Craig Carvalho Posted November 12, 2017 Share Posted November 12, 2017 There were photos taken of Oswald at the Cuban embassy. However, in reviewing the available documents, it appears that the CIA ignored this information as reported to HQ by MC station chief Win Scott. For reasons yet unknown Langley chose to focus only on Oswald's trip to the Soviet embassy. This is where the alleged photo of Oswald would originate from. Two men stationed in MC during the 1960's told congressional investigators they had seen photos of Oswald at the Cuban embassy in MC. Stanley Watson, deputy chief of station in MC under Scott, and Joseph Piccolo, a counterintelligence officer, have both testified to seeing the photos. It is interesting to note that within 48 hours of Scott's death in 1971, non other than James Angleton himself arrived in MC to retrieve Scott's manuscript of his yet unpublished memoir, along with other files and documents. There are many who regard Angleton as America's greatest spymaster. I have my doubts, as did Clare Edward Petty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Lifton Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 (edited) On November 11, 2017 at 8:02 PM, Sandy Larsen said: Duran said that the man she talked to was blond and short. (5' 3" I believe.) Azcue said the same. Azcue adamantly said that Oswald wasn't the man he had argued with at the consulate. Duran said that the man she talked to was poorly dressed. Yet the photo supposedly taken that day shows Oswald in a vest and tie. David Josephs has shown that Oswald didn't travel on the buses the FBI claimed he did. There were no surveillance photos of Oswald. No audio recordings of Oswald. Sylvia Odio places Oswald at her house at the same time. There's almost no reason to believe Oswald was there. Sandy (and others who have contributed to this thread, e.g. Michael Clark, and the many useful links he has posted; David Josephs, et al): FWIW: When I first became involved with NARA and the available documents, the year was 1968. Between then and about 1975, I would devoted considerable blocks of time puzzling over the entire matter of the "mystery man." Of course, this was before the many declassifications and releases which have added to our knowledge--and I often think of it as as adding many additional "pixels" to the picture. But back then, and particularly by the year 1975, I formulated a hypothesis about what may have been going on, and I'm going to set it forth here, briefly, because I personally believe it is a more valid explanation than anything I have read (so far) on the London Forum. Also, it is a hypothesis that I shared with a CBS producer at the time, and he became interested in this issue too. Unfortunately, there were no personal computers back then, so my "memos to file" were not scanned, and not easily retrieved, unless I went to certain storage boxes and searched for my original typewritten material. So let me explain, and I'd be interested in the reaction of those who have spent so many hours studying this particular puzzle. A NEW AND DIFFERENT HYPOTHESIS ABOUT THE MYSTERY MAN PHOTOS First of all, lets start with the fact that there are not photos of Oswald entering or leaving either the Soviet Embassy, or the Cuban Consulate, and that seems highly implausible, not to mention improbable. (And, in fact, its really absurd). Instead, we have this photo of "mystery man." So. . what is going on here? My hypothesis --and this is from recollection--went as follows: (a) Oswald had a handler, and was reasonably obedient, and followed instructions. (b) In the case of Mexico City, some person--perhaps the handler, or perhaps some associate--accompanied Oswald to one of the diplomatic facilities. (c ) Photos were taken, and included the image of the handler--which was a major error. I stress: a major error. (d ) Those involved in setting up Oswald (in the service of the forthcoming assassination of JFK) immediately realized a serious snafu had occurred, and the question became: How to get rid of that (incriminating) photo record? (And, perhaps, substitute another?). (e) Consequently, sometime between October 1 and (approx) October 8th, another person visited the Embassy, perhaps someone claiming to be Oswald, and the purpose of that visit was to create a false (i.e., spurious) photo record which could then be substituted for the original (and authentic) record. (f) Sometime before October 8th (again, "approx."), the files were manipulated (i.e., physically accessed), the LHO photos removed, and a substitute file created with the mystery man photos instead. (g) Meanwhile, transcripts had been created, the bureaucratic wheels turned, and the telegraphic traffic (which has become the subject of so much study) ensued. (h ) Per this hypothesis, incorrect descriptive data was included in that telegraphic traffic, because the photo record had been altered. In other words, because of the alteration of the photo record, anyone going to the file would come up with an incorrect description. Of course, historically, this has led to the