Was Oswald an Intelligence Agent?

[Paul Trejo]

As for the address stampted on OSWALD's FPCC handbills, it was the corner entrance to the same inside offices in the same building, according to Oliver Stone. This is somehow innocent sounding? Not to me.

Banister was surrounded by Cuban Exile radicals and their supporters. They filled his building. How can it be innocent for OSWALD to have an office in the same building?

Stone was wrong. Each entrance led to different offices. Banister's office was not surrounded by anti-Castro people in 1963, when Oswald was in town. Banister was active in anti-Castro matters in 1960-61. It is amazing how the erroneous info about this has been repeated from book to book.

Well, Stephen, if Oliver Stone (JFK) was mistaken about the two entrances of the same building leading to the same set of offices used by both OSWALD and BANISTER, then do you suppose that Jim Garrison was misinformed by Jack S. Martin about the working relationship between BANISTER and OSWALD in NOLA during the summer of 1963?

I ask because Thomas Beckham apparently confirmed that same story of Jack S. Martin to Joan Mellen (Farewell to Justice, 2009).

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 24, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[David Josephs]

1 ) Do you think Oswald associated with Guy Banister or people who were close to him? If so, with whom?

2 ) Do you think Oswald rented, or tried to rent, an office at 544 Camp Street?

3 ) Do you have an opinion as to whether or not Oswald stamped some of his FPCC fliers and Corliss Lamont pamphlets with the Camp Street address?

4 ) If so, why do you think he did that? And last but not least.........

5 ) Did you finish writing your book?

Thanks,

--Tommy

1) There are enough people who claim a Banister-Oswald relationship that it is possible that there was one. On the other hand, some of the claimants are not impressive: I'm not sure the Campbell brothers really knew Banister. I don't know why Delphine Roberts changed her story so dramatically in 1978. I have so many reservations about the tales told by Prof. Michael Kurtz, that I can't accept his claims without corroboration. You see my point??

2) Yes, I do think Oswald probably arranged to rent an office at 544 Camp, and when Newman and Arthus found out the purpose, they begged out of the deal. And that they "misremembered" to the authorities after the assassination.

3) Yes, like I said above, Russo printed an Oswald FPCC flyer with the stamp in his "Live By The Sword." Inquiries indicated that the flyer originated with Frank Martello's widow.

4) I don't know. I think he really expected to have an office there, at one time.

5) Getting close! I've been spurred on by several factors: A friend who simply has been gently pushing, another researcher who has traded some great Ferrie stuff with me, and the unauthorized use of a lot of my material by a crazy person. I've adopted the Rick Nelson philosophy about the Ferrie project: "You can't please everyone, so you've got to please yourself."

Hi Stephen et al...

1) I notice you do not mention Gaudet related to 544 Camp, Bannister and Oswald... Is he not a reliable witness to Bannister-Oswald?

2) Was it necessary for Oswald to actually rent the space if Bannister is already there and he was working with/thru him and his associates?

3) Other than Russo there does not seem to be any "544 Camp" flyers, only the Corliss pamphlet and his stamp kit (below is a report of th3e SS trying to distance Oswald from 544 Camp)

4) Seems to me that he was playing with the stamp kit for a variety of reasons over that summer... He had stamped his PO BOX and MAGAZINE addresses and evidently 544 CAMP as well. That his stamp kit was used to stamp the Corliss book with Camp Street should give the SS a little evidence that he was associated with that address.

I have not looked into CAMP as deeply as you and look forward to reading the work you've done...

Does the fact that most everyone involved with these flyers was US intelligence and that the flyers were in direct opposition of Oswald's stated intentions to the same people who he tells "Hit me" - as an anti-Castro supporter - not give us enough reason to associate Oswald with Bannister's little operation? Facinating stuff... thanks Stephen

DJ

[Jon G. Tidd]

Let's suppose some intelligence organization -- CIA, ONI, Guy Bannister, whoever -- recruited Oswald to infiltrate pro-Castro Cubans. Or if you wish, anti-Castro Cubans.

The LAST thing that organization would do is have Oswald hang around with Guy Bannister.

The only thing I can figure is that possibly Bannister supported the leafletting efforts of Oswald in order to flush out some street level Castro supporters. Supporters who wouldn't connect Oswald to Bannister. This seems like a waste of time and money to me, but who knows how Bannister thought.

