David Josephs Posted July 28, 2018 Share Posted July 28, 2018 Just as there were no reports of Ozzie receiving a rifle or pistol, contemporaneously.... The calls of the 27th and 28th either did not occur or were ignored at the time for the Oct 8th LIENVOY Summary report. You’d think the reports would have been rewritten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted July 29, 2018 Share Posted July 29, 2018 You are saying that the CIA did not include those calls on the monthly report in October for September? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 29, 2018 Author Share Posted July 29, 2018 Correct... not even mentioned. And for the November report, they would know exactly who they were talking about... but still no mention of his name, or the operational value... How again does Ozzie know the number to the Soviet military attaché? The calls occurred when the embassy was closed both Friday and Sat, the 27th and 28th... Similar to there not being a report of a rifle shipment in March or April.... that rifle evidence didn’t exist until after the fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted July 29, 2018 Share Posted July 29, 2018 Here is David's full post from the "New Documents Release 2017" thread. On 7/27/2018 at 11:46 AM, David Josephs said: A bit more info on that document... This is the one that Anne Goodpasture and Barbara Mandel send to CIA HQ ... from Ch 6 on Mexico: https://statick2k-5f2f.kxcdn.com/images/pdf/chapter6_3c.pdf "Bill Simpich provided me with the documentation links showing that Goodpasture, working with LADILLINGER (Soviet Desk officer Barbara Murphy Manell), took what was obviously a photo from 12:22 on Oct 2nd and represented it as Oct 1 to match the call transcript." There is literally nothing factual in that memo... and Ms. Goodpasture did not make mistakes over simple dates... ===================================== Why it fits so well that DAP masterminded the CI operation of OSWALD IN MEXICO.... David Atlee Phillips receives a package as MICHAEL CHOADEN sent from MX to HQ on OCT 1 On OCT 2 a memo is sent from MX to HQ stating that the "AMMO REQUESTED STILL NOT REC'D".... SUGGEST CHOADEN BRINGS AMMO ON NRETURN MEXI" Wasn't TIPPIT killed with .38 Special Ammo? An OCT 4 memo goes from HQ to MX informing them of DAP's position and his arrival OCT 7 The Memo you posted is from OCT 8, 1 day after Phillips arrives as CUBAN DESK CHIEF... the problem which arises is that the contemporaneous SUMMARY REPORTS for LIENVOY activity for the month of SEPT 1963 does not mention any of the calls from SEPT to the RUSSIAN numbers... This report is also dated OCT 8 It has always been my theory that any "evidence" created after the fact would have to conflict with any contemporaneous reports filed o was the FBI/CIA watched Oswald... If this man actually called these locations on the 27th and 28th it would have been mentioned in these reports... Only when we get to OCT do we see mention of the English speaking man... From the OCT 8 report https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2018/104-10413-10268.pdf we are told of only 2 leads of operational interest in SEPT 1963... neither one is OSWALD... How can there be transcripts of LEE OSWALD calls from SEPT 27/28 yet them not mentioned until the NOV report on OCT activity, and only a single line in passing... by the NOV SUMMARY REPORT - shouldn't we be seeing the name OSWALD We must also remember that the Cuban Embassy closed at 2pm, and was closed on weekends... yet Oswald. "notwithstanding" was able to proceed with his discussions and meetings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted July 29, 2018 Share Posted July 29, 2018 Interesting research David, allow me to suggest something, after a few caveats.... 1) As I understand it, you do not believe that LHO went to MC in the late September, early October timeframe. 2) I have never been sure whether it is your feeling that he was not there, the evidence doesn't prove that he was there, or that he was not there on the dates and times claimed by the WC? I am not really quizzing you on that, I just wanted to state that I am unclear on those points. For myself, I agree that the evidence does not prove that LHO was in MC at the WC dates and times. I also believe that LHO is not the guy described by Sylvia Duran or the person who made the phone calls. If you have shown that LHO just plain was not on MC in that time frame I have missed that. Now to my point. I think it is worth noting that the suppression of LHO's visit, in the LIENVOY report, is consistent with both Bill Simpich (as I understand his Speculation), and the Newman/Morely interview with Jane Roman. As I understand Simpich's speculation, as reiterated by B.A. Copeland recently on this forum, Angleton was being duped by rogues. This missing information is consistent with that duping. I have come to same, tentative, conclusion. At least that's how it looks to me. On the other hand, this missing information is consistent with the Newman/Morley-Roman revelation that the lid was being kept on LHO's activities through this period, By Angleton. So, while I hate to be perceived as chinking away at your research, I though it was worthwhile to point out that this missing information is consistent with two diverse theories. It also seems worth noting, as a side note, that DAP's MC assignment could be explained