oswald's close association with the U-2 plane while at Atsugi, Japan should have placed alerts all over this cable. It did not. To show a comparison, the FBI recommended "a stop be placed against the fingerprints to prevent subject's entering the US under any name." (Ibid) So, on November 4, 1959, the FBI issued a FLASH warning on Oswald. This same Navy memo arrived at CIA and, after a Warren Report type "delayed reaction", eventually went to James Angleton's CI/SIG unit on December 6th. Angleton was chief of counter-intelligence. SIG was a kind of safeguard unit that protected the Agency from penetration agents. It was closely linked to the Office of Security in that regard. But as Newman queries: where was it for the previous 31 days? Newman notes that the Snyder cable and this Navy memo fell into a "black hole " somewhere. In fact, the very first file Newman could find on Oswald was not even at CI/SIG. It was at the Office of Security. This is all quite puzzling because, as the author notes, neither should have been the proper resting place for an initial file on Oswald. This black hole "kept the Oswald files away from the spot we would expect them to go-the Soviet Russia division." (p. 27) Another thing the author finds puzzling about this early file is that he could find no trace of a security investigation about the danger of Oswald's defection. This is really odd because while talking to some of his friends the author found out that Oswald knew something that very few people did: the U-2 was also flying over China. If Snyder's original memo said that Oswald had threatened to give up secrets on radar operation to the Russians, and Oswald had been stationed at the U-2 base in Japan, there should have been a thorough security investigation as to what Oswald could have given the Russians. For the obvious reason that the program could be adjusted to avoid any counterattack based upon that relayed information. Newman could find no evidence of such an inquiry. (pgs 28,33-34) Further, the author found out that Oswald was actually part of a unit called Detachment C, which seemed to almost follow the U-2 around to crisis spots in the Far East, like Indonesia. (p. 42) Needless to say, after Oswald defected, the second U-2 flight over Russia--with Gary Powers on board--was shot down. Powers felt that, "Oswald's work with the new MPS 16 height-finding radar looms large" in that event. (p. 43) The author segues here to this question: Whatever the CIA did or did not do in regard to this important question, it should have been a routine part of the Warren Commission inquiry. It was not. As the author notes, "When called to testify at the Warren Commission hearings, Oswald's marine colleagues were not questioned about the U-2." (p. 43) Oswald's commander in the Far East, John Donovan, was ready to discuss the issue in depth. The Commission was not. In fact, Donovan was briefed in advance not to fall off topic. (p. 45) When it was over, Donovan had to ask, "Don't you want to know anything about the U-2." He even asked a friend of his who had testified: "Did they ask you about the U-2?" And he said, "No, not a thing." (Ibid) Donovan revealed that the CIA did not question him about the U-2 until December of 1963. But this was probably a counter-intelligence strategy, to see whom he had talked to and what he had revealed. Why is that a distinct probability? Because right after Powers was shot down, the CIA closed its U-2 operations at Atsugi. Yet, Powers did not fly out of Atsugi. As Newman notes, the only link between Powers and Atsugi was Oswald. (p. 46) Right after this U-2 episode, Newman notes another oddity. The CIA did not open a 201 file on Oswald for over a year after his defection, on 12/8/60. (p. 47) This gap seriously puzzled the House Select Committee on Assassinations. Investigator Dan Hardway called CI officer Ann Egerter about it. It was a short conversation. She didn't want to discuss it. (p. 48) The HSCA tried to neuter the issue by studying other defector cases. But as Newman notes: defection is legal but espionage, like giving up the secrets to the U-2, is not. (pgs 49-50) So the comparison was faulty. In fact, when Egerter finally opened Oswald's 201 file, the defection was noted, but his knowledge of the U-2 wasn't. This delay in opening the 201 file was so unusual that the HSCA asked former CIA Director Richard Helms about it. His reply was vintage Helms: "I am amazed. Are you sure there wasn't? ... .I can't explain that." (p. 51) When the HSCA asked where the documents were prior to the opening of the 201 file, the CIA replied they were never classified higher than confidential and therefore were no longer in existence. Newman notes that this is a lie. Many were classified as "Secret" and he found most of them, so they were not destroyed. Further, the ones that were classified as confidential are still around also. (p. 52) And this is where one of the most fascinating discoveries in the book is revealed. Although no 201 file was opened on Oswald