A brief debunking of the “James Angleton’s World War III virus” thesis

[Douglas Caddy]

No, CIA’s counterintelligence chief didn’t mastermind a JFK assassination cover-up weeks in advance

A brief debunking of the “James Angleton’s World War III virus” thesis

Written by Emma Best

 

https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2017/oct/26/jfk-angleton-world-war-iii/

[Michael Clark]

This is an important subject to me. Can anyone say how Newman came to the WWIII virus hypothesis? In particular, was it discovered and flesh-out as an answer to the question of "Why was Cuba not invaded, when it seemed that evidence was deliberately generated to spark an invasion"? Or, was it the other way around? 

Edited October 31, 2017 by Michael Clark

[James DiEugenio]

This is almost as bad as her attack on Jim Garrison.  It really makes me wonder who Emma Best is and who she works for.

The point was that on the day of the assassination, the stuff about Kostikov was unleashed by Angleton's office.

Whether or not it was accurate is besides the point.  Its in the Warren Commission. And it clearly suggested that somehow somebody was asleep at the switch about Oswald. 

Further, Hosty writes about Kostikov's rather brutal and violent activities in his book Assignment Oswald. Which somehow Emma missed.

The question we are looking at today, which she again ignores, is whether or not LHO was ever at the Soviet Embassy.  And that is a question these new documents pose rather dramatically.  And Emma ignores that also.  If such turns out to be the case, then what happened in Mexico City will be even worse than what we thought.

[Michael Clark]

I though she was pretty fair, pointing out that Newman even calls the WWIII virus speculation. She is clear in that she respects his work. Without better and further proof that takes us, and Newman, to more solid ground than speculation, such an article is important. I am not nearly as convinced, as many people here are, that Angleton was a main player. I think Newman's theory has a lot to do with the large number of people who suspect Angleton; a lot of people may be side-tracked.

Regarding Mexico City: I am not seeing enough of a distinction being made, or more precisely, being made clearly, about what people are specifically saying when they write about Oswald being in Mexico City and the evidence thereof.

Distinctions should be made as to whether Oswald:

-Was in MC as per the Warren Comission.

-Whether the evidence supports that

-Whether he was in MC, in that time frame, but not at the embassy or Consulate at all.

-Whether he was in MC in that time frame, but at the embassy or consulate at a different time.

-Whether he was in MC at a different time frame.

-Was there evidence for any this

... and on and on.

A dubunking of the WC story is important, but the presumption, from that debunking, that he did not go at all, and there never was evidence for it all, is an assumption that divides researchers and hinders an understanding of what may have happened.

 

Cheers,

Michael

Edited October 31, 2017 by Michael Clark

[George Sawtelle]

Jim

It comes down to one thing and one thing only. It's very simple ... who do you believe Sylvia Odio or David Phillips and the CIA? The CIA has proven over and over again they are a bunch of liars. Allen Dulles came right out and said it. He said in so many words that if it was necessary a CIA agent would lie, even under oath.

Oswald did not go to MC in the time period in question.

However he was impersonated but the impersonation was not CIA sponsored.

[Mathias Baumann]

12 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

This is almost as bad as her attack on Jim Garrison.  It really makes me wonder who Emma Best is and who she works for.

The point was that on the day of the assassination, the stuff about Kostikov was unleashed by Angleton's office.

Whether or not it was accurate is besides the point.  Its in the Warren Commission. And it clearly suggested that somehow somebody was asleep at the switch about Oswald. 

Further, Hosty writes about Kostikov's rather brutal and violent activities in his book Assignment Oswald. Which somehow Emma missed.

The question we are looking at today, which she again ignores, is whether or not LHO was ever at the Soviet Embassy.  And that is a question these new documents pose rather dramatically.  And Emma ignores that also.  If such turns out to be the case, then what happened in Mexico City will be even worse than what we thought.

Jim,

be that as it may, the phone call in Mexico City was definitely not part of that plan. Newman wrote it himself that the impostor knew very little about Oswald when he made the first call (obviously not even Oswald's name!) and concluded that the purpose of the phone call was to find out what Oswald had been doing at the Soviet embassy. And that becomes quite obvious when you read the transcript.

Edited October 30, 2017 by Mathias Baumann

[Paul Brancato]

I find myself unable to understand the subtleties of these arguments. I do agree with Jim that the most important point is that Angleton came out firing with the Kostikov connection immediately after, not before , the assassination. The hall of mirrors isn't proof of anything other than the rabbit hole that is MC, and the fact that Angleton's hand in it is obvious. If the purpose of the article is to clear Angleton of involvement in the planning of the assassination, to me it fails to do so.

I would seriously welcome a cogent and easily understandable review of this information, especially to disabuse me of my personal conclusions.

[James DiEugenio]

Paul, as I have alway maintained, when in doubt, turns to Kennedysandking,.com

 

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-reviews/newman-john-oswald-and-the-cia-re-issue

[Mathias Baumann]

To put things into context, here's the original transcript from the impostor's first phone call:

Quote

SILVIA DURAN: There is an American here who says he has been to the Russian consulate.

RUSSIAN CONSULATE: Wait a minute.

Silvia Duran is then heard to speak in English to someone apparently sitting at her side. This conversation goes as follows:

DURAN: He said wait. Do you speak Russian?

[OSWALD]: Yes.

DURAN: Why don't you speak with him then?

[OSWALD]: I don't know...

The person who was at the side of Sylvia Duran and who admitted to speaking some Russian then gets on the line and speaks what is described as "terrible, hardly recognizable Russian". This person is later identified as Lee Harvey Oswald.

