Yes, Oswald was an Intelligence agent

[Jim Hargrove]

Jim,

You're quite mistaken that LHO was a CIA agent. Just because the teenage LHO was on an assignment from the ONI inside the USSR, this hardly qualifies LHO as a CIA agent.

I see. So now your "CIA wannabe" is actually spying in Russia for our Office of Naval Intelligence, but he wants to transfer to the CIA? Is that the story du jour?

And as Mark Knight pointed out: "Lee Harvey Oswald was born on October 18, 1939. He arrived in Moscow on October 16, 1959. So he was a teenager for all of TWO DAYS while in the USSR."

You are aware of all the evidence that "Lee Harvey Oswald" did have a driver's license, right?

[Jim Hargrove]

Jim,

The CIA leaves domestic politics to the FBI. You should know that by now.

What a remarkable statement from someone who constantly lectures us on how we mischaracterize the CIA! Apparently Mr. Treo is not aware of the lengthy document available online from the CIA itself informally called “The Family Jewels.” Despite quite a few redactions, this document alone describes probably hundreds of illegal CIA operations conducted right here in the United States during a limited time period ranging from the 1950s to the early 1970s.

Roughly seven hundred other pages from the “Family Jewels” can be downloaded directly from a CIA website at this address:

https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/collection/family-jewels

[Paul Trejo]

Paul,

Nagell was one of CIA's own. It wasn't like some John Doe contacted them about a possible assassination attempt. It was a CIA agent doing so, about a real threat.

I just cannot believe that Nagell's warning would be taken as lightly as you claim it would have been. I can't believe the CIA, hearing from one of it's own agents about the assassination plot, would not have made sure it was taken seriously. Unless, of course, they didn't want it taken seriously.

But thanks for replying.

Sandy,

This is another case of jurisdiction. Just because the CIA told the FBI something, is no reason that the FBI would jump at the information.

We saw this clearly in chapter one of FBI Agent James Hosty's book, Assignment Oswald (1996). Hosty says that he kept going to the Secret Service, trying to offer them information about dangerous people in Dallas, but they kept rejecting him -- and reminding him again and again that the Secret Service didn't need any help from the FBI.

This was the main theme of chapter one of Hosty's book.

So, again, just because the CIA told the FBI something, that is no reason to believe that the FBI would jump at it. The FBI was always in a jurisdiction dispute with the CIA -- because they both were funded by the US Congress for crime espionage. They were in competition for funds.

If a criminal left the USA, the CIA would track him, and then demand the FBI records -- but those records would be slow as molasses in coming. Then, if the criminal returned to the USA, the FBI would track him, and then demand the CIA records -- but those records would be slow as molasses in coming.

The FBI and the CIA did not always play nice together. The FBI complained during the Warren Commission that the CIA gave them that photograph of that large Russian dude and told them this was LHO -- when they knew better. It was a mess.

So -- again, just because the CIA told the FBI something, is no reason the FBI would jump -- or even give it priority. And then to complicate matters, Nagell was a double-agent, so his word required extra confirmation.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited October 31, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

I see. So now your "CIA wannabe" is actually spying in Russia for our Office of Naval Intelligence, but he wants to transfer to the CIA? Is that the story du jour?

And as Mark Knight pointed out: "Lee Harvey Oswald was born on October 18, 1939. He arrived in Moscow on October 16, 1959. So he was a teenager for all of TWO DAYS while in the USSR."

You are aware of all the evidence that "Lee Harvey Oswald" did have a driver's license, right?

That's not the "story du jour" Jim, but that has been my story all along.

As for Mark Knight's able dating of LHO in the USSR, he correctly stated that for the first two days in which LHO was in the USSR, that LHO was still a teenager.

This demonstrates that, as I said, the ONI had recruited LHO to be a USSR dangle when LHO was still a teenager. LHO was still a teenager for two days when he entered Moscow -- so my dating was -- to that extent -- quite correct. (I may have won by a whisker, but I won.)

Sure, LHO turned 20 when he was in the USSR, but that doesn't detract from my point about how young he was -- and that the ONI would use people that young, while the CIA had higher requirements for Agents.

Again -- LHO was a high school dropout; LHO could not drive a car; LHO could hardly spell. Yes, LHO had other talents, but while LHO was a teenager, he was almost certainly not CIA material.

LHO certainly was, according to CIA Agent Victor Marchetti, an appropriate candidate for the ONI (Office of Naval Intelligence) -- but only as a "dangle" as a part of a large team of "dangles" -- which is a beginner's mission.