The idea that someone financed or otherwise encouraged Oswald's summer 1963 NOLA leafletting in order to set up Oswald as JFK's assassin is unbelievable. The idea someone tried to gain advantage from what Oswald was inclined to do, leafletting, is believable. But this idea doesn't necessarily point toward conspiracy to kill JFK.

Yet, someone observing Oswald at a distance might have perceived him as a useful person. A person who openly engaged in pro-communist activities. A person who was being watched by the CIA and FBI. A person who could be induced to move from Point A to Point B. A person who resented "authorities".

[Thomas Graves]

Let's suppose some intelligence organization -- CIA, ONI, Guy Bannister, whoever -- recruited Oswald to infiltrate pro-Castro Cubans. Or if you wish, anti-Castro Cubans.

The LAST thing that organization would do is have Oswald hang around with Guy Bannister.

The only thing I can figure is that possibly Bannister supported the leafletting efforts of Oswald in order to flush out some street level Castro supporters. Supporters who wouldn't connect Oswald to Bannister. This seems like a waste of time and money to me, but who knows how Bannister thought.

The idea that someone financed or otherwise encouraged Oswald's summer 1963 NOLA leafletting in order to set up Oswald as JFK's assassin is unbelievable. The idea someone tried to gain advantage from what Oswald was inclined to do, leafletting, is believable. But this idea doesn't necessarily point toward conspiracy to kill JFK.

Yet, someone observing Oswald at a distance might have perceived him as a useful person. A person who openly engaged in pro-communist activities. A person who was being watched by the CIA and FBI. A person who could be induced to move from Point A to Point B. A person who resented "authorities".

Going from memory here but I believe that sixteen year-old amateur photographer James "Jim" Doyle (since deceased) observed Oswald's being watched closely and and being photographed by a man using an "exceedingly expensive" camera the day Oswald and Bringuier and two other Cubans were arrested for disturbing the peace, on August 9, 1963. Doyle said that the man with the camera kinda stuck out because he was wearing a grey suit on a hot New Orleans day when all the other men wear wearing short-sleeved shirts.

Also, in the notes made by a journalist (Billings?) who "helped" Jim Garrison in his investigation there is reference to a "shepherd," apparently spotted at Oswald's leafletings, including at Oswald's brief Maison Blanche Building leafleting by, of all people, Carlos Bringuier and his young sidekick Miguel Cruz, and that the "shepherd" was wearing a coat and tie and sunglasses and was taking pictures of Oswald. Billings wrote that, according to Garrison, the "shepherd" had a 1-inch scar on his left eye brow. Billings or Garrison apparently wondered whether or not this same "shepherd" dude might have been the driver of the "tan station wagon." I assume that what they are referring to is the station wagon that Orest Pena or one of his friends saw (a couple of days after the notorious Oswald-vomiting-the-lemonade-on-the-bar incident at Pena's bar in New Orleans) in which car was riding the commie-speaking Mexican-looking dude who had accompanied Oswald into the bar a few days or nights earlier.

http://www.jfk-online.com/billings4.html

In the Jim Doyle film you can see a tall, athletic-looking man wearing a grey suit and scratching the back of his neck while standing, with his back to the camera and right in front of it, watching Oswald who is walking past him and apparently wearing his "Viva La Fidel" sign, as reported by Doyle's younger sister, who also witnessed the event. To see the guy I'm talking about, go to 3:58 of this youtube video:

I believe you can see the back of the same man wearing the same suit in photos and / or films taken a few minutes after the assassination, watching the goings-on in front of the TSBD.

--Tommy

Edited February 25, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Jon G. Tidd]

Tommy,

Your information is important. If it's true, it indicates clearly Oswald was being monitored.

Does a record of the grey-suit-man's filming exist to your knowledge?

[Thomas Graves]

Tommy,

Your information is important. If it's true, it indicates clearly Oswald was being monitored.

Does a record of the grey-suit-man's filming exist to your knowledge?

Jon,

If it is indeed the same person, you can see him (but only from the back -- good tradecraft, eh? -- and therefore you can't see if he's holding a camera) in the Jim Doyle film clip itself which I'll try to track down and post here, I have posted it here on this forum in the past but I forget now which thread.

