John Newman on Lisa Pease's challenges to his research

[Paul Brancato]

2 hours ago, Michaleen Kilroy said:

No attack but a clarification:  the preso wasn't meant to be a comprehensive theory of who killed JFK.  It was a brief overview of the PR and propaganda tactics that have been used over the years to influence public opinion about the case.

I have a response, but I’ve enumerated this before with little if any agreement,

Cuba was never attacked because the aim of the plotters was much larger, and not Mafia driven. If Cuba had been the goal, it would only have been necessary to shoot at JFK. Killing him was unnecessary. If an attack had been provably tied to Castro, even if trumped up, Castro’s fate would have been sealed. This attack was meant to remove the main obstacle to the global designs of the American War Machine. It’s possible that a plot designed to scare but not kill JFK was hijacked by a real hit team. Oswald may have played a part in the first scenario, but certainly not the second. I’m guessing he at least knew of the former, possibly as an informant. Using Oswald’s bonafides as a pretext for going after Castro was weak in the first place, but had the original coup been successful - meaning no dead president - the plotters would have revealed other leads to Castro which instead were covered up because the president was in fact dead. 

Edited January 3, 2020 by Paul Brancato

[Cory Santos]

9 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

I have a response, but I’ve enumerated this before with little if any agreement,

Cuba was never attacked because the aim of the plotters was much larger, and not Mafia driven. If Cuba had been the goal, it would only have been necessary to shoot at JFK. Killing him was unnecessary. If an attack had been provably tied to Castro, even if trumped up, Castro’s fate would have been sealed. This attack was meant to remove the main obstacle to the global designs of the American War Machine. It’s possible that a plot designed to scare but not kill JFK was hijacked by a real hit team. Oswald may have played a part in the first scenario, but certainly not the second. I’m guessing he at least knew of the former, possibly as an informant. Using Oswald’s bonafides as a pretext for going after Castro was weak in the first place, but had the original coup been successful - meaning no dead president - the plotters would have revealed other leads to Castro which instead were covered up because the president was in fact dead. 

Paul,

Do you allow for the possibility that the plotters used the mafia for the sole point of shooting JFK? 

[Norman T. Field]

I have wondered for many years if things actually played out in the following manner:

One of the original goals of the JFK assassination was to justify an invasion of Cuba.

But, according to Richard Case Nagel, the plot had been penetrated by Soviet intelligence well before Dallas. The Soviets then ordered Nagel to kill LHO, which Nagel refused to do. Then, almost immediately after JFK was killed, a very high level Soviet intelligence officer communicated to his opposite number in the U.S. that any attempt to blame Castro for the crime would result in the Soviets revealing all they knew about the plot and a threat of WW3. 

Hence the need for the sudden pivot to the lone nut gunman and LBJ's warnings to Warren commission appointees about the risk of a new world war. 

[Paul Brancato]

1 hour ago, Cory Santos said:

Paul,

Do you allow for the possibility that the plotters used the mafia for the sole point of shooting JFK? 

I do. 

[Paul Brancato]

1 hour ago, Norman T. Field said:

I have wondered for many years if things actually played out in the following manner:

One of the original goals of the JFK assassination was to justify an invasion of Cuba.

But, according to Richard Case Nagel, the plot had been penetrated by Soviet intelligence well before Dallas. The Soviets then ordered Nagel to kill LHO, which Nagel refused to do. Then, almost immediately after JFK was killed, a very high level Soviet intelligence officer communicated to his opposite number in the U.S. that any attempt to blame Castro for the crime would result in the Soviets revealing all they knew about the plot and a threat of WW3. 

Hence the need for the sudden pivot to the lone nut gunman and LBJ's warnings to Warren commission appointees about the risk of a new world war. 

Why would Soviet Intel deem it necessary to kill Oswald? And why was it necessary to kill JFK in order to justify a Cuban invasion?

I’ve already answered the second question - to me it wasn’t necessary. As for the first, Nagel would have us believe that the Soviets saw LHO as an assassin, and thought they could save JFK’s life by neutralizing LHO. That’s a hard one for me to swallow. 

[David Andrews]

13 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Why would Soviet Intel deem it necessary to kill Oswald? And why was it necessary to kill JFK in order to justify a Cuban invasion?

I’ve already answered the second question - to me it wasn’t necessary. As for the first, Nagel would have us believe that the Soviets saw LHO as an assassin, and thought they could save JFK’s life by neutralizing LHO. That’s a hard one for me to swallow. 

