Was Oswald an Intelligence Agent?

[Jon G. Tidd]

Tommy @ post #686:

I think you believe Oswald was a puppet. If I'm correct, I disagree.

[Paul Trejo]

Paul, I don't think the JFK Kill Team had anything to do with Lee Oswald.

The men who pulled the triggers on JFK and their direct handlers didn't need to know anything about Oswald.

If they didn't need to know -- they didn't know.

The Oswald Kill Team failed to murder Oswald in a timely manner so the major perps pulled the plug on Ozzie the Red Agent.

What did the Oswald kill team need team know about the JFK assassination other than time and place?

They only knew what they needed to know.

Sorry, Cliff, I didn't define my terms to start.

In my parlance: KILL-TEAM means anybody connected with the plot to kill JFK -- from planners to executors. This includes those who worked from April 1963 to September 1963 to "sheep-dip" or frame Lee Harvey Oswald as a COMMUNIST.

In my parlance: COVER-UP-TEAM means anybody connected with Hoover's 11/22/1963 concept to COVER-UP the fact that there was a plot to kill JFK -- and insisted instead on framing Lee Harvey Oswald as a LONE-NUT.

In my view, the KILL-TEAM was utterly separate from the COVER-UP-TEAM. The COVER-UP-TEAM chose the LONE NUT portrait of Oswald precisely because it CONTRADICTED the KILL-TEAM's COMMUNIST portrait of Oswald.

The COVER-UP-TEAM realized that the KILL-TEAM wanted to blame the Communists for killing JFK, so that the USA would invade Cuba.

If the US Government told the American public the truth, there would have been riots in the streets in the middle of the Cold War -- and could have started a Civil War and even WW3. Therefore, for purposes of NATIONAL SECURITY (exactly as they said) the US Government chose to re-frame Oswald as a LONE NUT.

That undermined the KILL-TEAM. They killed JFK, but they failed to get what they really wanted -- THE INVASION OF CUBA.

Hoover, LBJ, Dulles and Warren, therefore, foiled the second part of the KILL-TEAM motive.

This COVER-UP-TEAM accomplished this by means of lies about Lee Harvey Oswald -- but they also told us that this was so, and that the Truth about Lee Harvey Oswald would be released in 75 years (2039, presumably after the end of the Cold War).

After the USSR fell in 1990, President GHW Bush signed the JFK Records Act in 1992 to remove 22 years from that date, so that we should finally receive the Truth about Lee Harvey Oswald on 26 October 2017.

This, IMHO, is evidence that the COVER-UP-TEAM (and their Lone-Nut Oswald) was *opposed* to the KILL-TEAM (and their Communist Oswald).

Both Oswald portraits were lies.

Oswald, IMHO, thought he was an undercover double-agent working for the CIA to kill Fidel Castro, as a fake member of the FPCC. Actually, his handlers were FAKE CIA people, like Guy Banister, David Ferrie, Clay Shaw, Jack S. Martin, Fred Crisman and Thomas Beckham. Their supporters are also well-known to JFK Researchers: Loran Hall, Larry Howard, Gerry Patrick Hemming, Ed Butler, Carlos Bringiuer and various Cuban Exiles.

I hope my question is finally clear. I'll repeat it: How could the KILL-TEAM, which promoted a COMMUNIST OSWALD, possibly be the same as the COVER-UP-TEAM, which promoted a LONE-NUT OSWALD?

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 4, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Jon G. Tidd]

Paul Trejo,

Your theory is interesting. A kill-team and a cover-up team.

I buy that.

[Paul Trejo]

Paul Trejo,

Your theory is interesting. A kill-team and a cover-up team.

I buy that.

Right, Jon, and notice how this also harmonizes with your result:

* Oswald at no time acted on behalf of an intelligence service, although he had been observed by the CIA, FBI, and KGB since his Marine days.

I will add a theory: Oswald himself wanted to be hired by an Intelligence Service -- so badly that the KILL-TEAM would notice this, and then develop a plan to lie to Oswald by claiming to be part of the CIA, with a project for Oswald so that he could prove he had "the right stuff" and try out for a permanent job in the "CIA."

His mission was (IMHO) to pretend to be an Officer in a fake FPCC branch, then fool the Consulate in Mexico City, and get instant passage to Cuba, and join another team in Cuba to help kill Fidel Castro.

The people who framed him, IMHO, knew that he would never get past the Mexico City Consulate. Any official observers (like DAP) would have been hopeful that Oswald really could complete this mission. (If Oswald had been successful, he surely would have been offered a job by the CIA, right?)

The real purpose of the Fake FPCC in New Orleans was only to frame Oswald as a Communist. That was very successful.

The next move would be to blame the Communists for the murder of JFK. That part was a total failure.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

<edit typos>

Edited April 4, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Thomas Graves]

Tommy @ post #686:

I think you believe Oswald was a puppet. If I'm correct, I disagree.

Dear Jon,

I know you disagree.

