Steve Thomas Posted February 1, 2017 Author Share Posted February 1, 2017 1 hour ago, David Josephs said: Just a couple observations Could "B.O." be FBI Agent Robert "Bob" Olsen? The other two names for the 11/22 interrogation are Hosty and Bookout, both FBI. I checked all the DPD references I had and couldn't find a "B.O." David, I feel sheepish. Several days ago, I looked at the handwritten part of Fritz's interrogation notes. Just above the letters, B.O. are written Jame W and below the letters, B.O. is written Bookhout. Bookhout's name was James W. It looks like there was an oil spot where the "s" should have been in "James", or Fritz just didn't press down hard enough on his pen to finish the word. I think that at the time, Fritz didn't know how to spell Bookhout's name, so he just used the letters, B.O. and filled it in later. The person typing those notes made the same mistake I did. Steve (red in the face) Thomas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Thomas Posted February 1, 2017 Author Share Posted February 1, 2017 13 minutes ago, David Josephs said: and a good thought it is... The FPCC was being attacked from all sides... I was in a thread a while back that asked about the switch from Oswald the informant to Oswald the patsy.. what one notices after he moves to New Orleans is that his activities can be interpreted in a number of ways leaving the "plot" to twist and turn around him. As Oswald is carrying out his informant orders by playing both sides of the Castro fence (Anti-Castro Bannister forces yet "pro-Castro" flyers) he is also in the process of incriminating himself by sheer association - also in either direction. If JFK is somehow shot in Chicago, or Tampa... Oswald continues his $200/month informant job and everyone remembers Arthur Vallee instead. Virtually everything he is sent to do serves as both his quiet relationship with US intel and to incriminate him - should it become necessary. David, I've never heard of this, "Nationalities Intelligence Section." Do you know much about it? Steve Thomas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alistair Briggs Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 12 minutes ago, David Josephs said: and a good thought it is... The FPCC was being attacked from all sides... I was in a thread a while back that asked about the switch from Oswald the informant to Oswald the patsy.. what one notices after he moves to New Orleans is that his activities can be interpreted in a number of ways leaving the "plot" to twist and turn around him. As Oswald is carrying out his informant orders by playing both sides of the Castro fence (Anti-Castro Bannister forces yet "pro-Castro" flyers) he is also in the process of incriminating himself by sheer association - also in either direction. If JFK is somehow shot in Chicago, or Tampa... Oswald continues his $200/month informant job and everyone remembers Arthur Vallee instead. Virtually everything he is sent to do serves as both his quiet relationship with US intel and to incriminate him - should it become necessary. Cheers David. Whoever Oswald was an 'informant' for, no doubt they would have had a good number of other people in similar positions that they can 'manipulate' for whatever reason they deem fit - that makes sense to me. As you say, if JFK was shot in Chicago or Tampa then it would be someone else's name that we would be talking about. That goes on the assumption that Oswald was set up and it was inevitable that JFK was going to be shot... ... what if for example, Oswald wanted out (as he had another child on the way) and wanted to try and settle in to a family life. Scared of Oswald knowing too much the decision is made to set him up for something and the opportunity presents itself with JFK passing by his work... ... or what if Oswald was the shooter but he had been persuaded to do it as a set-up against the FPCC... ... or what if Oswald was the shooter but he thought he would get away with it as the 'evidence' pointed away from him... Too many thoughts pop in to my head, so apologies for them being disjointed. There's just something in my head that makes me wonder whether the JFK assassination was a separate thing from what Oswald had been up to previously, or at least not an inevitable continuation. Like (whoever it was that actually took the shots, either way) it was just actualy a taking advantage of the circumstances. (Example: I have never thought that the rifle was purchased (either by Oswald or by someone else) for the express use of killing JFK.) Regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted February 1, 2017 