until December of 1960, he was put on the Watch List in November of 1959. This list was part of the CIA's illegal HT/LINGUAL mail intercept program-only about 300 people were on it. Recall, this is at a time when Oswald's file is in the so-called Black Hole. It was not possible to find a paper trail on him until the next month. How could he, at the same time, be so inconsequential as to have no file opened, yet so important as to be on the quite exclusive Watch List? This defies comprehension. In fact, Newman is forced to conclude, "The absence of a 201 file was a deliberate act, not an oversight." (p. 54) Clearly, someone at the CIA knew who Oswald was and thought it was important enough to intercept his mail. Long ago, when I asked Newman to explain this paradox in light of the fact that his first file would be opened at CI/SIG, he replied that one possibility was Oswald was being run as an off the books agent by Angleton. In light of the other factors mentioned in this section, i.e. concerning the U-2 secrets, the "black hole" delay, plus what we will discover later, I know of no better way to explain this dichotomy. IIIIn his analysis of the Russian scene with Oswald on the ground, Newman made clear two important points. First, whereas most of the attention prior to this book was on embassy official Richard Snyder's interaction with Oswald, Newman revealed a man behind the scenes, peering through the curtains: John McVickar. It was this other embassy official who asked Priscilla Johnson to interview Oswald without Snyder's OK. (p. 72) What makes this interesting is the timing. Oswald had actually refused an interview with American reporter Bob Korengold. He had not been very forthcoming with Aline Mosby, the first journalist to talk to him. Then two things happened. First, the Russians communicated to Oswald that he would be allowed to stay in Russia (p. 73). Second, after McVickar gave Johnson the tip about Oswald, the defector agreed to meet her at her room. He arrived at nine at night. He stayed until well past midnight. (p. 72) What makes this interesting is that Newman reveals that Oswald's room at the Metropole Hotel was equipped with an infra-red camera for the observation of its occupants-and the CIA knew this. (p. 9) Second, Oswald found out he would be allowed to stay through a Russian official who actually visited his room. After the long interview with Priscilla Johnson, McVickar had dinner with the reporter. Johnson, of course, worked for the conservative, and intelligence affiliated, North American News Alliance. At this dinner, somehow, some way, McVickar revealed that Oswald was going to be trained in electronics. (p. 84) Which he was. Besides the discoveries about McVickar, Newman actually found documents that revealed that Johnson had applied to work for the CIA as early as 1952. She then worked with Cord Meyer, who helped fund the Congress for Cultural Freedom, exposed later as a CIA conduit. At the time Newman wrote the book, it was not yet revealed that the CIA did not hire her because they later deduced she could be used to do what they wanted anyway and they classified her as a "witting collaborator." (The Assassinations p. 435) The story based on this interview received little play in the media at the time, although it did announce that Oswald was a defector. But after the assassination, Johnson revised this original story-to Oswald's disadvantage-- and it received circulation through the wire services, including the front page of the Dallas Morning News. Thanks to Newman we now know that McVickar was ultimately responsible for it. Another hidden action that was first revealed in this book was that in 1961, the CIA launched a counterintelligence program against the Fair Play for Cuba Committee, which had been formed the year before. According to the author, that effort was launched by the CIA's Office of Security, under the orders of James McCord. (p. 95) Further, this operation was done within the United States, which made it illegal for the Agency, and without the permission of the FBI. Making it even more interesting is that, as Newman first revealed, David Phillips was also part of this program. (p. 241) This program used neighbors hired as spies, and double agents posing as sympathizers, both reporting back to the CIA. (p. 241) When Oswald decided he wanted to return from Russia, Newman notes another appearance by Mr. Murphy. Actually two. No "lookout" card was inserted on Oswald by the State Department. Although it appears that one was prepared, it was never active. (p. 138) This would have alerted State and other agencies that a security risk had applied to reenter the country. Second, many FBI files that contained the security risk information on Oswald from 1959 are now missing. (p. 153) Finally, the FBI very selectively issued documents from these files to the Warren Commission. The HSCA got more of the picture. But in 1994, when the author went looking for the information hinted at to the HSCA, he couldn't find them. (p. 