situation in which it has now been alleged that Oswald was impersonated. But, if my hypothesis is correct, that's not the proper explanation for the conflicting data. Bottom line: the price paid for "correcting" this snafu--which involved some "heavy duty" file manipulation--was to create the appearance of impersonation. (Again, keep in mind this is just a hypothesis). BUT . . there is one other addition, one I am quite confident about, based upon my many years of study of LHO. REGARDING THE AUDIO RECORD Oswald was a jokester and a punster. (Just ask Marina, which I did, and this is described in some detail in Priscilla McMillan's book, Marina and Lee. When Oswald was in Mexico, and when asked to make a phone call, he could easily have disguised his voice, speaking in a more guttural "European" fashion, and also have spoken English as if he was a foreigner (i.e., "broken English" etc). Because of this, it disturbs me every time I read that someone who studies this record, then states (as if its a fact), that the person who made a particular phone call "could not have been Oswald" because the transcriber noted he spoke "broken Russian" or "broken English." These are hardly reliable identifiers when dealing with a jokester and punster like LHO. Currently, I am re-reading Simpich's manuscript, and trying to understand the hypothesis of the "mole hunt' as an explanation. At this juncture, I remain unpersuaded. I really don't wish to become immersed in Mexico City just now, and the purpose of this post is to recall my own involvement with this area of the case, back in 1975. (As I recall, the CBS producer who was interested was one "Harry Moses.") Also, and this is directed at those who are citing Sylvia Odio. . there is little question in my mind (or in the minds of those who studied the matter closely for FRONTLINE, back in 1993) that the Sylvia Odio encounter occurred on Wed. evening, September 25th. So those who are citing 9/27 as the date are postulating an incorrect date, and then using that incorrect datum as the reason for claiming "it couldn't have been" Oswald. But I will address that matter in a separate writing, perhaps a separate thread on the London Forum. Meanwhile, I would like those who are studying this matter (of the "mystery man" photos) to seriously consider the possibility that the root of this whole problem is that Oswald was photographed in the company of a third party, that this occurred between 9/27 and Oct 1, and that strenuous efforts were made, on the part of someone (or some persons) connected with the planning of the Dallas scenario, to retrieve those photos from the file, to literally "flush them out", because of the major problem they would have posed, after JFK was shot, when these photos revealed Oswald to have been associated with some third party. DSL 11/12/2017 - 8:20 p.m. PST; Revised, 9:20 p.m. PST Edited November 13, 2017 by David Lifton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 5 hours ago, David Lifton said: So let me explain, and I'd be interested in the reaction of those who have spent so many hours studying this particular puzzle. A NEW AND DIFFERENT HYPOTHESIS ABOUT THE MYSTERY MAN PHOTOS ............ DSL 11/12/2017 - 8:20 p.m. PST; Revised, 9:20 p.m. PST David, My theory is similar to yours. I believe that LHO was in MC at some point, and made rounds that are similar to that described in the testimony of Sylvia Odio. The intention was to tie LHO to Cuba and, as some conspirators thought and desired, an attack and liberation of Cuba would occur. However, one element of the conspiracy was not interested in liberating Cuba, and that party did as you say; they swapped out the incriminating LHO / Cuba evidence and perhaps swapped-in evidence pointing to Russian and even US intelligence involvement. Of course, this evidence could not be used or persued as a war with Russia or an internal investigation was not desirable. The reason for this change of plans, (and I say this at the risk of coming-off similar to Trejo, constantly yapping about my pet CT) was to double-cross the Anti Castro Cuban and Mafia element of the conspiracy. It had been decided that it was not in the interest of this faction to liberate Cuba, give the Mob their gambling haven in Havana, or renegotiate or vacate Guantanamo. It was decided that a perpetually antagonistic relationship with Cuba was preferable to a return to a free, Mafia infested Cuba and risk the loss of Guantanamo. So my theoretical perps who double-crossed the Anti-Castro Cubans and the Mafia were a Right Wing, anti Catholic, racist, southern industrial and Naval faction. So, Making some evidence disappear in MC, and burying evidence of conspiracy in Dealy Plaza was all that was needed to thwart the wishes of the Mafia and Anti-Castro Cubans. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 And as far as Jack Ruby's motivations go, it seems likely that there must have been evidence tying him or higher level Jewish mobsters to the conspiracy as well, possibly in MC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 David Lifton wow you're giving the planners absolutely no credit at all and are making them sound like a bunch of bumble xxxxs. Do you really think they would have gone through all of this planning only to remember "ah der....the cameras....der...?" In the grand scheme of things there was no reason at all for them to have sent LHO down there. The idea of his being there was mere window dressing for the plot, all part of the "communist assassin cavorts with communists mere months before he murders US president" narrative to stir up xxxx for the Cuban invasion that never came. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Lifton Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 IMHO: There were a number of serious errors made in the execution of the plot, so I would not be surprised if --somehow--Oswald was photographed in the company of another person. Some examples of what were serious errors: ITEM; the shooting of Governor Connally, which was surely unintended. ITEM: The survival of Oswald (if he was a pre-selected patsy) to end up leaving the TSBD, and thenbe arrested alive by the Dallas Police, and to live for two additional days making multiple statements attesting to his innocence, and loudly proclaiming he was "just a patsy." ITEM: The alteration of the Z film (if the car stop witnesses are to be believed), in such an incompetent fashion that the President's head goes backwards, and resulting in a situation in which the film had to be suppressed for more than a decade (which it was). There are other examples, but these three should suffice to make the point. Let me put it this way: if there were no errors, then there would be no evidence trail; and without an evidence trail, Dallas would have been (by definition) a perfect crime, and we wouldn't be here debating the validity of the Warren Report's conclusions. Its my belief--and I will expand on this in a future writing--that almost every problem with the official version stems from mistakes in the execution of an original plan; a plan which, if properly executed, would not have left such evidence.. This line of analysis --a sort of "error analysis"--is particularly important if one is attempting to identify "what was supposed to happen, but didn't." Now back to Mexico City. . . : All I'm suggesting is that, for whatever reason,there was a serious snafu in Mexico City, resulting in a photo record that was "unacceptable" (for some reason); and the attempts to deal with the situation may have led to serious confusion; and specifically, to the confusing record that currently exists: pictures of someone who was obviously not Oswald, in effect "labeled" as Oswald, and the source of incorrect information that ended up in communications between Mexico City and Washington. I have little doubt that, as designed, the original plan called for a trail of credible evidence that Oswald (and Oswald alone) went to Mexico City, and appeared at both the Cuban Consulate and the Soviet Embassy. Occam's Razor suggests that the simplest way to accomplish this--if that was the goal--would be for Oswald (himself) to have been sent to Mexico City, and to those two locations, under the guise of someone simply seeking travel documents, for a trip back to the USSR, by way of Havana. According to Marina, that's essentially what Lee told her he was doing. You can "take it" from there. Again I repeat: I've only advanced a hypothesis in an attempt to explain a complicated and confusing record. If there's a better explanation, I'd be glad to defer to it. DSL 11/13/2017 - 5:30 p.m. PST Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 (edited) On 11/12/2017 at 1:01 PM, Craig Carvalho said: There were photos taken of Oswald at the Cuban embassy Prove it please Craig.... Oswald was never there... how can there have been photos taken? A photo of Oswald in and out of the Cuban/Soviet Compound would be the nail in the coffin in terms of evidence of his state of mind... What reason can you offer for them NOT providing an image of our Ozzie down there? btw, Mystery man is a non starter... Scott and JC seem to know who this person is.... are you aware of the ODUM situation with Marge and Ruby in Mexico related to this image? Goodpasture even lied about when the photos were taken... a women with a steel trap for a mind conveniently misdates the photo to coincide with the phone call... As for CIA personnel testifying to anything... the same phantom evidence was used to put Duran and Oswald into bed together... never happened but the legend grows. Some of the new releases include JUNE COBB's who was instrumental in creating the myth... I guess - if you're going to make a definitive statement of "FACT"... I'd like to understand from where it originates and why you believe it. Edited March 1, 2018 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 (edited) On 11/13/2017 at 5:51 AM, David Lifton said: Occam's Razor suggests that the simplest way to accomplish this--if that was the goal--would be for Oswald (himself) to have been sent to Mexico City, and to those two locations, under the guise of someone