by the shenanigans of others, or the the presence and activities of LHO in MC. It would be interesting to find out if DAP's assignment was planned ahead of time, or if it was hastily executed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted July 29, 2018 Share Posted July 29, 2018 7 hours ago, Mike Kilroy said: I’m curious who the “highly productive agent” is that accepts no salary that they’re trying to do a favor for... A possible candidate is AMLASH/1, if my recollection of docs is correct. He was noted as declining payment at times, except in cases where expensive travel arrangements were required of him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted July 29, 2018 Share Posted July 29, 2018 Michael: Your comment is not really accurate. If someone horned in on the operation, then the info still had to be recorded. Secondly, what he is referring to here is from documents we have not seen before. At least I have not seen them and no one has referred to them. And it all jibes with the other non technical info, like the testimony of the two plants in the MC office who say they never saw Oswald there. The last thing that Angleton ever wanted to prove about MC is that Oswald was not there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted July 29, 2018 Share Posted July 29, 2018 22 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said: Michael: Your comment is not really accurate. If someone horned in on the operation, then the info still had to be recorded. Secondly, what he is referring to here is from documents we have not seen before. At least I have not seen them and no one has referred to them. And it all jibes with the other non technical info, like the testimony of the two plants in the MC office who say they never saw Oswald there. The last thing that Angleton ever wanted to prove about MC is that Oswald was not there. Thanks Jim, While I have no problem deferring to authority on most occasions, until I get my head around all of this, especially David's research, I want leave a couple things on the table; on my table anyway. I know it is unpopular, but I do leave open the idea that Angleton was being played by Rogues. If the rogues job was to screw JJA by making evidence for LHO in MC disappear, I don't see that being an impossibility, especially with Phillips swooping-in days after the MC caper, to control the situation. Likewise, under the same circumstances, I can see JJA "dimming the lights" on the Oswalds or just one if he had knowledge of only one, to try to ferret-out the rogues (Phillips, McCord?). He may not have been using the dimmer switch to cover up the developing conspiracy. Since JJA had a "keen interest", as Jane Roman put it, in LHO in the Fall of 63, I don't really see how JJA could really want to prove that Oswald was there in MC, trying to get to Cuba and Russia. I may understand what you are getting at in 5 minutes, hours or days but I really don't see the logic in your statement that "The last thing that Angleton ever wanted to prove about MC is that Oswald was not there." Proof positive that LHO was in MC, with pictures, arrows and transcripts would have been potentially damning and devastating to JJA and the agency. The Warren Commission could serve up all the slop they wanted for the masses, but having rock-solid evidence posted in the NYT and Tme magazine of the purported LHO activities in MC would have been far more devastating than the actual smoke and mirrors that they presented. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 29, 2018 Author Share Posted July 29, 2018 Thanks for take no the time to muddle thru my Mexico fun.... counter point is greatly appreciated... “Angleton duped by rogues” by making Oswald in MX evidence disappear... hmmmm. 1, duping JJA seems a fool’s goal... and 2, we look at the things said and done contemporaneously and reported upon prior to the 22nd of Nov to see how they match the accusations. And they don’t. Let me clarify my position for you. The man Ruby killed was not in MX on those dates but on a Trip thru Austin to Dallas stopping at Sylvia Odio and remaining in Dallas until the 4th. Calls were made from the Cuban Emb to the Soviet compound. Whether Duran was the female voice IDK, but the male was not Oswald... we know this as FBI agents did hear a tape, it was not Oswald... and as Jim mentions, the only 2 who ID Oswald both say the man Ruby killed was not him... question remains, was there a real person in the Cuban Consulate doing the things Azcue and Duran claim? Again, we assume so, but there are more lies related to those days than truths... On Oct 7 DAP shows up and on Oct 8 both THE memo is written about 35 year old Ozzie And the Sept summary report is written. Are we to accept that Scott nor Goodpasture, nor Phillips were aware of the calls from the 27th and 28th for their operational interest...? It was this passage from the Lope report that got me really motivated... once you see that the man did not travel as offered 4 or 5 different times and ways.... and Odio and her sister were so sure... and he was seen in Dallas, seen in Austin.... It is very possible that these things are happening concurrently... why not, right? Yet an FBI Oswald in Dallas wth Hispanics is quite in line with his FBI expectations and an embarrassment for Hoover should that get out... Hoover knew everything that happened down there... and