154) When Oswald tries to return, he negotiates to have potential legal proceedings against him dropped. (p. 218) Interestingly, he was taken off the Watch List in 1960, then placed back on it in August of 1961. (But yet, his mail was opened even when he was off the list! p. 284) And at this time, there is the first documentary evidence that the CIA had an operational interest in Oswald. At the end of a memo about Oswald's probable return, the chief of the Soviet Russia division wrote, "It was partly out of curiosity to learn if Oswald's wife would actually accompany him to our country, partly out of interest in Oswald's own experiences in the USSR, that we showed operational intelligence interest in the Harvey [Oswald ] story." (p. 227) Marina got her exit visa surprisingly fast. Oswald explained his behavior there as, "It was necessary to make this propaganda because at the time he had wanted to live in Russia." (p. 235) Oswald thought his passport would be confiscated when he returned. But, surprisingly-or not-Oswald was actually able to sign papers for a government loan at the American Embassy. A man named Spas Raikin of the Travelers Aid Society was contacted by the State Department to meet Oswald and his new wife in New York in June of 1962. The Oswalds made it through customs and immigration without incident. And without any evidence of an attempt at a debriefing. When Oswald arrived back in Texas, FBI agent John Fain did do an interview with him. Oswald then got a job at Leslie Welding, and started to subscribe to communist newspapers. At this point, Mr. Murphy pops up again. Even though the FBI had informants in many post offices looking out for just this sort of thing-a former defector subscribing to communist periodicals- and Oswald has signed a post office form instructing the post office to deliver him foreign propaganda, the Bureau did an inexplicable thing. In October, they closed their Oswald file. (p. 271) What makes the timing of this fascinating are two events. First, the CIA campaign against the FPCC begins to heat up, and the FBI opens up a similar front against the FPCC led by Cartha De Loach. (p. 243) Second, George DeMohrenschildt, the Baron, enters Oswald's life. In his interview with the Warren Commission, the Baron tried to conceal his knowledge of who J. Walton Moore was. Moore was the head of the CIA office in Dallas who, it was later revealed, approached the Baron about going out to meet the returned defector. But DeMohrenschildt told the Warren Commission that Moore was "some sort of an FBI man in Dallas. Many people consider him the head of the FBI in Dallas." (p. 277) Newman closes this section of the book with a beautiful Mr. Murphy episode. He notes that FBI agent James Hosty was now, rather belatedly, looking for Oswald and his wife. This was in March of 1963. Hosty also recommended that Oswald's case be reopened. The grounds for this reopening? Oswald had a newly opened subscription to the Communist newspaper, The Worker. (p. 273) But, as the author notes, when the Dallas FBI office had previously learned of an earlier such subscription-to the exact same publication-it had closed his file! This recommendation had a caveat. Hosty left a note in Oswald's file "to come back in forty-five to sixty days." (Ibid) But by then, of course, Oswald would be in New Orleans. Newman poses the question: Was the reason Oswald's case was closed for these six months because DeMohrenschildt was now making his approach to Oswald? (p. 277) Was another reason because Oswald was now about to enter the fray, along with the CIA and FBI, against the FPCC in New Orleans? (p. 289) IVThe two finest parts of this distinguished work are the sections on New Orleans and, especially, Mexico City. Newman notes that the official story is that the FBI lost track of Oswald while he was organizing his FPCC group in New Orleans under the name of Hidell. This is when many credible witnesses place him in league with Guy Banister and Sergio Arcacha Smith at 544 Camp Street. But even though FBI agents Regis Kennedy and Warren DeBrueys were specialists on the anti-Castro beat in New Orleans, the FBI holds that Hosty did not know that Oswald moved to New Orleans until June 26th. In this book, the author demonstrates with a chart why this is so hard to believe. On page 300 he lists seven different events between May 14th and June 5th that should have caused the Bureau to realize that Oswald had moved. If you believe the Bureau, it wasn't enough. The author suspects this methodical obtuseness was due to the fact that Oswald was in, what Newman calls, his "undercover" phase in New Orleans. That is, he has visited Jones Printing to order flyers with two different stamps applied, neither of them in his name. The first is under the name Hidell, and the second is addressed 544 Camp St. Newman believes that Banister was using Oswald to smoke out leftwing students and liberal professors at Tulane, like Prof. Leonard Reissman. Newman also brings out the fact that in a memo to