It will take me a little longer to track down the photo or film which "captured," I believe, the same guy (with the same tall, athletic physique, the same hair, the same complexion, the same grey suit or coat), standing in front of the TSBD after the assassination, but do I believe I've bookmarked or downloaded, or, worst case scenario, taken a screen shot of it. Please bear in mind that this dude is only visible from the back in the 8/09/63 Jim Doyle film and in in the 11/22/63 TSBD photograph or film, too. So I don't think my "discovery" will lead anywhere, unfortunately.

But.... My overactive, vivid imagination tells me that the guy sure looks a heck-of-a-lot like David Sanchez Morales from behind.

Now for my preemptive "Parthian shot" cynical joke for the day: "We know that it couldn't be Morales, don't we, because after all Morales was CIA and we all know that the CIA couldn't possibly have been involved in the assassination.

LOL (Just giving you a hard time, Jon.)

--Tommy

PS An explanation regarding something I said on my earlier post. According to Richard Billings, Bringuier and Cruz saw the "shepherd" with, or monitoring, Oswald while he was passing out flyers in front of the Maison Blanche Building (where Dean Andrew's office happened to be situated). The Maison Blanche Building is on the same street but two blocks away from where Oswald and Bringuier and Cruz and the other Cuban guy were arrested in the 700 block of Canal Street on August 9, 1963. Dean Andrews himself seemed to remember Oswald's telling him, "It's a job" while leafleting in front of the Maison Blanche Building at 901 Canal Street.

http://www.jfk-online.com/andrews02.html

So it's interesting that Bringuier and Cruz may have observed Oswald's leafleting at two different places on Canal Street, and perhaps even on different days. And the possibility that someone who was monitoring or 'shepherding" Oswald was noticed by not only young Jim Doyle, but by Bringuier and Cruz, as well, and maybe even at different locations and / or different days.

Or is it a lot simpler than that? Was it a case of Billings's and Garrison's being confused as to where, exactly, on Canal Street Oswald and Bringuier were arrested on August 9, 1963?

http://departmentstoremuseum.blogspot.com/2010/05/maison-blanche-new-orleans-louisiana.html

Edited February 25, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Stephen Roy]

As for the address stampted on OSWALD's FPCC handbills, it was the corner entrance to the same inside offices in the same building, according to Oliver Stone. This is somehow innocent sounding? Not to me.

Banister was surrounded by Cuban Exile radicals and their supporters. They filled his building. How can it be innocent for OSWALD to have an office in the same building?

Stone was wrong. Each entrance led to different offices. Banister's office was not surrounded by anti-Castro people in 1963, when Oswald was in town. Banister was active in anti-Castro matters in 1960-61. It is amazing how the erroneous info about this has been repeated from book to book.

Well, Stephen, if Oliver Stone (JFK) was mistaken about the two entrances of the same building leading to the same set of offices used by both OSWALD and BANISTER, then do you suppose that Jim Garrison was misinformed by Jack S. Martin about the working relationship between BANISTER and OSWALD in NOLA during the summer of 1963?

I ask because Thomas Beckham apparently confirmed that same story of Jack S. Martin to Joan Mellen (Farewell to Justice, 2009).

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Stone made lots of mistakes. The layout of the building is confirmed by the HSCA testimony of owner Sam Newman, by others who were there in 1963, and by pictures made later of the building (since torn down).

There are many things that can be said about Jack S. Martin. One is that his MANY stories changed radically over the years. I did a newsgroup post on just a portion of this many years ago.

Have you ever looked into the opinions of other researchers on the believeability of Tommy Beckham?

[Thomas Graves]

Tommy,

Your information is important. If it's true, it indicates clearly Oswald was being monitored.

Does a record of the grey-suit-man's filming exist to your knowledge?

Jon,

If it is indeed the same person, you can see him (but only from the back -- good tradecraft, eh? -- and therefore you can't see if he's holding a camera) in the Jim Doyle film clip itself which I'll try to track down and post here, I have posted it here on this forum in the past but I forget now which thread.

It will take me a little longer to track down the photo or film which "captured," I believe, the same guy (with the same tall, athletic physique, the same hair, the same complexion, the same grey suit or coat), standing in front of the TSBD after the assassination, but do I believe I've bookmarked or downloaded, or, worst case scenario, taken a screen shot of it. Please bear in mind that this dude is only visible from the back in the 8/09/63 Jim Doyle film and in in the 11/22/63 TSBD photograph or film, too. So I don't think my "discovery" will lead anywhere, unfortunately.

But.... My overactive, vivid imagination tells me that the guy sure looks a heck-of-a-lot like David Sanchez Morales from behind.