simply seeking travel documents Under that theory then David... why isn't the travel info simple and neat...? All the man needed to do was buy a 4-part ticket in New Orleans... and he would be done with a provable record of his travel.... This did not happen... this traveler, we are told, bought a ticket at each and every stop along the way... yet left no evidence of doing so. thousand and thousands of FBI documents to prove he was... Arturo BOSCH changed the Frontera manifest in front of busline workers... The report superimposed is under Hoover's signature.... Flecha Rojas on the way down? Used as FACT until proven not to be possible... Frontera? Proven a fake but used until another option could be found... HARVEY CASH American Consul lied about what the information in front of him said.... EUGENE PUGH also lied about what the I&NS knew... I've put over 300 pages on that trip online at K&K... if the idea was to leave a provable trail of evidence for that trip... "they" failed miserably. Edited June 18, 2018 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Trejo Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 (edited) I believe that Mystery Man was best explained by Bill SImpich (2014) when he said that Anne Goodpasture deliberately falsified the CIA 201 File on Lee Harvey Oswald in order to prepare his CIA files for a top secret CIA Mole Hunt. This is in Chapter 5 of State Secret: Wiretapping in Mexico City (2014). This meant replacing Oswald's photograph with the photograph of ANYBODY. The Mole Hunt was supposed to operate like this: 1. Nobody was supposed to request the Oswald file without knowledge of the CIA high-command. 2. If anybody secretly sneaked a look at the Oswald file, then they would get bogus information, including a bogus photograph. 3. If that bogus information appeared anywhere in the world -- then the CIA would have their Mole. Instead of this successful outcome, the CIA got a surprise -- the JFK Assassination -- and the FBI demanded to see the CIA 201 file on Lee Harvey Oswald -- and the low-level CIA clerk hurried to hand over the file to the FBI -- and viola! Mystery Man! Regards, --Paul Trejo Edited November 13, 2017 by Paul Trejo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 (edited) 23 hours ago, Paul Trejo said: I believe And therein lies the entire problem Paul... What you believe and what you can support are similar like apples and tires.... 23 hours ago, Paul Trejo said: Instead of this successful outcome, the CIA got a surprise -- the JFK Assassination -- and the FBI demanded to see the CIA 201 file on Lee Harvey Oswald -- and the low-level CIA clerk hurried to hand over the file to the FBI -- and viola! Mystery Man! The CIA was surprised by the JFK assassination.... ? This is your POV now... ? THIS is how Mystery Man was created.... from the wrong day... Edited November 14, 2017 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brendan Boucher Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 Part of the scenario that Mr Lifton lays out has been discussed here before and I think it makes the most sense. Oswald was possibly caught on camera with someone whose identity, if disclosed, would make a Lone Nut assassin case impossible. But I do not think this would have been a mistake by any means. I believe Oswald and unknown compatriot(s) may have been deliberately inserted into the record by a different faction of operatives. Operatives who would have facilitated his entry and departure from Mexico without leaving documentation. I cannot profess to know the exact reasons this might have been done but it does help explain what ensued. By most accounts the agents working in Mexico City (and with MEXI from DC) were extremely competent at their jobs and were generally intelligent people. The extant record displaying their handling of the Oswald in Mexico saga paints them as bumbling idiots. Were they truly inept? Or were they willing to look inept in order to cover up something far more important? The documented cable traffic is literally laughable. For almost two months they play this charade where surely at least one of the parties knows damn well they're talking about the wrong man. There simply must be a reason that the MEXI Station had to obscure the fact that they did not have photos of Oswald on the dates they said they did and that their matching of voice to picture was obviously erroneous. I think what makes the most sense here is that Official Washington needed this "loose end" until after the assassination. When word started whipping around that Oswald had been in Mexico and may have met with Kostikov/Dept 13/KGB/Cuba figures, that was really all that was needed to ensure most people fell in line. It was far more preferable to have a Lone Assassin than to have had the Commies knock off the President, and everything that would entail. If the Oswald mis-identification had been exposed pre-assassination there had to have been a chance it would have disrupted the plot with him as a patsy. This to me explains the ham-handed, ever shifting cover up of the true