the Bureau from New Orleans, the information that several FPCC pamphlets contained the 544 Camp St. address was scratched out. (p. 310) The next discovery made by the author is also arresting. The FBI says they discovered Oswald was in New Orleans at the end of June. (p. 317) Yet they did not verify where he lived until August 5th. As Newman notes, the latter is the same day that Oswald broke out of his undercover mode and contacted some Cuban exiles, using his real name. Or as the author puts it: " ... the FBI's alleged blind period covers-to the day-the precise period of Oswald's undercover activity in New Orleans." (Ibid) On August 5th, Oswald begins to play an overt role as an agent provocateur with Carlos Bringuier of the anti-Castro exile group, the DRE. The Warren Commission never knew that the DRE had a CIA code name, AMSPELL. When Oswald is arrested on Canal Street after his famous altercation with Bringuier, he actually had the Corliss Lamont booklet, "The Crime Against Cuba" with him. This had the "FPCC 544 Camp Street" stamp on it. (As I showed in my first book, this particular pamphlet was very likely provided to Banister through the CIA itself. See Destiny Betrayed, p. 219) Newman then details Oswald's arrest, his court date, his activities in front of the International Trade Mart-with flyers in his own name with his own address, and how Oswald now goes to the papers to get ads published for his cause. Oswald was attracting so much attention that J. Edgar Hoover requested a memorandum on him in late August with a detailed summary of his activities. This went to the CIA. When Oswald debated Bringuier on a radio program, the moderator Bill Stuckey offered the tape to the FBI. And the DRE reported the incident to the CIA. As Newman builds to his climax, all of this is important in light of what will happen next. After creating a lot of bad publicity for the FPCC in New Orleans, Oswald now lowers his profile again. At the Mexican consulate in New Orleans, he and CIA operative Bill Gaudet get visas to go to Mexico on September 17th .Why is the date important? Because on the day before, the 16th, the CIA told the FBI they were considering countering FPCC activities in foreign countries. A week later, Oswald leaves New Orleans on a bus to Mexico. What Newman does with the legendary Oswald trip to Mexico is, in some respects, revolutionary. Greatly helped by the release of the finally declassified Lopez Report, he actually goes beyond that magnificent document. According to the Warren Commission, Oswald was in Mexico City from Friday September 27th to Wednesday October 3rd. The ostensible reason was to acquire an in-transit visa from the Cuban consulate so he could travel from Cuba back to the Soviet Union. But as Newman notes, this story makes little sense and is likely a ruse. (p. 615) Oswald already had a passport to Russia, but the stamp warned that a person traveling to Cuba would be liable for prosecution. If he really wanted to go to Russia, Oswald could have gone the same roundabout route he had in 1959. The route he was choosing this time actually made it much harder, if not impossible, to get to Russia in any kind of current time frame. When Oswald first shows up at the Cuban consulate it allegedly is at 11:00 AM on Friday. (p. 356) Yet as the author notes on his chronological chart, he is supposed to have already called the Soviet Consulate twice that morning. (Ibid) The problem with those two calls is that they were both in Spanish which, as the Lopez Report notes, the weight of the evidence says Oswald did not speak. He tells receptionist Silvia Duran he wants an in-transit visa for travel via Cuba to Russia. But he has no passport photos. He leaves to get the pictures taken. When he returned with the photos, Duran told him that he now had to get his Soviet visa before she could issue his Cuban visa. (p. 357) Oswald now went to the Soviet Consulate. But here we find another problem with what is supposed to be his third call there. The time frames for the call and the visit overlap. He cannot be outside calling inside when he is already inside. (Ibid) Further, this call is also in Spanish, which creates a double problem with the call. Once inside, Oswald learns he cannot get a visa to give to Duran unless he requested it from Washington first. And the process would take weeks. Oswald now makes a scene and is escorted out. He goes back to the Cuban consulate. Oswald tells Duran there was no problem with the Soviet visa. She does not buy his story and calls the Soviet consulate. They tell her they will call her back. Embassy official and KGB secret agent Valery Kostikov calls back. Oswald's attempt falls apart since Oswald knows no one in Cuba and the routing to the Russian Embassy in Washington will take too long. (p. 359) This call seems genuine. But as the author notes, and as we shall see, there was one problem with it: neither Duran nor Kostikov mentioned Oswald by name. Oswald creates another scene and quarrels with Cuban counsel Eusebio Azcue. Now, and this is important, Duran insists that this is the last time she saw or spoke to Oswald. This created a serious problem because the Warren Commission reported that she did talk to him again.