Now for my preemptive "Parthian shot" cynical joke for the day: "We know that it couldn't be Morales, don't we, because after all Morales was CIA and we all know that the CIA couldn't possibly have been involved in the assassination.

LOL (Just giving you a hard time, Jon.)

--Tommy

PS An explanation regarding something I said on my earlier post. According to Richard Billings, Bringuier and Cruz noticed the "shepherd" with (or monitoring?) Oswald while he was passing out flyers in front of the Maison Blanche Building (where Dean Andrew's office happened to be situated).

http://www.jfk-online.com/billings4.html

The Maison Blanche Building is on the same street but two blocks away from where Oswald and Bringuier and Cruz and the other Cuban guy were arrested in the 700 block of Canal Street on August 9, 1963. Dean Andrews himself seemed to remember Oswald's telling him, "It's a job" while leafleting in front of the Maison Blanche Building at 901 Canal Street.

http://www.jfk-online.com/andrews02.html

So it's interesting that Bringuier and Cruz may have observed Oswald's leafleting at two different places on Canal Street, and perhaps even on different days. And the possibility that someone who was taking pictures of Oswald was noticed by not only young Jim Doyle, but by Bringuier and Cruz, as well, and maybe even at different locations and / or different days.

Or is it a lot simpler than that? Was it a case of Billings's and Garrison's being confused as to where, exactly, on Canal Street Oswald and Bringuier were arrested on August 9, 1963? Even if so, it's still significant that young Jim Doyle wasn't the only person who noticed a man who was unusually interested in observing and documenting the leafleting Oswald. Evidently Carlos Bringuier and sidekick Miguel Cruz noticed him (or maybe one of "them"), as well.

http://departmentstoremuseum.blogspot.com/2010/05/maison-blanche-new-orleans-louisiana.html

expanded and bumped

Well, I see that this "bump" was preempted again by an excellent post by Stephen Roy, so maybe I'll just cool my wheels for a while until I find those film clips or photos I was talking about.....

--Tommy

Edited February 25, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Stephen Roy]

1 ) Do you think Oswald associated with Guy Banister or people who were close to him? If so, with whom?

2 ) Do you think Oswald rented, or tried to rent, an office at 544 Camp Street?

3 ) Do you have an opinion as to whether or not Oswald stamped some of his FPCC fliers and Corliss Lamont pamphlets with the Camp Street address?

4 ) If so, why do you think he did that? And last but not least.........

5 ) Did you finish writing your book?

Thanks,

--Tommy

1) There are enough people who claim a Banister-Oswald relationship that it is possible that there was one. On the other hand, some of the claimants are not impressive: I'm not sure the Campbell brothers really knew Banister. I don't know why Delphine Roberts changed her story so dramatically in 1978. I have so many reservations about the tales told by Prof. Michael Kurtz, that I can't accept his claims without corroboration. You see my point??

2) Yes, I do think Oswald probably arranged to rent an office at 544 Camp, and when Newman and Arthus found out the purpose, they begged out of the deal. And that they "misremembered" to the authorities after the assassination.

3) Yes, like I said above, Russo printed an Oswald FPCC flyer with the stamp in his "Live By The Sword." Inquiries indicated that the flyer originated with Frank Martello's widow.

4) I don't know. I think he really expected to have an office there, at one time.

5) Getting close! I've been spurred on by several factors: A friend who simply has been gently pushing, another researcher who has traded some great Ferrie stuff with me, and the unauthorized use of a lot of my material by a crazy person. I've adopted the Rick Nelson philosophy about the Ferrie project: "You can't please everyone, so you've got to please yourself."

Hi Stephen et al...

1) I notice you do not mention Gaudet related to 544 Camp, Bannister and Oswald... Is he not a reliable witness to Bannister-Oswald?

2) Was it necessary for Oswald to actually rent the space if Bannister is already there and he was working with/thru him and his associates?

3) Other than Russo there does not seem to be any "544 Camp" flyers, only the Corliss pamphlet and his stamp kit (below is a report of th3e SS trying to distance Oswald from 544 Camp)

4) Seems to me that he was playing with the stamp kit for a variety of reasons over that summer... He had stamped his PO BOX and MAGAZINE addresses and evidently 544 CAMP as well. That his stamp kit was used to stamp the Corliss book with Camp Street should give the SS a little evidence that he was associated with that address.

