The KGB and the JFK case

[Thomas Graves]

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Ha! That would be something. But I don't think the plotters could have found an agent who looked that much like the real Leonov.

 

Sandy "Brainwashed by 90-plus Years of Soviet/Russian Active Measures, Interwoven With 58 Years of Operational Deception Ops" Larsen,

 

Hey!  Maybe Leonov was impersonating his own impersonator!

 

Or maybe "Leon" was the cover name for Henry Harvey Lee Oswald.  You know, of the "Harvey and Lee and Henry, Too" Theory?

 

--  Tommy 

 

PS  How was the evil, evil, evil CIA going to "associate" Lee Harvey Oswald with Nikolai Leonov to make their evil, evil, evil plan work, Sandy?

Photograph them holding hands and sharing an icecream cone at the Sunday afternoon bullfights?

Photographing them doing "The Nudie Boody Twist" together at Duran's party?

Come up with an old Civil Air Patrol photo showing Ferrie, Lee, AND "Leon"?

A hot-off-the-press CIA photo showing Leonov handing Oswald a parcel full of curtain rods?

 

Edited February 24, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Thomas Graves]

On 2/22/2018 at 2:48 PM, James DiEugenio said:

Tommy,

In case you did not notice, I have taken David'a advice.

I don't take you seriously anymore.  And I think few people on this board do.

I have explained why on several occasions.  You ignore them.

Fine. 

 

James,

With all due respect, are you admitting that you used to take me seriously?

You mean, you mean, you mean ... back in the day when I, too, thought the evil, evil, evil CIA had killed Kennedy, and was already pointing out the alarming number of factual errors and logical fallacies you tend to make in your posts?

--  Tommy 

PS  Did you vote for Donald Trump, James?  If not, would you vote for him now, seeing as how he's "pivoted" away from being "Anti-Swamp" and is now, like you, rabidly anti-"Deep State" (or anti-"Military Industrial Intelligence Complex," or some-such-thing), and he's refusing to enforce the new sanctions against Russia for invading Ukraine and for hacking our election (you do agree that Putin hacked our election, don't you, James, or do you prefer to go with Binney and Assange on that one?), and because he's supporting "Poison Gasser" Assad?

Etc, etc? 

Anybody but Hillary, right, James?

Edited February 26, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Cliff Varnell]

Jim DiEugenio wrote:

  [JFK] let the Bay of Pigs fail when everyone else was telling him to send in the Marines. 

 Charles Cabell, Arleigh Burke and...Richard Nixon (?!)...were "everyone"?

[James DiEugenio]

Can you please tell me who else was in charge?

Cabell was the highest CIA officer, Burke had his fleet off the coast, JFK called up Nixon to ask him his advice.

Did you want him to ask Pat Nixon also?

[Cliff Varnell]

9 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Can you please tell me who else was in charge?

Dean Rusk and McGeorge Bundy -- the guys who took over the Bay of Pigs planning and guaranteed its failure.

Rusk constantly griped about the size of the invasion force and the necessity of it appearing to be an all-Cuban no-Americans operation.  Rusk's complaints led JFK to order the false flag "defecting Cuban" air force cut in half.  Reduced from 16 planes to 8, the D-Day -2 false flag attack on Castro's air force failed, and doomed the BOP operation before it launched.

Everyone involved knew that the failure of the D-day -2 attack was fatal -- except Kennedy. 

Face it, JFK screwed the pooch on D-Day -1 when he gave the okay for the invasion to proceed without grasping the implications of Castro's air supremacy.

Adlai Stevenson angrily denied US involvement at the U.N. D-Day -1. 

The D-Day -2 attack on the Cuban airfields blind-sided Stevenson and he put redundant pressure on Kennedy to keep the US out.

U.S. military intervention would have been a war crime, and everyone knew it.

Quote

Cabell was the highest CIA officer,

No, Allen Dulles was.  But he went into a premature early retirement down in Puerto Rico on D-Day, totally clocked out of the operation.

Cabell didn't attend the principals' meetings:

https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1961-63v10/d65

https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1961-63v10/d66

Dulles and Bissell attnded the key meetings and neither of them put pressure on Kennedy.

They left the dirty face-saving work to Cabell.   Rusk offered him the chance to talk directly to JFK on D-Day -1 but he turned it down.

How did turning down the opportunity to pressure Kennedy constitute pressure on Kennedy?

Cabell didn't talk to Kennedy until 4:30 am on D-Day when it was too late -- Castro's planes were about to attack the invasion force.

Quote

Burke had his fleet off the coast,

And Burke didn't make his pitch for U.S. intervention until just after midnight D-Day +2 when it was way to late.

Quote

JFK called up Nixon to ask him his advice.

Did you want him to ask Pat Nixon also?