(p, 408) The apparent source for this is an FBI memo of Dec. 3, 1963. The HSCA realized this was a problem. So they grilled Duran on this point. They tried three different ways to get her to admit she could be wrong. She stuck by her story. (pgs 409-410) Why is this so problematic? Because on the next day, Saturday September 28th, the Lopez Report says there was a call from a man and a woman to the Soviet Consulate. Further, in his interviews, Newman discovered that the Russians maintain that the switchboard was closed on Saturday. (p. 368) From this and other evidence, Newman concludes that the man in this call is not Oswald. Duran says the woman is not her. Further evidence of this impersonation is that Oswald had visited the Russian Consulate earlier that day. And this phone conversation has little, if any, connection to what he discussed there. From information in the Lopez Report, from CIA Station Chief's Winston Scott's manuscript, and interviews with the transcribers, there was also a call made on Monday, the 30th, from Oswald to the Soviet Consulate. This call is apparently lost today. Finally, on Tuesday, October 1st, there are two calls from Oswald to the Soviet Consulate. Right off the bat, these are suspicious because they are in poor Russian. Yet Oswald was supposed to have spoken fluent Russian. So again, these two calls appear to have been made by an imposter. But why? In the new Epilogue written for this edition, Newman writes it is because when Duran originally called the Soviet Consulate, Oswald's name was not specifically mentioned. When Oswald then went to the Soviets on Saturday, and created another scene, this was the last of the actual encounters. The specific problem was this: There was no direct record made between Oswald and Kostikov. As we shall see, this could not be allowed. So the two calls on Tuesday had to be made. And the necessity was such that the risk was run of exposing the charade by not having Oswald's voice on the tapes. Why was this so important? VPrior to Oswald's Mexican odyssey, the FBI reports on his FPCC forays in New Orleans went into a new operational file at CIA, which did not merge with his 201 file. (p. 393) According to the author, this file eventually contained almost a thousand documents. Newman dates the bifurcation from September 23rd: shortly after Oswald goes to the Mexican consulate, and right about when he leaves New Orleans. The FBI report goes to Oswald's CI/SIG soft file and his Office of Security file. (p. 394) But after the assassination, all the FBI reports suddenly revert back to Oswald's 201 file. Only two compartments in the Agency had all of Oswald's file-CI/SIG and Office of Security. As we shall see, there is a method to all this meandering. At CIA HQ, after the information about Oswald in Mexico City arrives, a first cable is sent on October 10. This cable is meant for the FBI, State Department and the Navy. This cable describes a man who does not resemble Oswald. He is 35 years old, has an athletic build, and stands six feet tall. (p. 398) At almost the same time this cable was sent, a second cable from CIA HQ goes to Mexico City. This one has the right description of Oswald. So therefore, in a normal situation, the officers in Mexico City could match the description to their surveillance take. But it was missing something crucial. It said that the latest information that CIA had on Oswald was a State Department Memorandum dated from May of 1962. This was not true. For just one example, the Agency had more than one FBI report about Oswald's FPCC activities in New Orleans. Yet, for some reason, the file used to draft this cable was missing the FBI New Orleans reports. What makes these two varyingly false cables even more interesting is that Angleton's trusted assistant Ann Egerter signed off on both of them for accuracy. (p. 401) Apparently, she didn't know what she was signing, or if they contradicted each other. Further, Egerter sent Oswald's 201 file, which was restricted, to the HQ Mexico City desk until November 22nd. (Ibid) For the first cable, Jane Roman was the releasing officer. She also participated in the drafting of the second cable. What makes her participation in all this so interesting is that she had read the latest information about Oswald in New Orleans on October 4th, less than a week before she signed off on the first cable. When Newman confronted her with these contradictory documents, she said: "I'm signing off on something that I know isn't true." (p. 405) She went on and tried to explain it with this: "I wasn't in on any particular goings-on or hanky-panky as far as the Cuban situation ... to me it's indicative of a keen interest in Oswald, held very closely on a need-to-know basis." (p. 405) Note her reference to the "Cuban situation". For it was Oswald's