I have not looked into CAMP as deeply as you and look forward to reading the work you've done...

Does the fact that most everyone involved with these flyers was US intelligence and that the flyers were in direct opposition of Oswald's stated intentions to the same people who he tells "Hit me" - as an anti-Castro supporter - not give us enough reason to associate Oswald with Bannister's little operation? Facinating stuff... thanks Stephen

DJ

1) I only mentioned three selected examples of people who could have been good witnesses but weren't. Gaudet seems like a good witness. My only reservation is that he said nothing until 1978.

2) I'm not talking hypotheticals. Oswald said he rented an office, and Newman and Arthus were just cagey enough to make me think that he really had tried to do so. But hypothetically, if Oswald was an agent, yes, he'd likely rent an office and conceal any Banister connection.

3) I first saw an LHO flyer with the 544 stamp in one of Groden's books, but people told me it was just a prop from the Stone film. When I noticed the one in Russo's book, whom I consider more responsible, I asked him the source and he said it was Martello's widow.

4) Yeah, the SS and the FBI were concerned and mystified by the 544 stamp, at different times. (I asked an SA in the NO FBI office about the quick investigation of the 544 stamp in the days immediately after the assassination; He said it "never occurred to them" that it might be associated with Banister).

When you say "most everyone involved with these flyers was US intelligence," who do you mean?

[Stephen Roy]

Let's suppose some intelligence organization -- CIA, ONI, Guy Bannister, whoever -- recruited Oswald to infiltrate pro-Castro Cubans. Or if you wish, anti-Castro Cubans.

The LAST thing that organization would do is have Oswald hang around with Guy Bannister.

The only thing I can figure is that possibly Bannister supported the leafletting efforts of Oswald in order to flush out some street level Castro supporters. Supporters who wouldn't connect Oswald to Bannister. This seems like a waste of time and money to me, but who knows how Bannister thought.

The idea that someone financed or otherwise encouraged Oswald's summer 1963 NOLA leafletting in order to set up Oswald as JFK's assassin is unbelievable. The idea someone tried to gain advantage from what Oswald was inclined to do, leafletting, is believable. But this idea doesn't necessarily point toward conspiracy to kill JFK.

Yet, someone observing Oswald at a distance might have perceived him as a useful person. A person who openly engaged in pro-communist activities. A person who was being watched by the CIA and FBI. A person who could be induced to move from Point A to Point B. A person who resented "authorities".

Some good observations here, especially: "The LAST thing that organization would do is have Oswald hang around with Guy Banister."

[Thomas Graves]

Let's suppose some intelligence organization -- CIA, ONI, Guy Bannister, whoever -- recruited Oswald to infiltrate pro-Castro Cubans. Or if you wish, anti-Castro Cubans.

The LAST thing that organization would do is have Oswald hang around with Guy Bannister.

The only thing I can figure is that possibly Bannister supported the leafletting efforts of Oswald in order to flush out some street level Castro supporters. Supporters who wouldn't connect Oswald to Bannister. This seems like a waste of time and money to me, but who knows how Bannister thought.

The idea that someone financed or otherwise encouraged Oswald's summer 1963 NOLA leafletting in order to set up Oswald as JFK's assassin is unbelievable. The idea someone tried to gain advantage from what Oswald was inclined to do, leafletting, is believable. But this idea doesn't necessarily point toward conspiracy to kill JFK.

Yet, someone observing Oswald at a distance might have perceived him as a useful person. A person who openly engaged in pro-communist activities. A person who was being watched by the CIA and FBI. A person who could be induced to move from Point A to Point B. A person who resented "authorities".

Some good observations here, especially: "The LAST thing that organization would do is have Oswald hang around with Guy Banister."

Maybe that would explain why Oswald didn't "hang around" with the guy who was setting him up. Banister probably tried to discourage Oswald from "hanging out" with him, but Oswald just weaseled his way into Banister's office a few times, anyway!

LOL

--Tommy

Edited February 25, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Paul Trejo]

...I suppose they could definitely be the same but the amateur artist in me gives an astounding "no" off the bat lol...I mean they look like two different inidividuals. Tilsted back head doesn't produce too much a difference in appearance of the same person does it? (at least significantly) I don't mean to forcefully push the dual Oswald theory here (there seems, on the surface good evidence or arguments for that, despite counterclaims to such a theory) but perhaps in 6 years one's appearance could change depending on the age prior to the 6 years. The Fain question is a very good one and also, does anyone have any idea who that CIA recruiting officer was who probably recruited Oswald in the 50s? (I had notes written about this from Jim D's Destiny Betrayed 2md Ed but have since lost them...) he would be a key individual as far as Oswald's intelligence history is concerned as well.

