Marina, the Commission, and Mexico City

[Thomas Graves]

27 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Good points Tommy. The difficulty lies in discerning truth without accepting everything.

Paul,

Why do you feel compelled to reject something, ... anything?

"I just gotta reject something, honey, paranoid Contrarian that I am." 

[A joke; not necessarily describing you, Paul.]

LOL

--  Tommy

Edited March 6, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[David Josephs]

On ‎3‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 2:12 PM, Michael Clark said:

Not to sound like a wise-guy, but, LHO could have been in MC and still have been impersonated at the consulates.

If LHO was in MC the evidence would not need to have been so tainted.  All Oswald had to do was purchase a 3 or 4 part ticket to and from Mexico City by bus from New Orleans... he does not do this, instead he supposedly arrives at each location and buys or converts a ticket there.... he does this repeatedly, according to the FBI's bogus account.

Why does the FBI cover for the CIA here?  Cause Oswald is doing his "Harry-Dean-like" job of infiltration and reporting in Dallas that week with 2 Cubans

If there is reason for Odio to lie, and for the FBI to hold her evidence until late 1964 please tell us.

DJ

 

Mr. LIEBELER. You mentioned when your sister saw Oswald's picture on television that she almost passed out. Did she recognize him, do you know, as the man that had been in the apartment?
Mrs. ODIO. She said, "Sylvia, you know that man?" And I said, "Yes," and she said, "I know him." "He was the one that came to our door, and it couldn't be so, could it?"

====

Mr. LIEBELER. But they did in fact, introduce him as Leon Oswald? 
Mrs. ODIO. And I shook hands with him.
Mr. LIEBELER. That is also what you told Agent Hoary when he interviewed you on December 18, 1963, and that is indicated in his report? 
Mrs. ODIO. Oh, yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. Now, a report that we have from Agent Hosty indicates that when you told him about Leopoldo's telephone call to you the following day,
that you told Agent Hosty that Leopoldo told you he was not going to have anything more to do with Leon Oswald since Leon was considered to be loco?
Mrs. ODIO. That's right. He used two tactics with me, and this I have analyzed. He wanted me to introduce this man. He thought that I had something to do with the underground, with the big operation, and I could get men into Cuba. That is what he thought, which is not true.
When I had no reaction to the American, he thought that he would mention that the man was loco and out of his mind and would be the kind of man that could do anything like getting underground in Cuba, like killing Castro. He repeated several times he was an expert shotman. And he said, "We probably won't have anything to do with him. He is kind of 1oco."
When he mentioned the fact that we should have killed President Kennedy--and this I recall in my conversation he was trying to play it safe. If I liked him, then he would go along with me, but if I didn't like him, he was kind of retreating to see what my reaction was. It was cleverly done.
Mr. LIEBELER. So he actually played both sides of the fence? 
Mrs. ODIO. That's right, both sides of the fence.

 

The WC concluded that everything Odio said could not be true - why?  Cause Oswald was in Mexico City or on his way

They go on to say that Oswald was not in Dallas from Sept thru early Oct...  This is the same exact time period that Maurice Bishop meets Veciana in Dallas and they see Oswald.  So despite NOT proving anything conclusive about Mexico, Odio had to be wrong.

I don't think she or her sister were wrong.

 

Edited January 3, 2018 by David Josephs

[Thomas Graves]

4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Yes, from the evidence that David J adduces,  it had to be Goodpasture. 

And if you read the Lopez Report, the origin of this picture was not a molehunt, its what I said it was. Eddie and Dan spend about a page on this issue.

As for PT and his comments about the identity of the Mystery Man, let us read the whole quote, from which he edited out everything but one word:

"Since the time of the assassination, this man has been identified as Yuriy Ivanovich Moskalev, a Soviet KGB officer.  The identification is unconfirmed and comes from only one source." 

Now, since the man was photographed more than once, that source must be fairly good since he was popping up, if i recall, 3-4 times.  And its the only ID of him we have. 

As per PT's other comments, repeat, there is nothing about a molehunt in the Lopez Report as far as I can tell.  But further, to show you how bad PT is on this, this whole idea of a molehunt did NOT BEGIN with Bill.  It began with Peter Scott and it was many, many years prior.  Back in the nineties in The Fourth Decade. That is how bad PT is at historiography.

Dear Jim,

It dawns on me that the important thing might be that Goodpasture, et al., might have thought it was Moskalev, and said to themselves, "My, how interesting!  Someone's been telephonically impersonating re-defector Oswald here in M.C., and guess who's in town! .... MOSKALEV! Let's suggest in our next cable that we think this guy's Oswald, and let Headquarter's speculate on whether or not he's impersonating LHO! After all, he's the only guy dressed like an American we've got on camera right now!"

--  Tommy

Edited March 6, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Michael Clark]

1 hour ago, David Josephs said:

If LHO was in MC the evidence would not need to have been so tainted.  All Oswald had to do was purchase a 3 or 4 part ticket to and from Mexico City by bus from New Orleans... he does not do this, instead he supposedly arrives at each location and buys or converts a ticket there.... he does this repeatedly, according to the FBI's bogus account.