activities with the Cubans in New Orleans that was left out of the second cable to Mexico City. Therefore Mexico City chief Win Scott could not coordinate Oswald's New Orleans activities with what Oswald had done on his home turf. For the second cable, the releasing officer was Tom Karemessines who was deputy to Richard Helms. It has never been explained why this cable had to go so high up into officialdom for permission to release it. There is one last piece to this mosaic that is necessary for its deadly denouement to be fully comprehended. Ann Egerter testified that their counter-intelligence group knew Kostikov was a KGB agent. But the story is that they did not know he was part of Department 13, which participated in assassinations, until after Kennedy's assassination. (p. 419) All of this is absolutely central to the events that occur on November 22, 1963. Consider: Here you have a defector who was in the Soviet Union for almost three years. He returns and then gets involved confronting anti-Castro Cubans in New Orleans. He then goes to Mexico City, and visits both the Cuban and Soviet embassies trying to get to Russia from Cuba. He creates dramatic scenes at both places, and here is the capper: He talks to the KGB's officer in charge of assassinations in the Western Hemisphere. By the time Oswald returned to Dallas, the alarm bell should have been sounding on him throughout the intelligence community. Especially in view of Kennedy's announced visit to Texas. He should never have been allowed to be on the motorcade route. The Secret Service should have had the necessary information about him and he should have been on their Security Index. This did not happen. In fact, at the time his profile should have been rising, these false cables within the CIA and to the FBI, State, and Navy were actually lowering it. The final masterstroke, which made sure the information would be concealed until November 22nd, was not discovered until after the book's initial publication. As stated above, the FBI had issued a FLASH warning on Oswald back in 1959. After four years, this was removed on October 9, 1963! This was just hours before the first CIA cable mentioned above was sent. (The Assassinations p. 222) As Newman notes, "the CIA was spawning a web of deception". (p. 430) When JFK is killed, and Hoover tells President Johnson about Oswald's trip to Mexico City and his visits to both the Cuban and Russian embassies, the threat of nuclear war quickly enters the conversation. But when the FBI discovers that the voice on the tapes are not really Oswald's it does two things: 1.) It points to something even more sinister, therefore throwing the intelligence community into a CYA mode, and 2.) It forces the Agency to hatch a cover story: the tapes were routinely destroyed days after they were made. The result of all this was an investigation that was never allowed to investigate. A presidential commission whose leader was told beforehand that millions of lives were at risk because the Cubans and Russians might be involved. And it exposed an intelligence community that was asleep at the switch, therefore allowing the alleged assassin to be moved into place by the KGB. The result was therefore preordained: a whitewash would follow. And Newman presents written evidence from both J. Edgar Hoover and Nicolas Katzenbach demonstrating that the subsequent inquiry was curtailed at its inception. Deputy Attorney General Katzenbach wrote that speculation about Oswald had to be "cut off" and the idea that the assassination was a communist conspiracy had to be rebutted. (p. 632) Newman later discovered that Hoover realized he had been duped by the CIA about Oswald in Mexico City. (The Assassinations, p. 224) In his new Epilogue for this 2008 edition, Newman explains why only someone who a.) Understood the inner workings of the national security state, and b.) Understood and controlled Oswald's files, could have masterminded something as superhumanly complex as this scheme. One in which the conspiracy itself actually contained the seeds that would sprout the cover-up. In this new chapter, Newman names James Angleton as the designer of the plot. (p. 637) He also names Anne Goodpasture, David Phillips' assistant in Mexico City, as the person who hatched the internal CIA cover up by saying the ersatz tapes had been destroyed in October. This is evidenced in a cable she sent on 11/23 (pgs 633-634). Yet she probably knew this was false. Because she later testified to the ARRB that a voice dub of a tape had been carried to the Texas border on 11/22/63, the night before she sent the cable (p. 654). Further, Win Scott had made his own voice comparison after the assassination. He could not have if the tapes had been destroyed. (p. 635) Angleton made sure Scott's voice comparison never became public by swooping into Mexico City and confronting, nearly threatening, Win Scott's widow after he died. Once he was inside the house, he removed four suitcases of materials from Scott's office. This included