Nagell claimed that the Soviets sent him, as a double-agent, to spy on Alpha 66.  Maybe the Soviets felt that killing Oswald after Nagell reported him as a designated patsy would deter a plot that they felt was low-level and instigated by Alpha.  Keeping out of notoriety the defector they had once taken in and stopping an invasion of Cuba and its global consequences would also be a motive.  Remember that JFK himself had had RFK tell Dobrynin that he feared a military coup and nuclear war under continued stress between the powers.

 

Edited January 3, 2020 by David Andrews

[Paul Brancato]

2 minutes ago, David Andrews said:

Nagell claimed that the Soviets sent him, as a double-agent, to spy on Alpha 66.  Maybe the Soviets felt that killing Oswald after Nagell reported him as a designated patsy would deter a plot that they felt was low-level and instigated by Alpha.  Keeping out of notoriety the defector they had once taken in would also be a motive and stop an invasion of Cuba and its consequences.

 

Thanks David - that is nuanced and interesting. Did Nagel ( it’s been years since I read the book) think of Oswald as a patsy, an informer, a shooter, or some combination? 

[Larry Hancock]

Let's keep this straight, Nagell said he was asked to monitor Oswald because the Soviets thought he was a wild card and could do something to embarrass them...especially if he began talking to Cubans that were radical and unpredictable.  However if you look at the names Nagell gave as the people he himself monitored in Miami, none were Alpha 66.   And the Cubans he describes meeting Oswald were not linked to Alpha 66 but most recently to Army training, having just come out of it.  As to Oswald, the only thing Nagell knew was that Oswald had been recruited for some sort of action on the East Coast, likely involving JFK, that was what he heard in New Orleans.   Of course even if you write Nagell out of the whole story, proof that Oswald was talking about going to the East Coast and actually talking about going underground is found in his letters to SWP and CPUSA....for whatever motive.  Nagell had no contact with any conspiracy or Oswald after New Orleans. 

[David Andrews]

 

22 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

Thanks David - that is nuanced and interesting. Did Nagel ( it’s been years since I read the book) think of Oswald as a patsy, an informer, a shooter, or some combination? 

Nobody can really say, being that Dick Russell is somewhat inconclusive on the matter of how Nagell perceived Oswald.  We also don't know, verbatim, what Nagell said after his arrest.  We have the 1967 'Arturo Verdestein' letter, which Nagell wrote from prison to his friend Arthur Greenstein.  That's always worth a new look.  In it, Nagell paints Oswald as patsy-shooter-hypnosis victim (see link).  Nagell may not have known Oswald's motives, involvements and affiliations fully.  From reading Dick Russell, my sense is that Nagell knew Oswald had been an intelligence operative in Japan and probably knew, obliquely, that Oswald still was one in the US. 

Nagell may also have been telling tall tales in the 'Verdestein' letter.  But, how would he have known about David Ferrie and hypnosis while imprisoned during 1967?  Did CIA visitors feed that to him?  And who was Arthur Greenstein really, anyway?  How would he have understood Nagell's obscure references if he was really only a young US tourist that Nagell had met in Mexico?  (Including the obscure outlining of a silver-backed currency.)

The letter:

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-private-correspondence-of-richard-case-nagell

Edited January 3, 2020 by David Andrews

[David Andrews]

19 minutes ago, Larry Hancock said:

Let's keep this straight, Nagell said he was asked to monitor Oswald because the Soviets thought he was a wild card and could do something to embarrass them...especially if he began talking to Cubans that were radical and unpredictable.  However if you look at the names Nagell gave as the people he himself monitored in Miami, none were Alpha 66.   And the Cubans he describes meeting Oswald were not linked to Alpha 66 but most recently to Army training, having just come out of it.  As to Oswald, the only thing Nagell knew was that Oswald had been recruited for some sort of action on the East Coast, likely involving JFK, that was what he heard in New Orleans.   Of course even if you write Nagell out of the whole story, proof that Oswald was talking about going to the East Coast and actually talking about going underground is found in his letters to SWP and CPUSA....for whatever motive.  Nagell had no contact with any conspiracy or Oswald after New Orleans. 

Larry, who is Nagell referring to as 'Bravo' in the substitution-coded Verdestein/Greenstein letter, if not Alpha?  Did he infiltrate any exile camps, pretending to be an arms runner?  Would really like to know, and also hear your take on any other coded references in the letter.

"Patsy is needed! She is pro-Castor Oiler well-known to Bravo Club. Two Bravo members speak to Patsy, convince her they are boyfriends, buy her Cuber Liber Cocktail (minus rum), get her drunk on glory, tell her they are special emissaries to Yanquis Land personally by Young Regent of Isle of Cuber to give Xmas present to Young Regent of Yanquis Land . . . have "chosen" Patsy to help deliver Xmas present. Will be furnished Safe Conduct Pass to Isle of Cuber by Embassy in Mexico City. Will be given proper treatment on arrival. Oh, joy! Will live happily ever after. Can Patsy join Xmas Present Committee now?"

https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/the-private-correspondence-of-richard-case-nagell

Also, Nagell had no contact with any conspiracy or Oswald after New Orleans.  -- Was this also Dick Russell's finding?  How late in 1963 (prior to his September arrest) was Nagell still bound to kill Oswald or be exposed by the Soviets?