Why does the FBI cover for the CIA here?  Cause Oswald is doing his "Harry-Dean-like" job of infiltration and reporting in Dallas that week with 2 Cubans

If there is reason for Odio to lie, and for the FBI to hold her evidence until late 1964 please tell us.

DJ

 

Mr. LIEBELER. You mentioned when your sister saw Oswald's picture on television that she almost passed out. Did she recognize him, do you know, as the man that had been in the apartment?
Mrs. ODIO. She said, "Sylvia, you know that man?" And I said, "Yes," and she said, "I know him." "He was the one that came to our door, and it couldn't be so, could it?"

====

Mr. LIEBELER. But they did in fact, introduce him as Leon Oswald? 
Mrs. ODIO. And I shook hands with him.
Mr. LIEBELER. That is also what you told Agent Hoary when he interviewed you on December 18, 1963, and that is indicated in his report? 
Mrs. ODIO. Oh, yes.
Mr. LIEBELER. Now, a report that we have from Agent Hosty indicates that when you told him about Leopoldo's telephone call to you the following day,
that you told Agent Hosty that Leopoldo told you he was not going to have anything more to do with Leon Oswald since Leon was considered to be loco?
Mrs. ODIO. That's right. He used two tactics with me, and this I have analyzed. He wanted me to introduce this man. He thought that I had something to do with the underground, with the big operation, and I could get men into Cuba. That is what he thought, which is not true.
When I had no reaction to the American, he thought that he would mention that the man was loco and out of his mind and would be the kind of man that could do anything like getting underground in Cuba, like killing Castro. He repeated several times he was an expert shotman. And he said, "We probably won't have anything to do with him. He is kind of 1oco."
When he mentioned the fact that we should have killed President Kennedy--and this I recall in my conversation he was trying to play it safe. If I liked him, then he would go along with me, but if I didn't like him, he was kind of retreating to see what my reaction was. It was cleverly done.
Mr. LIEBELER. So he actually played both sides of the fence? 
Mrs. ODIO. That's right, both sides of the fence.

 

The WC concluded that everything Odio said could not be true - why?  Cause Oswald was in Mexico City or on his way

They go on to say that Oswald was not in Dallas from Sept thru early Oct...  This is the same exact time period that Maurice Bishop meets Veciana in Dallas and they see Oswald.  So despite NOT proving anything conclusive about Mexico, Odio had to be wrong.

I don't think she or her sister were wrong.

Hypothesizing David. I hope it is welcome.

As it turned-out, JFK was killed by a nutter, LBJ was saved and controlled. the MIC got its war in Vietnam, TFX contracts, etc.

If the Dealy ambush failed or was aborted, there would have been a more reckless back-up attempt, by Cubans who would have died, on the way to the Trade-Mart or escape from Dealy Plaza. Those Cubans would have been identified as Communists (with Cubans in Dealy as well), and the MIC, the Mafia and anti-Castro Cubans would have had their war in Cuba, casinos and natural resources, whether JFK survived or not; and they may or may not have got the Vietnam War. Other wars in the Caribbean, Central and South America would have now been on the plate. LHO's consulate pics could have been part of the backup plan to frame LHO as pro-Castro, in a conspiracy, in order to justify a Cuban war. The Vietnam War was far lower risk because their would be no nukes, and the Mafia would get stiffed and that dirty angle never realized.

As it was, the Cuban connection was to be denied because it was not needed, so the garbage LHO MC ID was sent up the chain.

Its all kind of an alternative to Operation Northwoods.

Cheers,

Michael

 

Edited March 7, 2017 by Michael Clark

[James DiEugenio]

 

Quote

My, how interesting!  Someone's been telephonically impersonating re-defector Oswald here in M.C., and guess who's in town! .... MOSKALEV! Let's suggest in our next cable that we think this guy's Oswald, and let Headquarter's speculate on whether or not he's impersonating LHO! After all, he's the only guy dressed like an American we've got on camera right now!"

I think David's post above with the two pictures says its more certain than that.  

But what is interesting is that, if those are two photos of two different men, as they appear to be that, then that makes Annie G's skullduggery even more inexplicable.  Why did she pick that particular photo?  Because, as David shows,  Moskalev could be made to look like Oswald?  Or did Danny and Ed make a mistake thinking that was the only WM photo on hand that day?

[Thomas Graves]

32 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

 

I think David's post above with the two pictures says its more certain than that.  

But what is interesting is that, if those are two photos of two different men, as they appear to be that, then that makes Annie G's skullduggery even more inexplicable.  Why did she pick that particular photo?  Because, as David shows,  Moskalev could be made to look like Oswald?  Or did Danny and Ed make a mistake thinking that was the only WM photo on hand that day?

Dear Jim,

Maybe because the Moskalev-looking guy was the only American-appearing dude, casual clothes-wise, to be photographically captured while entering / leaving the Embassy / Consulate around October 1, 1963?

Or, in the interest of the ongoing "mole hunt," he looked closer to the 5'10",  165 lb. John Fain-Bill Bright "Oswald [Robert E. Webster] in Russia" than the real, one-and-only 5' 9.5", maybe 140 lb. Oswald ever would / could?