even he couldn’t find him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 29, 2018 Author Share Posted July 29, 2018 Literally within hours of the assassination, the 4 lines mentioned above had their records “borrowed” by Mexican Pres Staff, as well as changed in these hours... and only for the days in question. We’ve only ever seen copies of copies provided by an FBI asset placed incredibly high in the Gobernacion... and not Echevarria. All the evidence goes thru a single person.... hmmmm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted July 29, 2018 Share Posted July 29, 2018 (edited) Thanks, David. I took time to read your MC research when it was posted to Kennedy’s and King last year. I cant be sure I read it all; so I am sorry if I I am asking questions that you have gone over repeatedly, So allow me to ask, how do you eliminate the Marine-Corp-Photo LHO as the person that Sylvia Odio met? I am not sure that you accept the Marine Corp photo LHO as someone other than the LHO murdered in the basement of the DPD, to whom I refer as the DPD LHO. But I think you understand my question. Couldn’t Sylvia Odio have seen the Marine-Corp-LHO, leaving the DPD LHO to go to MC and pose for CIA pics and create other records that we have never seen? I am just curious as to how you came to be so sure; because it seems like part of your process says that LHO could not have been in MC because he was seen at Odios. I have not been able to rule out the possibility that the DPD LHO was not at Odios, while MCPh LHO was at Odio’s, DPD LHO being in MC, but there is not one stitch of valid evidence for him being there. Do you see what I am getting at? I’m not asking that you buy any of it. I’m just wondering if I have presented a clear scenario. Anyway, with great respect and thanks, Michael Edited July 29, 2018 by Michael Clark Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 29, 2018 Author Share Posted July 29, 2018 Odio came after. The evidence offered does not put Oswald there.... the LITAMIL-9 reports specifically asking about Oswald. Showing him “a” photo... maybe im approaching this wrong... Simpich does not put Oswald there... if there was this mole hunt in process, the use of the name Oswald holds duplicitous meaning at the least. Oswald’s physical presence is absent at every stop from New Orleans to that hotel and back to Dallas... the FBI uses physical witnesses who are easily impeached.... over 20 FBI assets in MX city found no trace of Oswald, as badly as Hoover needed them to.... what would Hoover’s motivation be for hiding the fact he wasn’t there... when he needed to cover for him? He wouldn’t, so a second voice and photo means 2 people in MX, not just the written no 1. 2 hours ago, Michael Clark said: Inam just curious as to how you came to be so sure; because it seems like part of your process says that LHO could not have been in MC because he was seen at Odios 2 hours ago, Michael Clark said: So allow me to ask, how do you eliminate the Marine-Corp-Photo LHO as the person that Sylvia Odio met? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 29, 2018 Author Share Posted July 29, 2018 2 hours ago, Michael Clark said: do you see what I am getting at? I’m not asking that you buy any of it. I’m just wondering if I have presented a clear scenario. Anyway, with great respect and thanks, Michael The scenario is clear, just not how I see it... while Armstrong and I have spoken of this, he concedes that while some of the evidence points to “LEE” , if leaving a trail for future investigators to find was the point of the trip, it was done terribly and only leads to more questions. There is a lot to read... I am working on a PowerPoint to make my POV easier to follow... I’m about a third done... Good talking with you about it.... and please keep asking if I’m not clear... easier to address during the workday when the mind is sharp... lol DJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Clark Posted July 29, 2018 Share Posted July 29, 2018 21 minutes ago, David Josephs said: The scenario is clear, just not how I see it... while Armstrong and I have spoken of this, he concedes that while some of the evidence points to “LEE” , if leaving a trail for future investigators to find was the point of the trip, it was done terribly and only leads to more questions. There is a lot to read... I am working on a PowerPoint to make my POV easier to follow... I’m about a third done... Good talking with you about it.... and please keep asking if I’m not clear... easier to address during the workday when the mind is sharp... lol DJ Thanks David, I moved to my iPhone before I posted last and had a few typos. I corrected them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted July 30, 2018 Share Posted July 30, 2018 It was my understanding that what Scott/Simpich are saying is that some lower level rogues horned in on an upper level sanctioned mission that somehow they knew about. What David is showing is that instead of the lower level guys duping the upper level guys, the lower level guys really did not know what was happening. And then the CIA got Echeverria to cover up their plotting. Michael: per the other point, Angleton could not admit that Oswald was not down there. Because then that would have blown the whole CYA cover up that the cables caused on the 22nd. 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