You think he was just an "odd duck" who happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time.

Respectfully,

--Tommy

Isn't an intelligence agent, by definition, a "puppet," in that he or she does what they are told to do by their case officer?

Edited April 1, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Jon G. Tidd]

Tommy,

Yes. To an extent, a limited extent, an intelligence agent is a puppet in the sense of taking and following instructions given by a case officer or by an intermediary the case officer has instructed.

In an intelligence operation, however, it's critically important that an agent (that is, a person who has access to information desired by the intelligence service that has recruited the agent) appear to even a trained observer (that is, a hostile counter-intelligence operative) to be acting completely independently.

That's why I lean toward believing Marina's husband was not being manipulated by an intelligence service. He was such a flashing red light, any C.I. operative (let's say, Cuban or Soviet, for example) would have focused on him. So would have the CIA and FBI. Oswald stood out like the proverbial sore thumb. If you're a case officer whose mission is to gather information on whatever it is that makes Oswald stand out like a sore thumb, the last thing you're going to do is try to recruit Oswald to gather the information you want. You'll be found out and possibly endangered. In any event, your operation will fail.

I know I sound like a broken record on this.

[Paul Trejo]

Tommy,

Yes. To an extent, a limited extent, an intelligence agent is a puppet in the sense of taking and following instructions given by a case officer or by an intermediary the case officer has instructed.

In an intelligence operation, however, it's critically important that an agent (that is, a person who has access to information desired by the intelligence service that has recruited the agent) appear to even a trained observer (that is, a hostile counter-intelligence operative) to be acting completely independently.

That's why I lean toward believing Marina's husband was not being manipulated by an intelligence service. He was such a flashing red light, any C.I. operative (let's say, Cuban or Soviet, for example) would have focused on him. So would have the CIA and FBI. Oswald stood out like the proverbial sore thumb. If you're a case officer whose mission is to gather information on whatever it is that makes Oswald stand out like a sore thumb, the last thing you're going to do is try to recruit Oswald to gather the information you want. You'll be found out and possibly endangered. In any event, your operation will fail.

I know I sound like a broken record on this.

No, Jon, you're not a broken record at all -- you're repeating good sense until you get agreement. I agree with this statement 100%.

IMHO, Lee Harvey Oswald, in good faith, followed some lying liars who claimed to be in the CIA. Jim Garrison exposed them there in New Orleans, his home turf, and Oliver Stone outed them for posterity. These Fake CIA folks set up a Fake FPCC and made Lee Harvey Oswald the Fake Director of that Fake FPCC.

It's exactly as George De Mohrenschildt told the Warren Commission on 22 April 1964: "I never would believe that any government would be stupid enough to trust Lee with anything important."

George De Mohrenschildt (IMHO) was the ringleader who convinced Oswald to try to kill Ex-General Walker. This forever spoiled Oswald's chances of ever becoming a CIA Agent -- in the real world. In Oswald's imagination, however, Guy Banister would give him another chance.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited April 2, 2015 by Paul Trejo

[Jon G. Tidd]

Paul Trejo,

You quote George DeM before the Warren Commission:

"It's exactly as George De Mohrenschildt told the Warren Commission on 22 April 1964: "I never would believe that any government would be stupid enough to trust Lee with anything important."

I believe George DeM told the truth as he knew it.

The question is whether some foreign intelligence service saw Marina's husband as useful.

Great post.

[Paul Brancato]

I have a different interpretation of Oswald and FPCC. I don't think it reasonable that Oswald created the FPCC chapter in order to then infiltrate himself into Cuba as part of a CIA (or fake CIA) kill Castro operation. In my opinion it was the FPCC that was being smeared by the false tie to LHO, a man who wore his Marxist credentials on his sleeve publicly. It was common to smear left wing organizations by tying them to Communists. No one back then made a distinction between Marxist and Communist. They still don't.

[Thomas Graves]

I have a different interpretation of Oswald and FPCC. I don't think it reasonable that Oswald created the FPCC chapter in order to then infiltrate himself into Cuba as part of a CIA (or fake CIA) kill Castro operation. In my opinion it was the FPCC that was being smeared by the false tie to LHO, a man who wore his Marxist credentials on his sleeve publicly. It was common to smear left wing organizations by tying them to Communists. No one back then made a distinction between Marxist and Communist. They still don't.

Paul B.,

The FPCC was being smeared by whom? The FBI and the CIA, or Oswald?

--Tommy

Edited April 3, 2015 by Thomas Graves

[Tom Neal]

I have a different interpretation of Oswald and FPCC. I don't think it reasonable that Oswald created the FPCC chapter in order to then infiltrate himself into Cuba as part of a CIA (or fake CIA) kill Castro operation. In my opinion it was the FPCC that was being smeared by the false tie to LHO, a man who wore his Marxist credentials on his sleeve publicly. It was common to smear left wing organizations by tying them to Communists. No one back then made a distinction between Marxist and Communist. They still don't.

Paul,

You beat me to it!