details of Ozzie in Mexico. DJ, I know you have done exhaustive work on Oswald's supposed adventure to and from Mexico City and you are convinced the trip was never made. One of the main things that makes me believe Oswald did actually apply for a Visa is that the application, with his picture attached made it to Cuba and was then viewed in the 70's. If Oswald did not apply for that Visa you would have to accept that either Sylvia Duran filed an application for someone whose picture did not match the person in front of her or that somehow Cuban files were doctored after the fact to include Oswald's photo. Mexico City (like everything else) is a complete morass, but if any sense can ever be made of the machinations that unfolded there in late September-early October 1963 then you are a long way to understanding the entire plot, planners, and personages intimately involved with the assassination. FWIW - I enjoy and respect Bill Simpich's work on Mexico City but this idea of a "Molehunt" which once made some sense to me just does't anymore. Not to mention that the term "Molehunt" hardly fits the description of any operations supposedly run by Angleton, etc. after Oswalds appearances/phone calls in Mexico, does it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 At the end of Paul's reply he switched gears again so the real culprits were the RADICAL RIGHT. Right, Paul? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Walton Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 Brendan did you read what Josephs just posted? Another key he mentions is why is the record keeping so messy? I believe I read somewhere that LHO kept everything. Yet look at the records of MC and the gun purchases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 (edited) 28 minutes ago, Brendan Boucher said: DJ, I know you have done exhaustive work on Oswald's supposed adventure to and from Mexico City and you are convinced the trip was never made. One of the main things that makes me believe Oswald did actually apply for a Visa is that the application, with his picture attached made it to Cuba and was then viewed in the 70's. If Oswald did not apply for that Visa you would have to accept that either Sylvia Duran filed an application for someone whose picture did not match the person in front of her or that somehow Cuban files were doctored after the fact to include Oswald's photo. Hi there Brendan... welcome to the forum and thanks for your thoughtful response. Duran tells us the person she saw in person was not the man Ruby shot. Same as Azcue. Maybe they're lying. CORNWELL - Correct?... Did you look at the photos when he brought them back, careful about to be sure that it was the same man who was standing in front of you?TIRADO - Yes. (Why not ask whether the man returning with the photos was Oswald?) ---------------- CORNWELL - Then what did you do with the application?TIRADO - Well, I used to put it in a file, and uh, I used to keep one copy, another to send (2), the original (3), we used to send to Cuba. And I think I have another file (4). That's 4 copies - yet she only said she typed out and had the man sign 2 of them (with different signatures)... how can there be 4 copies? I've dropped a few things into the post to consider... but asking whether someone did something in Mexico City when the evidence which places him in Mexico City at the time is not authentic is kind of a non-starter... PROVE he was in MX first, THEN talk about what he did or didn't do there... lol. Duran claims the application was typed with a carbon... Despite the WCR getting the original mixed up with the carbon we notice a few things 1 - there are no staples on the photo on the carbon 2 - no matter how you line it up, you cannot create a carbon copy of the original on the right 3 - we literally have no info on the origins of these 2 photos or the Chain of Custody for these applications.... Edited November 13, 2017 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brendan Boucher Posted November 13, 2017 Share Posted November 13, 2017 To me, Azcue's testimony to the HSCA is worthless. There is no incentive whatsoever for him to confirm that it was indeed Oswald in the Consulate and every reason to throw some gum in the works. He'd been in Cuba since before the assassination of course and why would he not take this opportunity to take a shot at the US. The fact that he has "Oswald" in a blue "Prince of Wales" suit is not very convincing when coupled with the photos eventually affixed to the application. As for Duran, her testimony certainly leans toward LHO having been present in front of her multiple times. And there can be no doubt that someone went to the Cuban Consulate and filled out a Visa form with Oswald's information. Is it your supposition that someone eerily similar to Oswald may have been that man causing somewhat of a scene in the Consulate? Quote CORNWELL - Then, the next morning you saw a newspaper.TIRADO - Yes.CORNWELL - Were you sure at that time that that was the man?TIRADO - Yes. 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