No, the guys listed in this memo:

<quote on, emphasis added>

On March 16, 1961, CIA officials outlined for President Kennedy the revisions to the Zapata plan that the President had called for on the previous day. The Presidentʼs appointment book indicates that the meeting took place in the White House from 4:15 to 5:23 p.m. The meeting was attended by Vice President Johnson, McNamara, Rusk, Mann, Berle, Dulles, Bissell, McGeorge Bundy, William Bundy, and Gray. (Kennedy Library, Presidentʼs Appointment Book) Although not listed in the appointment book, it is clear from his subsequent debriefing on the meeting that Admiral Burke also attended. According to Grayʼs notes on the meeting:

“At meeting with the President, CIA presented revised concepts for the landing at Zapata wherein there would be air drops at first light with [Page 160]the landing at night and all of the ships away from the objective area by dawn. The President decided to go ahead with the Zapata planning; to see what we could do about increasing support to the guerrillas inside the country; to interrogate one member of the force to determine what he knows; and he reserved the right to call off the plan even up to 24 hours prior to the landing.” (Summary notes prepared on May 9, 1961, by General Gray; Kennedy Library, National Security Files, Countries Series, Cuba, Subjects, Taylor Report)

On March 17 Admiral Burke provided the JCS with additional details about the discussion of the revised Zapata plan. According to Burke, the President wanted to know what the consequences would be if the operation failed. He asked Burke how he viewed the operationʼs chance of success. Burke indicated that he had given the President a probability figure of about 50 percent. President Kennedy also inquired what would happen if it developed after the invasion that the Cuban exile force were pinned down and being slaughtered on the beach. If they were to be re-embarked, the President wanted to know where they could be taken. According to Burkeʼs account of the meeting: “It was decided they would not be re-embarked because there was no place to go. Once they were landed they were there.” In the course of the discussion, it was emphasized that the plan was dependent on a general uprising in Cuba, and that the entire operation would fail without such an uprising. (Review of Record of Proceedings Related to Cuban Situation, May 5; Naval Historical Center, Area Files, Bumpy Road Materials)

<quote off>

Everyone knew there was not going to be any US intervention, period.

Cabell and Burke were just trying to save a little face.

Edited February 27, 2018 by Cliff Varnell

[James DiEugenio]

Here we go again.

Yawn.  

What's next Cliff?  The ice bullet and Harriman?

[Cliff Varnell]

26 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Here we go again.

Here you go again, claiming that "everyone" was three guys who weren't central to the planning or execution of the BOP.

26 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Yawn.  

Your promotion of the myth that JFK was pressured into committing a war crime is egregious.

26 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

What's next Cliff?  The ice bullet and Harriman?

What's next Jim, more convoluted proofs of conspiracy to put jurors to sleep?

[Paul Trejo]

On ‎2‎/‎21‎/‎2018 at 8:39 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

Thanks David.

I believe that the CIA created the Mexico City story for the sole purpose of making it look like Oswald was there conspiring with the likes of Kostikov and Leonov to assassinate Kennedy. The CIA needed to create a trail of evidence, and for the trips to and from MC they had an Oswald impersonator travel by car in and out of Mexico. And that's the reason the early reports had Oswald traveling by car.

Having Oswald travel by car was incompatible with the Lone Nut narrative because it would require a driver, and this would suggest a conspiracy. So the FBI the scrapped the automobile evidence and replaced it with a fabricated bus trip.

Thanks to David Josephs for providing documented evidence that LHO entered and exited Mexico as a passenger in a car.

At the very least one can see that CTers did not just make this stuff up.   There is material evidence in documented form.

Now -- the interpretation of the documentation is always open -- in the absence of other information.

However -- my interpretation is that the Mexico documentation is TRUE AND CORRECT in substance, even if it was slightly modified, or if LHO told Mexico Immigration that his middle name was "Henry," or if the Mexican Immigration clerk mistakenly heard "Henry" (because there is a Spanish name, "Enrique" which means Henry and is very common in Mexico, but there is no Spanish equivalent to "Harvey).

In any case -- it's a matter of interpretation .   I say that LHO entered and exited Mexico as the passenger in a car driven by Loran Hall, with Larry Howard as another passenger.   Both men would give alias names, and would speak fluent Spanish and easily get by the busy Mexico Immigration clerk.

As Harry Dean said as early as 1965 on the Joe Pyne radio show, Lee Harvey Oswald was driven to Mexico City by Loran Hall and Larry Howard, and met Guy Gabaldon there as well.   That eye-witness CT sticks until I see some MATERIAL PROOF that it is incorrect.

So far, lots of talk, and little PROOF.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[David Josephs]

1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:

I say that LHO entered and exited Mexico as the passenger in a car driven by Loran Hall, with Larry Howard as another passenger.   Both men would give alias names, and would speak fluent Spanish and easily get by the busy Mexico Immigration clerk.

1 hour ago, Paul Trejo said:

However -- my interpretation is that the Mexico documentation is TRUE AND CORRECT in substance, even if it was slightly modified, or if LHO told Mexico Immigration that his middle name was "Henry," or if the Mexican Immigration clerk mistakenly heard "Henry" (because there is a Spanish name, "Enrique" which means Henry and is very common in Mexico, but there is no Spanish equivalent to "Harvey).

Paul... your "interpretation" makes a variety of HUGE assumptions...