OSWALD: I was in your Embassy and spoke to your Consul.

RUSSIAN EMBASSY: What else do you want?

OSWALD: I was just now at your Embassy and they took my address.

RUSSIAN EMBASSY: I know that.

OSWALD: I did not know it then. I went to the Cuban Embassy to ask them for my address, because they have it.

RUSSIAN EMBASSY: Why don't you come by and leave it then, we're not far.

OSWALD: Well, I'll be there right away.

And this is what Newman makes of this conversation on page 365 of his book:

Quote

[...] the speakers were not Oswald and Duran, but two impostors who had stepped into Oswald's "reality" and were trying to acquire intelligence information.

And especially considering that neither Oswald's nor Kostikov's name is mentioned in this conversation I think that observation is spot-on. We know that David Attlee Phillips had used similar tricks before on another American visitor to the Embassy.

But would it make sense for the plotters to try to link Oswald to Kostikov? I don't think so. Oswald was not yet working at the School Book Depository, so why would the conspirators risk exposure at this point in time? How could they be so sure that Oswald would be in the right place at the right time to play a part in the assassination? Were they able to move him around at will like a pawn? If so, why did they not make him call the Embassy himself?

 

[James DiEugenio]

But Mathas, if you read my review, they did link LHO to Kostikov on the last call right?

As per the TSBD angle, well, if you believe as I do and several others do, it was a good gamble that that was going to happen through Ruth.

[Mathias Baumann]

1 hour ago, James DiEugenio said:

But Mathas, if you read my review, they did link LHO to Kostikov on the last call right?

As per the TSBD angle, well, if you believe as I do and several others do, it was a good gamble that that was going to happen through Ruth.

Yes, on the last call. But why would the impostors wait so long and thus increase the risk of exposure? And correct me if I'm wrong, but the context in which Kostikov's name eventually came up was rather innocuous if I remember correctly.

The whole impersonation affair appears rather amateurish and impromptu in my opinion, not like a well concocted plan.

And About Ruth Paine: I agree she's a suspicious character, but when Oswald was in Mexico he was also still on the FBI's watch list. How could the plotters foresee that he'd be taken off the list before the assassination?

 

[David Josephs]

On ‎10‎/‎29‎/‎2017 at 3:07 PM, George Sawtelle said:

who do you believe Sylvia Odio or David Phillips and the CIA?

Very astute George...  this is the key to the entire thing...  

Odio was correct in stating Oswald was at her door Friday night...  whoever it is Azcue and Duran met that one and only day, it was not Lee Harvey.

------------------------

Pardon me for butting into the discussion James and Mathias... 

On ‎10‎/‎30‎/‎2017 at 12:34 PM, James DiEugenio said:

But Mathas, if you read my review, they did link LHO to Kostikov on the last call right?

There was a call on Oct 3 attributed to Oswald as well.... but to the one at 10:35am on Oct 1: 4 minutes earlier, another call was first made to the Soviet Military Attache 15-69-87... a number whose connection to Oswald is a mystery... he is given the correct number 15-60-55 and a call is made.

Man Outside (OSWALD):  ....But I don't remember the name of the consul
OBYEDKOV:   KOSTIKOV.  He is dark /hair or skin?/.
MAN: Yes. My name is OSWALD.

 

MAN: Have they done anything?
OBY: Yes, they say that a request has been sent out, but nothing has been received yet.
MAN: And what....?   /OBY hangs up/.

This suggests that between the /.../ are the transcriber's action notes and thoughts.... from the pattern it doesn't appear that "hair and skin?" were said out loud... they would know the Russian word for either, yes?

So all we have is "KOSTIKOV. He is dark."
"Yes. My name is OSWALD."

Isn't strange that OBY hangs up on the man?

----------------------------------------

On the LADILLINGER Oct 8 CIA Cable we get from OCT 1 "WHOM HE BELIEVED BE KOSTIKOV" and the OCT 2 & 4 images/description of Mystery Man

On the 10th we get the NAVY/STATE/FBI Message and the reply back to MX - BOTH without mentioning "KOSTIKOV"
The NAVY message even puts DOB: 10/18/39 and "American approx. 35 years old"  a sentence apart.

Now I understand keeping KOSTIKOV from prying eyes or as the ace in the hole... but Win Scott's letter to Ambassador Mann on Oct 16th is cc'd to just about everyone...  If it was Angleton's plan to use KOSTIKOV as a silencer... is Win Scott here playing his FBI loyalty card?  The FBI is not cc'd here but he MUST believe Hoover would get the info from the list of CC's

To me THIS is the confusing part of the puzzle... did Scott use Lee HENRY in this Oct letter to see who would forward the info onto the FBI?

 

Edited November 30, 2017 by David Josephs

[David Josephs]

Problem being that Woosley should have conveyed the name Lee HENRY, not HARVEY....

since it was this cc'd memo that reached him...

On 10-18 Clark Anderson sends a cable to Hoover reiterating Win Scott's verbiage... and that it was Lee HENRY

From what I have, the FBI doesn't tell Mexico that it's Lee HARVEY until 10-22 when the linking to his imaginary drinking starts...

 

Edited November 30, 2017 by David Josephs

[Gene Kelly]

Interesting that this is also a tale of two women and their testimony (both of whom were harassed and demeaned in character) ... Silvia Duran and Sylvia Odio

[James DiEugenio]

Its pretty disgusting is it not?

 

Shenon clearly targeted Duran in his crappy book.  And then Baer tried to do the same thing in his equally crappy Tracking Oswald.  Glad she did not talk to him.

Edited October 31, 2017 by James DiEugenio