I agree 100%. The FPCC was VERY successful and much feared by the anti-commies at the time LHO's FPCC affiliation was exposed. The FPCC made much ado about being "non-communist" and tying the "Communist" LHO to them was vital. This of course added to LHO's communist legend - despite the fact that Ozzie made the distinction that he was "a Marxist." The difference between the two was ignored. Considering the company he was keeping at the time, it seems pretty reasonable that this anti-FPCC op was suggested to him...

Following the assassination and Oswald's public "conviction" the FPCC was no longer the force it had been. This was one more reason to use LHO as the "patsy." An even stronger blow to the FPCC. The planners took out JFK *and* the FPCC with a single operation. Another indication of a well-planned professional hit.

Interesting that at the late night press conference the night of the assassination, DA Henry Wade linked Oswald to the Free Cuba Committee, but was immediately corrected by none other than Jack Ruby. Why would Ruby not only be aware of Oswald's connection to the FPCC, but spoke out to be certain the media learned this fact unless this FPCC smear was part of the assassination plan and Ruby was well aware of this fact?

Tom

[David Andrews]

I'm sorry, I would not believe G. DeM. on Oswald to the WC or to anyone once Oswald was arrested and dead. At best, DeM would try to minimize his own involvement and culpability in Oswald's progress. At worst - this is the man who wrote G.H.W. Bush to protect him from the HSCA, among other pursuers. And whom Bush cut like he did Barry Seal - without so much as the kind word Dick Helms expended on Clay Shaw.

Edited April 3, 2015 by David Andrews

[Greg Parker]

This is the the kind of thing I was talking about in another thread. The FPCC was not what the spooks, writers or researchers, claimed (or in some cases, just assumed) it was. The facts can only be ascertained by looking outside the boxes handed to us.

The FPCC was created by the CIA working on the "if you build it, they will come" principle. After the BoP "they" got a bit antsy and the FPCC became pretty much a paper tiger from that point... so then it became a useful "shell" organization.... for all sorts of "shell" games...

http://www.reopenkennedycase.org/apps/forums/topics/show/13161079-the-fpcc-was-a-paper-tiger

[Brian Schmidt]

"I hope my question is finally clear. I'll repeat it: How could the KILL-TEAM, which promoted a COMMUNIST OSWALD, possibly be the same as the COVER-UP-TEAM, which promoted a LONE-NUT OSWALD?"

I think these two could be reconciled.

Perhaps the conspirators had used Oswald look-alikes in the months prior to the assassination to try to tie him back to Cuba, but it ended up being overdone -- too many Oswalds were used wherein it would become obvious he was in two places at the same time. Once they knew this would not stand up to scrutiny, they had to go with the lone-nut scenario. This is the thesis of Jim Douglass' JFK and the Unspeakable.

I've always wondered, too, if LBJ, knowing of the intense anti-Kennedy group in the CIA and Cuban exile community, took advantage of it for his own purposes. People like Robertson and Morales were already in place and willing to pretty much do anything for their cause. Perhaps he made a call to someone like Tracy Barnes and set the plan in motion. Once the assassination occurred, he was worried that the Oswald as Cuban agent angle was too sloppy and a domestic conspiracy might be more easily exposed, and maybe he would be implicated. It was safer for him to go with the lone-nut approach.

Now, one might argue that the lone-nut approach happened too quickly after the assassination for this scenario. But maybe Johnson knew all along that he and his inner circle would immediately convince the public that Oswald was a lone-nut. He threw some red meat to the clique in the CIA and Cuban exile community by saying they could pin the assassination on the Cubans, knowing that they were ideologues, but also knowing this was too risky and he wouldn't go along with it. After all, he didn't really care about Cuba, he just wanted to be become president. Or maybe it was the other way - the conspirators agreed with LBJ to kill Kennedy but they never told him they were planting evidence linking it back to Castro. This would explain the CIA budget funding articles saying that Oswald acted on Castro's behest in the days after the assassination while Johnson was so worried about squelching talk of a foreign conspiracy.

Edited April 3, 2015 by Brian Schmidt

[Paul Brancato]

Brian - that is a brilliant post. It really isn't so hard after all to imagine how one team could set up Oswald's bonafides beforehand, all the while knowing they would not pursue the conspiracy angle afterwards. JFK and the Unspeakable is an important book in my opinion. I have said many times on this forum that portraying Oswald the assassin as a Castro or USSR Communist conspirator would never had stood the test of time as it is paper thin at best. But as you say, it was an excellent motivator for the forces that did the deed.

Greg - another bit of brilliance. I completely agree that FPCC was a creation of CIA. I recall reading about the leadership in Chicago, and thinking that one of them sounded like an agent provocateur. Can't recall his name right now.

Tommy - I think both FBI and CIA were actively involved in a smear campaign, but in LHO's case I think it was FBI. Not sure though.

David - DeM is not a source of reliable information, and Bush sure did drop him. Wonder what the back story is there?

Tom - thanks