Larry, don't retire yet.  We need a monograph reading on Nagell, apart from the Russell book.

Edited January 3, 2020 by David Andrews

[Larry Hancock]

And here I was thinking that a monograph on how the whole Dallas attack came together would be enough...grin.

My problem is that after walking through Nagell's remarks in a chronological order I have to accept that some of the things he said at certain points, especially after his wife took off with his kids and his whole life focused on getting them back, were truly situational.  He spent as much time backing off remarks he had made as making them earlier.  On one point I am convinced, as you said, that Nagell was aware of Oswald's attempts to contact the Soviet embassy in Tokyo and of the fact he was monitored by intelligence in doing that..both American and Russian intelligence.  Which means Oswald was under suspicion by the Russians from that point on (the KGB was well famed...as is the FSB....for its meticulous dossiers as well as its utter paranoia).

If  you accept that, and Nagell's spy games in Mexico City during the missile crisis, it certainly makes sense that the Soviets might contact him there and ask him to look in on Oswald who was by that time in the US.  It is also true that one of the most radical and active groups as of fall 62 was Alpha 66,  which did have a presence in Mexico City and harassed the Cubans. So they may well have been mentioned as a potential problem to Nagell.

However after that point you really have to get into the facts of exactly what Nagell did versus what he may have said later.  Was he in Dallas, we don't know that....was he in Miami and New Orleans, yes he was.  Did he leave New Orleans in a panic and do something really dramatic to take himself out of play and safely into jail...yes he did.  And at that point he gets to read newspapers and later books in prison, right up to the Garrison investigation when he gets to talk to folks about Oswald again.

Did Nagell add things to his remarks to make his story more convincing and get attention, I suspect he did at times and then downplayed that at other times.  All that is what I tried to capture in my (not a monograph but overview and analysis) of the Nagell document collection I put onto CD with Lancer.   What I would really love to see is for someone to go over those exact documents and see if they either agree or disagree with my analysis.  

http://jfklancer.com/catalog/hancock/index.html

If someone does that perhaps we could turn the point / counterpoint into a new monograph...

 

[Ron Bulman]

So we have Gaeton Fonzi of the HSCA wanting David Phillips indicted for perjury regarding his testimony about not being introduced to, or knowing who Veciana was in April 1978. 

Then we have Hardway and Lopez of the HSCA wanting him indicted for lying about Oswald and Mexico City in August 1978.  

Maye not Oswald, Phillips and Veciana Dallas in 1963.

But were they on to something important regarding Phillips?

[Steve Thomas]

14 hours ago, David Andrews said:

Larry, who is Nagell referring to as 'Bravo' in the substitution-coded Verdestein/Greenstein letter, if not Alpha?

"Patsy is needed! She is pro-Castor Oiler well-known to Bravo Club.

David,

This is just a guess on my part, but could "Bravo Club" be a reference to a B Company, or Company B?

Larry wrote, "And the Cubans he describes meeting Oswald were not linked to Alpha 66 but most recently to Army training, having just come out of it.”

This could be the U.S. Army Special Warfare Center (SWC), Fort Bragg, North Carolina, and in particular, one of the 7th Special Forces Groups (SFG's)

Special Forces teams ([operational detachment alphas (SF ODAs).

 

I read about a very interesting case study called "Plan Lazlo" in Columbia in the early 1960;s. I'm just using this as an example. In summary, it said,

" BG (Brigadier General) Yarborough; LTC (Lieutenant Colonel) Little, the U.S. Army Special Warfare Center G-3; and COL Russell, the 7th Special Forces Group commander, went to Colombia in February 1962, to study the violence problem and evaluate the effectiveness of their counterinsurgency effort. Yarborough recommended that relationships between military and police be delineated, that military and intelligence services at all levels collaborate more, and that intelligence and counterintelligence programs be coordinated and standardized. These were deemed critical to a national counterinsurgency plan. The HUK counterinsurgency basic concept of operations (in the Philippines) was used by the team. To conduct antiviolence planning, identify requirements, and coordinate operations, Yarborough recommended that MTTs (mobile training teams) —psychological warfare, civic action, air support, and intelligence—and five Special Forces ODAs be sent to work with the Colombian military. The Special Warfare Center recommendations became part of Ambassador Freeman’s antiviolence plan and helped the Colombian generals preparing Plan Lazo.

https://www.soc.mil/ARSOF_History/articles/v2n4_plan_lazo_page_1.html

"Patsy" could be Marita Lorentz.