1. The Odio sisters are lying
2. The TRUE and CORRECT records do not show a car entering Mexico with 3 men...  aliases or not.
3. As I posted in another thread... the man on the 27th MUST be Oswald for all this to work yet not only are the ID's suspect, but TERESA PROENZA says she met OSWALD when he walked in "blind" yet could not talk to him since he only spoke English... She speaks Spanish...  we are to remember that the calls on the 27th from the MO (Man Outside) were in fluent SPANISH.  If the man she met was Oswald AND made these calls in perfect Spanish, why couldn't he speak to TERESA
4. William GAUDET's story about the Visa office conflicts with those who also got Visas there that day...

I could go on and on Paul... the real problem here is you take 1 thing to mean ALL things...  "Henry" had nothing to do AT ALL with Mexican Immigration.  The impetus for HENRY is the reply from CIA HQ on the 10th, in a DIFFERENT version of the same memo sent to STATE, ONI & FBI

 

Here's your "TRUE AND CORR#ECT" Mexican documentation... 

Paul, please try to stay within your comfort zone... when you make assumptions and statements that are supposedly FACT, they need to check out... yet they don't. 

An FBI asset at GOBERNACION "created" the evidence...  This Oswald was in Dallas...  That you can throw in that junk about Hall and Howard is just shameless...

[Paul Trejo]

David,

I certainly do not say that the Odio sisters were LYING in any indefensible manner.   They were both terrified for their lives.

The FBI was clearly refusing to protect them, because they were contradicting The FBI Director with their denial of the "Lone Nut" Oswald.

Therefore, Loran Hall was free to terrorize them.   Hall knew where they lived.   He knew their telephone numbers.  He called Silvia Odio over the telephone before and he would do it again.   He was a speed-freak and a killer -- and he was out for MONEY.

The FBI knew this, but they did not pick him up, because he had friends in high places.   For example, when Loran Hall got picked up by the Dallas Police for possession of amphetamines and reckless driving, no less a person than attorney Robert Morris, ran to bail him out, and then escorted Hall to the home of General Walker for consolation.    This was documented by Jim Garrison.

After Silvia Odio was allowed to give the WC her testimony (as the second-to-last witness) the FBI picked up Loran Hall -- who confessed that he was at her home.   But it wasn't Oswald, he claimed, but William Seymour and Larry Howard.   

However, when William Seymour and Larry Howard denied it, and came up with alibis (from their spouses and pals) Loran Hall changed his testimony, and said it must have been some other wealthy Cuban lady's home.   But the FBI did not relay this change of story to the WC, who reported the first confession and stuck with it like glue.   Anything but risk the Lone Nut Theory.

Loran Hall was a loose cannon.   Also, J. Lee Rankin personally told Silvia Odio, "No matter what you testify, Silvia, we're going to deny that you ever saw Lee Harvey Oswald."    The FBI was sitting right there.   Silvia knew that the FBI offered her zero protection from Loran Hall.

Under those circumstances, what woman in 1964 would pick out Loran Hall from a photo sheet?     Most women would not.   It was a matter of self-defense.   Silvia Odio's denial that it was Loran Hall and Larry Howard is so defensible!

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited February 28, 2018 by Paul Trejo

[James DiEugenio]

David is doing some really good excavation on Mexico City.

He deserves a lot of credit for what he has done with those files.

[David Josephs]

Paul - you've raised "speculation, assumption and non-sequitur" to an art form...

 

[Thomas Graves]

On 2/21/2018 at 7:03 PM, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Tommy,

FWIW I tend to believe that Angleton was right, that Nosenko was the false defector.

I won't read State Secret because Simpich wrote that Oswald was "CIA in his own mind." Which is mind-blowingly wrong. It's hard for me to believe there are still researchers who don't accept that Oswald was a CIA agent. And no, my feeling that way has nothing to do with Harvey & Lee.

But, speaking of Harvey & Lee, I believe that it has now been proven that there were two young Oswalds. The teeth records show that, and there is just no way of getting around it.

 

 

Sandy,

 

With all due respect, what non-circumstantial evidence do you have that Lee Harvey Oswald was a witting CIA agent?

 

--  Tommy 

 

 

Edited March 1, 2018 by Thomas Graves

[Paz Marverde]

21 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

David is doing some really good excavation on Mexico City.

He deserves a lot of credit for what he has done with those files.

Ditto

[Sandy Larsen]

6 hours ago, Thomas Graves said:

Sandy,

 

With all due respect, what non-circumstantial evidence do you have that Lee Harvey Oswald was a witting CIA agent?

 

--  Tommy 

 

The evidence is all circumstantial, Tommy. But there's a large amount of it and it is very compelling.

My favorite evidence, because it is so simple and stands alone, is that James Angleton's CI/SIG division was investigating Oswald in 1960. Ann Egerter testified before the HSCA that the sole purpose of the CI/SIG division was to investigate CIA employees. They were tasked with "spying on spies." Therefore, Oswald was a CIA spy.

And now we have the indisputable teeth evidence that there were two Oswalds. Which adds even more to the mountain of evidence that Oswald was CIA.