I do believe that if LHO had been successful in his "dangle" mission for the ONI, and had proven that he could be a true team-player, that the CIA could have offered LHO job by the time he was 25.

But not as a teenager. Unless he had been a University genius in the ROTC. That simply wasn't the case with LHO.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited October 31, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Sandy Larsen]

Paul,

Nagell was one of CIA's own. It wasn't like some John Doe contacted them about a possible assassination attempt. It was a CIA agent doing so, about a real threat.

I just cannot believe that Nagell's warning would be taken as lightly as you claim it would have been. I can't believe the CIA, hearing from one of it's own agents about the assassination plot, would not have made sure it was taken seriously. Unless, of course, they didn't want it taken seriously.

But thanks for replying.

Sandy,

This is another case of jurisdiction. Just because the CIA told the FBI something, is no reason that the FBI would jump at the information.

We saw this clearly in chapter one of FBI Agent James Hosty's book, Assignment Oswald (1996). Hosty says that he kept going to the Secret Service, trying to offer them information about dangerous people in Dallas, but they kept rejecting him -- and reminding him again and again that the Secret Service didn't need any help from the FBI.

This was the main theme of chapter one of Hosty's book.

So, again, just because the CIA told the FBI something, that is no reason to believe that the FBI would jump at it. The FBI was always in a jurisdiction dispute with the CIA -- because they both were funded by the US Congress for crime espionage. They were in competition for funds.

Oh I see. The FBI would ignore a warning from the CIA that the President was to be assassinated. And that would earn the FBI a larger operating budget. Dead president means more money for FBI. Yeah, that makes sense.

Not! The problem, of course, is that you are equating a threat to the President of the United States to ordinary every-day events. You believe that CIA and FBI officials wouldn't think about their careers when confronted with a death threat to the President, and instead would insist on following standard operating procedures.

LOL. No, that is just crazy talk.

If a criminal left the USA, the CIA would track him, and then demand the FBI records -- but those records would be slow as molasses in coming. Then, if the criminal returned to the USA, the FBI would track him, and then demand the CIA records -- but those records would be slow as molasses in coming.

The FBI and the CIA did not always play nice together. The FBI complained during the Warren Commission that the CIA gave them that photograph of that large Russian dude and told them this was LHO -- when they knew better. It was a mess.

So -- again, just because the CIA told the FBI something, is no reason the FBI would jump -- or even give it priority. And then to complicate matters, Nagell was a double-agent, so his word required extra confirmation.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

[Sandy Larsen]

Again -- LHO was a high school dropout; LHO could not drive a car; LHO could hardly spell. Yes, LHO had other talents, but while LHO was a teenager, he was almost certainly not CIA material.

Oswald had trouble spelling (second-language interference?) but he certainly was no dummy. I've listened to him speak and he strikes me as being a highly intelligent individual.

[Paul Trejo]

Oh I see. The FBI would ignore a warning from the CIA that the President was to be assassinated. And that would earn the FBI a larger operating budget. Dead president means more money for FBI. Yeah, that makes sense.

Not! The problem, of course, is that you are equating a threat to the President of the United States to ordinary every-day events. You believe that CIA and FBI officials wouldn't think about their careers when confronted with a death threat to the President, and instead would insist on following standard operating procedures.

LOL. No, that is just crazy talk.

Sandy,

Whatever it is, it isn't crazy. Have you read J. Edgar Hoover's testimony to the Warren Commission?

Hoover had to explain why the FBI failed to cooperate with the Secret Service in dealing with threats to JFK in Dallas. Hoover's explanation was that they had a big pile of threats to JFK on their desks, but they had to assess whether they were from screwballs or were legitimate.

Hoover said that the FBI finally decided that none -- literally none -- of the threats to JFK in Dallas were legitimate. And the FBI went through a lot of them.

So, the FBI dropped the ball.

Certainly I said nothing about J. Edgar Hoover getting JFK killed to get a bigger budget -- that was your sense of humor -- however, in J. Edgar Hoover's testimony to the Warren Commission he did -- in fact -- raise the topic of the FBI budget!

Did you know that?

In point of historical fact, the Warren Commission testimony of J. Edgar Hoover, Alan Belmont, James Rowley, and all the FBI men and all the Secret Service men who testified -- all claimed that they were following SOP.

You should read it sometime. It's not me who's talking crazy.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited October 31, 2016 by Paul Trejo

[Jim Hargrove]

Again -- LHO was a high school dropout; LHO could not drive a car; LHO could hardly spell. Yes, LHO had other talents, but while LHO was a teenager, he was almost certainly not CIA material.