I also had to look twice to convince myself that the two photographs of OSWALD you posted were the same person. Yet when I noted that the photos were taken years apart, with different cameras, by different photographers, I could see the similarities. A lot can happen in four years. Any weight change can make a big difference. Also, viewing the top of the nose is far different from viewing the bottom of the nose. Here's a couple of photos from a famous person -- Judy Garland -- only a four years apart, I believe -- by two different cameras. One might think they aren't the same person.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 25, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Thomas Graves]

...I suppose they could definitely be the same but the amateur artist in me gives an astounding "no" off the bat lol...I mean they look like two different inidividuals. Tilsted back head doesn't produce too much a difference in appearance of the same person does it? (at least significantly) I don't mean to forcefully push the dual Oswald theory here (there seems, on the surface good evidence or arguments for that, despite counterclaims to such a theory) but perhaps in 6 years one's appearance could change depending on the age prior to the 6 years. The Fain question is a very good one and also, does anyone have any idea who that CIA recruiting officer was who probably recruited Oswald in the 50s? (I had notes written about this from Jim D's Destiny Betrayed 2md Ed but have since lost them...) he would be a key individual as far as Oswald's intelligence history is concerned as well.

I also had to look twice to convince myself that the two photographs of OSWALD you posted were the same person. Yet when I noted that the photos were taken years apart, with different cameras, by different photographers, I could see the similarities. A lot can happen in four years. Any weight change can make a big difference. Also, viewing the top of the nose is far different from viewing the bottom of the nose. Here's a couple of photos from a famous person -- Judy Garland -- only a four years apart, I believe -- by two different cameras. One might think they aren't the same person.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo garland_14.jpggarland_17.jpg

It's very obvious that these are photos of Harriet and Lee Ann.

--Tommy

Edited February 25, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Paul Trejo]

Let's suppose some intelligence organization -- CIA, ONI, Guy Bannister, whoever -- recruited Oswald to infiltrate pro-Castro Cubans. Or if you wish, anti-Castro Cubans.

The LAST thing that organization would do is have Oswald hang around with Guy Bannister.

The only thing I can figure is that possibly Bannister supported the leafletting efforts of Oswald in order to flush out some street level Castro supporters. Supporters who wouldn't connect Oswald to Bannister. This seems like a waste of time and money to me, but who knows how Bannister thought.

The idea that someone financed or otherwise encouraged Oswald's summer 1963 NOLA leafletting in order to set up Oswald as JFK's assassin is unbelievable. The idea someone tried to gain advantage from what Oswald was inclined to do, leafletting, is believable. But this idea doesn't necessarily point toward conspiracy to kill JFK.

Yet, someone observing Oswald at a distance might have perceived him as a useful person. A person who openly engaged in pro-communist activities. A person who was being watched by the CIA and FBI. A person who could be induced to move from Point A to Point B. A person who resented "authorities".

OK, Jon, I'd like to respond to this:

(1.0) It's important to distinguish between an official Intelligence Organization (FBI, CIA, ONI) and Guy Banister. Banister was a crooked politician, working for Carlos Marcello along with David Ferrie.

(1.1) I imagine (based on Garrison's and Mellen's work) that Banister might get some cash infusions from Clay Shaw -- yet by my reading, Mafia don Carlos Marcello was the actual employer of Banister and Ferrie during the summer and fall of 1963.

(1.2) What I would suppose (following Jim Garrison's Jack S. Martin, and Joan Mellen's Tom Beckham) is that Guy Banister recruited Oswald to infiltrate pro-Castro Cubans.

(1.3) This was on *behalf* of the anti-Castro Cubans (whom OSWALD also offered to train for Carlos Bringuier).

(1.4) Naturally, any CIA officers involved in AMWORLD, AMTRUNK and AMLASH might be mildly interested in Guy Banister's crooked deal -- but from a distance -- to see if they might profit in some manner, in the near future.

(2.0) I agree entirely that the LAST thing Guy Banister would want is to have OSWALD hang around with Guy Banister -- if (and only if) infiltrating Castro's people was really BANISTER's motive.