Share Posted February 1, 2017 Quote I've never heard of this, "Nationalities Intelligence Section." Do you know much about it? lol.. I hadn't either. Not as secretive or mysterious as the FBI's SIS from 1940-1945 though... Another small reference mentions this section only being responsible for Cuban related conspiracies. http://dlib.nyu.edu/findingaids/html/tamwag/tam_576/dscref34.html Belmont became FBI SA in 1937 and then served in Birmingham and Chicago field offices as well as ASAC of Chicago and NYC. In 1950 he became Assistant Director in charge of the Domestic Intelligence Division. He retired in 1965 and became Assistant Director of Hoover Institution on War, Peace and Revolution. 1926-1930 – San Diego State College -- 1930-1931 = Stanford University, B.A. degree, Accounting -- 11/30/36 = EOD FBI = Special Agent -- 3/7/37 = Birmingham AL -- 6/24/37 = Chicago -- 6/6/38 = Chief Clerk’s Office, WDC, Supervisor, Supply Division -- 7/2/40 = Division 5, National Defense Division -- 10/28/40 = Chief Clerk’s Office (Administrative Division) -- 1/28/41 = NYC, Supervisor, Section 2 (applicant investigations) -- 8/16/42 = ASAC, Chicago -- 1/15/43 = SAC Cincinnati -- 7/8/44 = Transferred from Cincinnati to become ASAC of NYC -- 7/29/49 = Commended by Hoover for his work on Judith Coplon case -- 8/31/49 and 3/15/50 = commended by Hoover for his work on Alger Hiss case -- 2/27/50 = Inspector in Charge, Security Division (Division 5) -- 09/30/51 – 6/1/61 = Hoover appointed him Assistant Director, Domestic Intelligence Division -- 02/60 = Became FBI liaison to U.S. Intelligence Board headed by Allen W. Dulles -- 6/2/61 – 12/30/65 = Belmont promoted to Assistant to Director—Investigative (replacing Donald J. Parsons who retired). In this position he supervised/directed Laboratory, General Investigative, Special Investigative and Domestic Intelligence Divisions -- 12/30/65 = retired 9/58 Staff of DID; Belmont – Assistant Director Inspectors: Donald E. Moore = 10/14/56 Branch Chief, Espionage – Central Research Branch -- Joseph A. Sizoo = 9/15/53 #1 Man and Branch Chief, Internal Security-Liaison Branch Section Chiefs: Fred J. Baumgardner = Internal Security Section -- James F. Bland = Subversive Control Section (until 9/1/55 he headed Internal Security Section) -- Ralph R. Roach = Liaison Section -- William A. Branigan = Espionage Section -- Sterling B. Donahoe = Nationalities Intelligence Section Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 (edited) On 2/1/2017 at 1:33 PM, Alistair Briggs said: Cheers David. Whoever Oswald was an 'informant' for, no doubt they would have had a good number of other people in similar positions that they can 'manipulate' for whatever reason they deem fit - that makes sense to me. As you say, if JFK was shot in Chicago or Tampa then it would be someone else's name that we would be talking about. That goes on the assumption that Oswald was set up and it was inevitable that JFK was going to be shot... ... what if for example, Oswald wanted out (as he had another child on the way) and wanted to try and settle in to a family life. Scared of Oswald knowing too much the decision is made to set him up for something and the opportunity presents itself with JFK passing by his work... ... or what if Oswald was the shooter but he had been persuaded to do it as a set-up against the FPCC... ... or what if Oswald was the shooter but he thought he would get away with it as the 'evidence' pointed away from him... Too many thoughts pop in to my head, so apologies for them being disjointed. There's just something in my head that makes me wonder whether the JFK assassination was a separate thing from what Oswald had been up to previously, or at least not an inevitable continuation. Like (whoever it was that actually took the shots, either way) it was just actualy a taking advantage of the circumstances. (Example: I have never thought that the rifle was purchased (either by Oswald or by someone else) for the express use of killing JFK.) Regards I like your thinking... mostly. There really is no place any longer for entertaining the thought that Oswald shot anyone that day. Like Vallee, Oswald was positioned to be useful if necessary. The Warren Comm Docs which deal with Vallee are especially interesting to me... "Never believe anything until it is officially denied" - Howard Zinn If men were not arrest and there was nothing of any consequence in Chicago, why does WCD47 insist on linking Vallee with Oswald https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10448#relPageId=14&tab=page is a report within CD47 which connects the Nov 2 arrest of Vallee