Hmmm.

--  Tommy

PS  In my humble opinion, Mystery Man - Moskalev can not be "made to look like Oswald" no matter how hard David Josephs tries.

But of course my statement could be interpreted in such a way as to clearly prove that my rejecting of Harvey & Lee in toto is simply due to the fact that I am, well ... I AM just notorious CIA-paid t-r-o-l-l.

 Aren't I?

LOL

 

Edited March 6, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Michael Clark]

3 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

Dear Jim,

.......,.,,,,,,,,

--  Tommy

PS  In my humble opinion, Mystery Man - Moskalev can not be "made to look like Oswald."

 

I agree, but he is, looks, or could be made to be Russian, putting Russia in a defensive and unjustified position if an invasion of Cuba came to be. 

Cheers,

Michael

[Thomas Graves]

7 minutes ago, Michael Clark said:

I agree, but he is, looks, or could be made to be Russian, putting Russia in a defensive and unjustified position if an invasion of Cuba came to be. 

Cheers,

Michael

Michael,

Good point.

--  Tommy

[Thomas Graves]

44 minutes ago, Thomas Graves said:

Michael,

Good point.

--  Tommy

BTW, I suggest that everyone read the entire 3-page 1977 CIA document regarding Moskalev.

http://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=6502#relPageId=2&tab=page

--  Tommy

Edited March 7, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Paul Trejo]

3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

BTW, I am not saying that there absolutely was no molehunt in the CIA.  Clearly there was due mostly to Golitsyn.  What I am saying is that the Lopez Report does not refer to one.

James,

The reason that the Lopez Report does not refer to a CIA Mole Hunt, is because Hardway and Lopez were ignorant of any such Mole-Hunt.

The knowledge of a CIA Mole Hunt that started on October 1, 1963, only minutes after the Telephonic Impersonation of Oswald in Mexico City, was only available in FOIA releases of CIA documents that were released after 2003.

Bill Simpich is not simply a great JFK researcher -- he is a genius.  His work has will change JFK CT literature for all time.   Lopez was great.  Simpich is greater.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Thomas Graves]

3 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

James,

The reason that the Lopez Report does not refer to a CIA Mole Hunt, is because Hardway and Lopez were ignorant of any such Mole-Hunt.

The knowledge of a CIA Mole Hunt that started on October 1, 1963, only minutes after the Telephonic Impersonation of Oswald in Mexico City, was only available in FOIA releases of CIA documents that were released after 2003.

Bill Simpich is not simply a great JFK researcher -- he is a genius.  His work has will change JFK CT literature for all time.   Lopez was great.  Simpich is greater.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul,

That's far-and-away too rational and reasonable an explanation for why Hardaway and Lopez didn't say anything about the M.C. mole hunt.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

--  Tommy

Edited March 7, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Paul Trejo]

7 hours ago, David Josephs said:

You know PT, if you took some time and read my work on Mexico with the same attention as you gave State Secret, you may actually learn a thing or two about the evidence and Mexico City...  then again you ain't gonna learn what you don't wanna know....

=====

David,

I've read your work thoroughly last year.   I'm not impressed.

It's absurd for anybody to compare your wild speculation with the brilliant product of a genius like Bill Simpich.  

For all you readers out there who really want to know what Lee Harvey Oswald was doing in Mexico City in 1963 -- you cannot afford to dispense with (1) The Hardway-Lopez Report (2003); and (2) State Secret: Wiretapping in Mexico City (2014) by Bill Simpich.

Both texts are free online.  That's the real stuff, dude.

And here's another opinion -- stay as far away from the 'Harvey and Lee' science fiction nonsense as possible. 

Also, CTKA and James Di Eugenio shed no light on the topic, IMHO.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Thomas Graves]

10 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

David,

I've read your work thoroughly last year.   I'm not impressed.

It's absurd for anybody to compare your wild speculation with the brilliant product of a genius like Bill Simpich.  

For all you readers out there who really want to know what Lee Harvey Oswald was doing in Mexico City in 1963 -- you cannot afford to dispense with (1) The Hardway-Lopez Report (2003); and (2) State Secret: Wiretapping in Mexico City (2014) by Bill Simpich.

Both texts are free online.  That's the real stuff, dude.

And here's another opinion -- stay as far away from the 'Harvey and Lee' science fiction nonsense as possible. 

Also, CTKA and James Di Eugenio shed no light on the topic, IMHO.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul,

They're probably just afraid, due to general ignorance and / or not having read State Secret, that that Simpich somehow let's the whole CIA "off the hook" regarding the assassination.

Like Steve Bannon and Alexander Dugin, they're against Whole Institutions and Agencies.

IMHO.

--  Tommy

Edited March 7, 2017 by Thomas Graves

[Paul Brancato]

I must be losing it. Could someone remind me of a reasonable explanation for not showing the photos of LHO if they had them? 

[Michael Clark]

5 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

I must be losing it. Could someone remind me of a reasonable explanation for not showing the photos of LHO if they had them? 

Risk of Nuclear War over Cuba?

Edited March 7, 2017 by Michael Clark