(2.1) Yet Jack S. Martin said that OSWALD was often in meetings with Banister.

(2.2) Banister's own secretary said that she saw OSWALD with her boss, and that her boss once stood up for OSWALD.

(2.3) So, Banister evidently gave OSWALD the impression that the 'enemy' was dizzy, and they could get away with practically anything -- like using these Fake FPCC credentials to Mexico City to trick their way into Cuba, during the final week of September 1963.

(2.4) It is plausible that the address of 544 Camp Street, NOLA (on the genuine handbills for a Fake FPCC) was stamped on those handbills by an oversight; a mistake.

(2.5) For example -- not all of OSWALD's FPCC handbills had that address on them.

(2.6) For example, the FBI submitted an FPCC handbill with the stamp of 544 Camp Street, directly to the Warren Commission Exhibits -- and it never occurred to the FBI that there might be some connection. It took Jim Garrison four years to suspect that -- and NOLA was his home town.

(3.0) I agree with you Jon, that it would have been silly for BANISTER to use OSWALD to flush out some street-level Castro supporters. It makes no sense.

(3.1) What makes more sense is that BANISTER might use OSWALD for a larger plot.

(3.2) That plot could have been sold to OSWALD as 'killing Fidel Castro.'

(3.3) BANISTER's real plot would be (IMHO) creating a PATSY with an iron-clad history of FPCC support, in newspaper, radio, TV and police reports. Iron-clad.

(3.4) To this very day people still show OSWALD handing out leaflets in front of the NOLA Trade Mart and declare him to be an authentic FPCC member. Oy vey.

(4.0) If (and only if) the story told by Marina Oswald, George De Mohrenschildt, Jeanne De Mohrenschildt and Volkmar Schmidt (i.e the Walker shooting) is presumed to be true, then we may say that OSWALD was inclined to do more with his life than merely leafletting.

(4.1) That is, OSWALD was not disinclined to use his rifle to impress his rich and yuppie Dallas friends.

(4.2) I do agree with you this far, Jon -- that nobody would dare tell OSWALD that he was being set up to be a Communist Patsy for a much bigger game.

(4.3) What points to the JFK murder conspiracy is simply that OSWALD was set up to look like an authentic FPCC supporter (i.e. a Communist) in NOLA -- and on that basis was exploited as the Patsy in the JFK murder.

(4.4) Thus, anybody who kept nagging the Warren Commission in 1964 that OSWALD was no "Lone Nut" but a Communist agitator -- is rightly suspected (IMHO) of being part of the Conspiracy.

(4.5) I note that Ex-General WALKER, even in his WC testimony, would insist that the WC was all wrong about OSWALD.

(5.0) I agree with you, too, Jon, that someone observing OSWALD "from a distance" might have considered him useful to their plans.

(5.1) That could include the CIA (since the CIA said that year that they considered "laying on of interviews" with Oswald).

(5.2) It could also include Ex-General WALKER.

(5.3) The connection in WALKER's mind could be revenge against JFK/RFK for the April shooting.

(5.4) WALKER hints as much in many of his personal papers.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited February 25, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Thomas Graves]

Let's suppose some intelligence organization -- CIA, ONI, Guy Bannister, whoever -- recruited Oswald to infiltrate pro-Castro Cubans. Or if you wish, anti-Castro Cubans.

The LAST thing that organization would do is have Oswald hang around with Guy Bannister.

The only thing I can figure is that possibly Bannister supported the leafletting efforts of Oswald in order to flush out some street level Castro supporters. Supporters who wouldn't connect Oswald to Bannister. This seems like a waste of time and money to me, but who knows how Bannister thought.

The idea that someone financed or otherwise encouraged Oswald's summer 1963 NOLA leafletting in order to set up Oswald as JFK's assassin is unbelievable. The idea someone tried to gain advantage from what Oswald was inclined to do, leafletting, is believable. But this idea doesn't necessarily point toward conspiracy to kill JFK.

Yet, someone observing Oswald at a distance might have perceived him as a useful person. A person who openly engaged in pro-communist activities. A person who was being watched by the CIA and FBI. A person who could be induced to move from Point A to Point B. A person who resented "authorities".

OK, Jon, I'd like to respond to this:

(1.0) It's important to distinguish between an official Intelligence Organization (FBI, CIA, ONI) and Guy Banister. Banister was a crooked politician, working for Carlos Marcello along with David Ferrie.