 

Steve Thomas

Edited January 4, 2020 by Steve Thomas

[Larry Hancock]

Its really no mystery, Nagell was definitely referring to Alpha 66 in his remark...however there is no sign that he ever had any contact or real information about them other than what he may have picked up in Mexico City where they were active that fall.  They had also been getting the most media attention in 1963 due to their raids into Cuba. As I said, Nagell provided a list of the Cubans he did monitor in Miami and they were almost entirely all right wing type individuals not groups per se....people like Masferrer and his ilk that were really pretty marginalized at that point but who had gotten lots of media attention in prior years.

As to Angel and Leopoldo, Nagell was referring to at least one (possibly both) of them who was a Cuban exile who had been taken into the Army for infantry officer training under the program pushed by RFK...a number of those people were being recruited by Artime and Segundo Borges beginning in the summer of 1963, some of them left the program to go into AMWORLD.  David Boylan and I have been writing about them in our Wheaton Names research. Some of them and some of their friends did circulate though both the New Orleans area and on into Dallas beginning in August through November. And some of their friends in the DRE were most definitely under FBI monitoring and were saying very bad things about JFK.  And some of them also ended up in both Chicago, New Orleans and Dallas.

The good news is that we know a lot more about some of these things than when Nagell's story first surfaced so it can be cross checked, something critical to any source. And with any source, what Nagell knew from first hand experience (some of which can be corroborated) has to be balanced) against his full remarks, some of which had to have been speculation.

[David Andrews]

Larry, it would be so good to have a work on Nagell that could dialogue with the Dick Russell book and also with the collected Nagell materials, including those provided by Malcolm Blunt and Bart Kamp as a .pdf collections last year.  If these latter overlap with documents you have collected on your site, forgive me - I'm simultaneously enmeshed in my own 9/11 project and some personal issues, and I don't have time to review RCN at length.  I would love to immerse myself in the Nagell enigmas and produce an accurate reading, but in the absence I have to stick to my main project.

These are questions I have about the Nagell legend and the Russell book:

• Between September 1963 and the 1967 date of the 'Verdestein' letter, Nagell was shuttled among jaols, prisons and mental hospitals.  How, in that 1967 letter, does he know about Alpha 66 and the David Ferrie interest in hypnosis?
• Were visitors from intelligence agencies feeding him the above factoids, in order to produce the kind of legend detailed in the letter, and presumably elsewhere, verbally, for a time?
• Did Nagell, in cooperation with the South Korean HID intel agency, run Oswald during his Atsugi days in operations against a Soviet officer and a Japanese communist?  This is given lengthy treatment in the Russell book.  Russell reports that after Nagell boasted that he had invented the Hidell alias, Nagell was shocked into silence when Russel suggested it was a combo of HID and the last letters of Nagell.  Nagell's past experience with Oswald would have been a perfect gambit to approach Oswald if the Soviets indeed turned Nagell and sent him to monitor Oswald, and later assassinate him.
• Did the Soviets put Nagell on a boat traveling across the Gulf of Mexico to Cuba to meet Raul Castro, and possibly Fidel, as a prelude to his assassinating Oswald and leaving the US for an exile in Cuba?  I realize that Nagell's assertion can now never be proven, but a dialogue between Russell and an established researcher such as yourself might produce some useful revelations.  Because of my own interest in Nagell as a documentary film or feature film subject, I have more than once floated in EF posts my hope to talk to Russell, but these were either unnoticed or unacknowledged.
• Paul Brancato asked whether Nagell perceived Oswald as a shooter, a patsy, or an informant.  This knowledge of how Nagell understood Oswald, and whether this understanding approached the actuality of Oswald, is a sizable lacuna in the Russell book: in an important sense, we can't know Nagell without knowing Oswald.  Russell knew Nagell and researched his statements, hints, teases and jokes -- discussing these with Russell would be as significant to this case as being able to interview Gaeton Fonzi today about Veciana.  Neither would give one a complete key to the JFKA, but they would give important background and settle many questions.

If I had time, or if somebody would convince me that making the time would be of use, I could go through the Russell book and the documents you've collected and provide more dialogue points on those materials.  I would do that to contribute to a work-in-progress that would see print someday.  However, I hope that my points are part of the dialogue you hoped for.  If more comes to me, I'll share it here.  I am sure I am not the only one on EF with questions, and those members should raise them.

 

Edited January 4, 2020 by David Andrews