with the belief "Vallee" was LEE HARVEY OSWALD under an assumed name... I highly suggest working thru this WCD... With regards to the rifle... My work helped me conclude that not a single one of those 100 rifles were ever at Klein's. No other rifle from those 100 has ever been seen, ever been on a SOLD receipt. These 40.5" FC rifles were on sale from Feb 1963 until Nov 23 1963 after Waldman claims he gathered all the remaining rifles up and removed them from inventory - are we to believe that the only rifle from that delivery ever sold was to HIDELL/OSWALD? As I wrote in my article, there are almost 1000 orders on that microfilm, and there are numerous films yet not a single order has ever been offered to confirm that any of the other 100 rifles actually existed. Nor do we ever learn what rifle was shipped between Feb-Nov 1963 when a customer ordered the newly revised "C20-T750" no longer a 36" scoped carbine but a 40.5" scoped FC. And finally, another nail in the coffin is the SS declaring the rifle Oswald/Hidell ordered was a Troop Special (TS) 1891 carbine and not the larger Fucile Corto model. The Evidence IS the Conspiracy IS the Evidence IS the Conspiracy IS the Evidence. They can't be separated. Nothing I have found in the evidence can authentically incriminate Oswald, it can only reveal the shadows created by the cover-up and conspiracy. You'll see the likes of DVP "list" the evidence which incriminates Ozzie, but never take it any further or address the inherent authenticity problem. If it can't be prove that Ozzie ever ordered or picked up these weapons, discussing what he did with them is worthless. Edited March 28, 2017 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted February 2, 2017 Share Posted February 2, 2017 2 hours ago, Steve Thomas said: David, I feel sheepish. Several days ago, I looked at the handwritten part of Fritz's interrogation notes. Just above the letters, B.O. are written Jame W and below the letters, B.O. is written Bookhout. Bookhout's name was James W. It looks like there was an oil spot where the "s" should have been in "James", or Fritz just didn't press down hard enough on his pen to finish the word. I think that at the time, Fritz didn't know how to spell Bookhout's name, so he just used the letters, B.O. and filled it in later. The person typing those notes made the same mistake I did. Steve (red in the face) Thomas Steve, On page 2 of the notes Fritz lists "B.O. + myself" yet the "0" may instead be a "G" since both appear to have a little tail where it should be. It appears again on page 4 of the notes related to B.O. asking about the Hidell SSS Card. It could be "Robert" for Bob, and maybe it's a G... BG or RG... and in the DPD or SS or FBI or ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alistair Briggs Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 On 02/02/2017 at 0:00 AM, David Josephs said: I like your thinking... mostly. There really is no place any longer for entertaining the thought that Oswald shot anyone that day. My thinking seems to have no limits as to the 'craziness' it can come up with. lol One day I should make a list of all the crazy things I have considered and offer it up for the lolz. Some of them are more bizarre than could be imagined. lol On 02/02/2017 at 0:00 AM, David Josephs said: The Evidence IS the Conspiracy IS the Evidence IS the Conspiracy IS the Evidence. They can't be separated. Nothing I have found in the evidence can authentically incriminate Oswald, it can only reveal the shadows created by the cover-up and conspiracy. You'll see the likes of DVP "list" the evidence which incriminates Ozzie, but never take it any further or address the inherent authenticity problem. If it can't be prove that Ozzie ever ordered or picked up these weapons, discussing what he did with them is worthless. When you say 'nothing I have found in the evidence can authentically incriminate Oswald', I can't disagree with that. *Just as something of an aside, although I can think of no other crime that is on a direct comaprable level to the JFK assassination (in its entirety), I do still find myself drawing certain comparisons on certain parts to other crimes. There are limitations to doing so of course, I understand that, but I find it an interesting thing to do nonetheless. Peace Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted February 7, 2017 Share Posted February 7, 2017 Funny thing about those random thoughts Alistair.... when we come upon what actually happened, it's crazier than anyone could have ever imagined. Take care DJ 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