(1.1) I imagine (based on Garrison's and Mellen's work) that Banister might get some cash infusions from Clay Shaw -- yet by my reading, Mafia don Carlos Marcello was the an actual employer of Banister and Ferrie in 1963.

(1.2) What I would suppose (following Jim Garrison's Jack S. Martin, and Joan Mellen's Tom Beckham) is that Guy Banister recruited Oswald to infiltrate pro-Castro Cubans.

(1.3) This was on *behalf* of the anti-Castro Cubans (whom OSWALD also offered to train for Carlos Bringuier).

(1.4) Naturally, any CIA officers involved in AMWORLD, AMTRUNK and AMLASH might be mildly interested in Guy Banister's crooked deal -- but from a distance -- to see if they might profit in some manner, in the near future.

(2.0) I agree entirely that the LAST thing Guy Banister would want is to have OSWALD hang around with Guy Banister -- if (and only if) infiltrating Castro's people was really BANISTER's motive.

(2.1) Yet Jack S. Martin says that OSWALD was often in meetings with Banister.

(2.2) Banister's own secretary said that she saw OSWALD with her boss, and that her boss once stood up for OSWALD.

(2.3) So, Banister evidently gave OSWALD the impression that the 'enemy' was dizzy, and they could get away with practically anything -- like using these Fake FPCC credentials to Mexico City during the final week of September 1963.

(2.4) It is plausible that the address of 544 Camp Street, NOLA, on the genuine handbills for a Fake FPCC was stamped on those handbills by an oversight; a mistake.

(2.5) For example -- not all FPCC handbills found had that address on them.

(2.6) For example, the FBI submitted an FPCC handbill with the stamp of 544 Camp Street, directly to the Warren Commission Exhibits -- and it never occurred to the FBI that there might be some connection. It took Jim Garrison to discover that, since NOLA was his home town.

(3.0) I agree with you Jon, that it would have been silly for BANISTER to use OSWALD to flush out some street-level Castro supporters. It makes no sense.

(3.1) What makes more sense is that BANISTER might use OSWALD for a larger plot.

(3.2) That plot could have been sold to OSWALD as 'killing Fidel Castro.'

(3.3) BANISTER's real plot would be (IMHO) creating a PATSY with an iron-clad history of FPCC support, in newspaper, radio, TV and police reports. Iron-clad.

(3.4) To this very day people still show OSWALD handing out leaflets in front of the NOLA Trade Mart and declare him to be an authentic FPCC member. Oy vey.

(4.0) If (and only if) the story told by Marina Oswald, George De Mohrenschildt, Jeanne De Mohrenschildt and Volkmar Schmidt (i.e the Walker shooting) is presumed to be true, then we may say that OSWALD was inclined to do more with his life than merely leafletting.

(4.1) That is, OSWALD was not disinclined to use his rifle to impress his rich and yuppie Dallas friends.

(4.2) I do agree with you this far, Jon -- that nobody would dare tell OSWALD that he was being set up to be a Communist Patsy for a much bigger game.

(4.3) What points to the JFK murder conspiracy is simply that OSWALD was set up to look like an authentic FPCC supporter (i.e. a Communist) in NOLA -- and on that basis was exploited as the Patsy in the JFK murder.

(4.4) Thus, anybody who kept nagging the Warren Commission in 1964 that OSWALD was no "Lone Nut" but a Communist agitator -- is rightly suspected (IMHO) of being part of the Conspiracy.

(4.5) I note that Ex-General WALKER, even in his WC testimony, would insist that the WC was all wrong about OSWALD.

(5.0) I agree with you, too, Jon, that someone observing OSWALD "from a distance" might have considered him useful to their plans.

(5.1) That could include the CIA (since the CIA said that year that they considered "laying on of interviews" with Oswald).

(5.2) It could also include Ex-General WALKER.

(5.3) The connection in WALKER's mind could be revenge against JFK/RFK for the April shooting.

(5.4) WALKER hints as much in many of his personal papers.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Guy Banister was a private investigator, not a politician.

A politician is someone who tries, and maybe succeeds, to get elected to a public office by the electorate of his neighborhood, town, city, region, county, state, or country.

The real question should be, "Was Guy Banister a materialistic private investigator?"

LOL

--Tommy

Edited February 25, 2015 by Thomas Graves