the contents of his safe where the Mexico City/Oswald materials had been stored. (p. 637) This remarkable book could never have been composed or even contemplated without the existence of the Assassination Records Review Board. No book takes us more into Oswald's workings with the intelligence community than this one. And his section on Mexico City is clearly one of the 5 or 6 greatest discoveries made in the wake of the ARRB. The incredible thing about the case he makes for conspiracy and cover up is this: The overwhelming majority of his evidence is made up of the government's own records. Its not anecdotal, its not second hand. In other words, its not from the likes of Frank Ragano, Billy Sol Estes, or Ed Partin. It is material that could be used in a court of law. And it would be very hard to explain away to a jury. Imagine the kind of witness Jane Roman would make. Which is why it all had to be concealed for over thirty years. So much for there being nothing new or important in those newly declassified files. Angleton knew differently. Just ask Win Scott's widow. Or read this book. Edited July 12, 2014 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 (edited) "Were" ??? Are you dyslexic, Gaal? And by the way, how do you know that it was a "national security issue, Gaal?" --Tommy ************************************************************** "Vallee drove a 1962 Ford Falcon with the New York licence plate 31-10RF. After JFK's assassination, NBC news learned of Vallee's arrest on Nov 2nd in Chicago. Luke Christopher Hester, an NBC Chicago employee, asked his father in law, Hugh Larkin, a retired New York City police officer, to check on Vallee's licence plate. Larkin asked his old friends in the New York PD to do a check on the plate. They came back to Larkin saying the licence plate was "frozen" and "only the FBI could obtain the information." =========== Does seem some info Car in Vallee's name http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=62272&relPageId=50 http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=62272&relPageId=51 "NYS MVB reflect New York license plate threeone one zero RF listed to Thomas Vallee, two one three one Bond Lane, Hicksville, New York, on nineteen sixty two Ford Falcon." http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=62272&relPageId=51 So,Thomas Vallee wasn't driving a car that was registered to Lee Harvey Oswald, was he, Gaal? Thomas Vallee was driving a car that was registered to Thomas Vallee. D'oh. --Tommy Edited July 13, 2014 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 (edited) D'oh. --Tommy ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++YES Mr. Graves is a loquacious debater. " two one three one Bond Lane, Hicksville, New York," (GRAVES) is not a real address. Gee ....golly at a loss for words .....AH !! D'oh. Edited July 13, 2014 by Steven Gaal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas Graves Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 (edited) "Were" ??? Are you dyslexic, Gaal? And by the way, how do you know that it was a "national security issue, Gaal?" --Tommy ************************************************************** "Vallee drove a 1962 Ford Falcon with the New York licence plate 31-10RF. After JFK's assassination, NBC news learned of Vallee's arrest on Nov 2nd in Chicago. Luke Christopher Hester, an NBC Chicago employee, asked his father in law, Hugh Larkin, a retired New York City police officer, to check on Vallee's licence plate. Larkin asked his old friends in the New York PD to do a check on the plate. They came back to Larkin saying the licence plate was "frozen" and "only the FBI could obtain the information." =========== Does seem some info Car in Vallee's name http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=62272&relPageId=50 http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=62272&relPageId=51 "NYS MVB reflect New York license plate threeone one zero RF listed to Thomas Vallee, two one three one Bond Lane, Hicksville, New York, on nineteen sixty two Ford Falcon." http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=62272&relPageId=51 So,Thomas Vallee wasn't driving a car that was registered to Lee Harvey Oswald, was he, Gaal? Thomas Vallee was driving a car that was registered to Thomas Vallee. --Tommy PS "Does seem some info Car in Vallee's name" Yes, you must be dyslexic. edited and bumped so Gaal can't ignore it Edited July 13, 2014 by Thomas Graves Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steven Gaal Posted July 13, 2014 Share Posted July 13, 2014 edited and bumped so Gaal can't ignore it (GRAVES) ///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////// The thrust of the debate on this thread has become whether or not High or Low level CIA people are part of the JFK assassination. POST #84 above has answers to said debate. Thomas Vallee's car registration is a inconsequential sidebar that has become a stumbling block for Mr. Graves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now