LHO certainly was, according to CIA Agent Victor Marchetti, an appropriate candidate for the ONI (Office of Naval Intelligence) -- but only as a "dangle" as a part of a large team of "dangles" -- which is a beginner's mission.

So, according to your explanation, because “LHO” was a high school dropout, couldn’t drive, and wasn’t a good speller, he wasn’t CIA material at any level. But he could qualify for low-level ONI activities because… uh… the U.S. Navy was filled with uneducated losers who couldn’t spell or drive either, eh?

Thank you for this clarification. It’s good to know the CIA had such High Standards® compared to the lowly U.S. Navy.

[Paul Brancato]

You are conveniently leaving out FBI took LHO off the watch list. Did Hoover mention that in his testimony?

[Chris Newton]

Who were the two subversives that the FBI reported met with Oswald two weeks before the assassination?

[Paul Brancato]

Never heard that one Chris

[Chris Newton]

[Jim Hargrove]

You are conveniently leaving out FBI took LHO off the watch list. Did Hoover mention that in his testimony?

I sincerely doubt it. The WC didn’t even bother to depose the Division 5 guy (Gheesling) who ordered the cancellation. “Lee Harvey Oswald” had been on that list for nearly four years, since the “defection.” Now that he was taken off it, he’d no longer be under FBI and SS surveillance on 11/22.

What’s really unnerving is that similar steps were taken right around the same time by Mexico City CIA personnel. Newman called this “turning down the lights” on “Oswald.” It’s enough to make a fellow feel paranoid.

Edited November 1, 2016 by Jim Hargrove

[Jim Hargrove]

You are conveniently leaving out FBI took LHO off the watch list. Did Hoover mention that in his testimony?

I sincerely doubt it. The WC didn’t even bother to depose the Division 5 guy (Gheesling) who ordered the cancellation. “Lee Harvey Oswald” had been on that list for nearly four years, since the “defection.” Now that he was taken off it, he’d no longer be under FBI and SS surveillance on 11/22.

What’s really unnerving is that similar steps were taken right around the same time by Mexico City CIA personnel. Newman called this “turning down the lights” on “Oswald.” It’s enough to make a fellow feel paranoid.

Just to finish up on the above.... This probably isn't new information for many here, but it sure seems significant to me.

At the very same time the FBI was taking “Lee Harvey Oswald” off the watch list, the CIA was publishing several confusing things about him. Responding to a query from the Mexico City station, four CIA officers signed a cable giving lots of accurate biographical data on our boy but calling him “Lee Henry Oswald.” The three page cable expressed no security concerns whatsoever about Oswald and, in fact, indicated the Moscow embassy felt “life in the Soviet Union had clearly had maturing effect on Oswald.” Nothing to worry about here!

This cable was signed by Jane Roman (Angleton’s assistant), William Hood (also close to Angleton),

Thomas Karamessines (assistant to Helms) and John Whitten who, according to Jefferson Morley, was the only CIA officer of the four signers who suffered any adverse consequences for this troubling cable. John Armstrong believes that Angleton ran the “Harvey and Lee” Oswald project.

[Paul Trejo]

So, according to your explanation, because “LHO” was a high school dropout, couldn’t drive, and wasn’t a good speller, he wasn’t CIA material at any level. But he could qualify for low-level ONI activities because… uh… the U.S. Navy was filled with uneducated losers who couldn’t spell or drive either, eh?

Thank you for this clarification. It’s good to know the CIA had such High Standards® compared to the lowly U.S. Navy.

Jim,

You're still trying to argue that the CIA was interested in this teenager, who was a high-school dropout, who couldn't drive a car, who could hardly spell -- to hire him as a CIA Agent.

The likelihood is zero.

However -- since Lee Harvey Oswald was already in the Marines, and already training in Russian language, and already training in radar, photography and clandestine services -- the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI) would certainly consider LHO as a candidate for a low-level beginners position as a "dangle" in the USSR.

A "dangle," according to former CIA Agent Victor Marchetti, is one of a large group of boys who would pretend to defect, and then take a station in the USSR, and would not know each other. They would very rarely send a report to the US Embassy about this or that location of this or that person -- never knowing why -- and never knowing what the other "dangles" were doing.

The task would take years. The rewards were probably great -- if one did a good job for the ONI in this program, he would probably be considered for a job in the CIA in the future.

But to imagine that the CIA wanted the teenage LHO as an Agent in early 1959 is untenable. The CIA had high standards for CIA Agents then, just as they have high standards today. College degrees are preferred. High-school drop-out teenagers aren't.

Regards,

--Paul Trejo

Edited November 1, 2016 by Paul Trejo