David Josephs Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 7 minutes ago, Larry Hancock said: What I would say it has now reached a point where I do not consider Mexico City as being significant to the attack in Dallas nor to the basic conspiracy. But that will step on lots of toes and drive everyone to defending their territories so that's another story for a later time. If we are correct about Oswald not being in Mexico... it becomes even more likely that the Odio's see him when they said they did... meaning he traveled to Dallas on the 24th/25th of Sept and spent the week there. Given what was done to Odio's information... I wonder about your thoughts on how Mexico was indeed significant to the basic conspiracy... At the time, and all the way thru Lopez's comment, it was accepted he went... IOW Alvarado has to say he was not truthful in his story telling - about the man OSWALD at the Cuban Embassy.. the basic premise of his being there due to the CIA transcripts and the coerced information from DURAN. If DURAN had actually seen Oswald and done the things she said she did with "this man" the more local publicity the better - to reinforce his being there through other means.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Allison Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 The podcast discusses the possibility that it was Leonov that made the visit to the Cuban Embassy, posing as Oswald. For those that say a lack of photo is proof that Oswald was never in MC (despite Win Scott saying he had a pic of Oswald in his safe), the other option would be that the pictures of Oswald were not released because they showed him with someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James DiEugenio Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 (edited) Matt: 3 comments on the above: 1.) We now have the CIA checks on their photo banks done right after the assassination. They say in B and W there is no photo of Oswald. 2.) In light of the above, where did Scott get his photo if not from the CIA? 3.) If Scott did have a photo and tape of Oswald, then why would Angleton fly down immediately upon his death, threaten his wife, and confiscate the contents of his safe? And why was it Goodpasture--with strong ties to Phillips and Angleton-- who so quickly alerted him to the fact? BTW David that is really good finding out Echeveria was in on the arrest of Duran. How could this guy have been ignored for so long? Edited January 16, 2020 by James DiEugenio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 2 hours ago, Matt Allison said: I believe during the podcast it is mentioned that Hosty stated other FBI agents told him that the FBI themselves had Oswald under surveillance in MC. If that is true, that obviously has some bearing on the question of whether LHO was actually there or not. And Hoover tells us in so many words the entire thing was a CIA scam... So Hosty in a public forum... or his boss in a rare authentic moment to one of his Sr Staff.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 33 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said: BTW David that is really good finding out Echeveria was in on the arrest of Duran. How could this guy have been ignored for so long? He was also OCHOA's boss... Ochoa remains the one and only person to have compiled virtually every scrap of paper documentation related to Oswald coming and going and staying in Mexico... So while Echeverria was CIA, The FBI had their sources and means as well.... Matt Allison - a question, why do you suppose Hoover and his FBI covered for the CIA related to Mexico? (hint: Sylvia Odio) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Allison Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 Jim- Dan Hardway intimates that he believes a photo or photos of Oswald were removed from the system immediately after Oswald's presumed visit, and sent to Phillips in DC, and that Win Scott knew about it. David- Yes, that Hoover quote is huge, and I only wish we knew exactly what he was referring to. I am as much on the fence about MC as everyone else, truly an incredible mystery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 1 minute ago, Matt Allison said: David- Yes, that Hoover quote is huge, and I only wish we knew exactly what he was referring to. You mean regarding the French Espionage... "nor the false story re Oswald's trip to Mexico, to mention 2 of their instances of double dealing".... despite ALL the stories about his trip being false, are you suggesting this quote refers to a smaller sub-section of the trip to Mexico "false stories" the CIA offered? The note is in January 1964.... a huge majority of FBI reporting on Mexico is dated from Feb thru May 1964 The CIA began lying about it immediately - first in October and then after the assassination... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 If we are correct about Oswald not being in Mexico... it becomes even more likely that the Odio's see him when they said they did... meaning he traveled to Dallas on the 24th/25th of Sept and spent the week there. Given what was done to Odio's information... I wonder about your thoughts on how Mexico was indeed significant to the basic conspiracy. ..........My current thought is that Oswald was being "handled" by individuals that took him to Dallas, to McKewon's, possibly to Houston and possibly on through south Texas and on across the border at least into Mexico. As to going across the border, I'm still fascinated by the material turned over to the DPD which would have shown Oswald being connected to a variety of suspicious individuals including Ruby...material which multiple officers described before it was turned over to Alexander - who acknowledged it, admitted it was in his possession and stated he had determined not to introduce it in Ruby's trial - and apparently destroyed it. I do hold open to the fact that there was material prepared to associate Oswald with Cuban and Castro agents that never got used as planned based on the plan being aborted with his capture at the Texas Theater. As I've said before, we have a picture of what happened but no idea of the totality of all that might have been planned - as Martino privately stated to his friends. Laying out such thoughts in a structured manner and supporting them remains a work in progress. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted January 16, 2020 Share Posted January 16, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Larry Hancock said: I wonder about your thoughts on how Mexico was indeed significant to the basic conspiracy As I see it Larry, right from the beginning with how the 2 different cables went out to Mexico and to FBI/State/Navy. I saw thru my research how CIA/Immigration lined up against FBI/State Dept with regards to what information they were finding/sharing and when. To me, the basic conspiracy was on whom to lay the blame... Most of the planners focused on creating Cuba/Russia connections to get the green light to invade (Military, not CIA) I still believe Scott's Phase 1 / Phase 2 approach whereby Phase 1's Cuba/Russia focus eithe3r works and they get to send the bombers, or it doesn't and it keeps people in line when Phase 2 - "the lone nut" is introduced.... The dropping and removal of most anything conspiracy-related was, to me, amazingly fast as if planned from the start... but with enough of the shadow of WWIII to be used as leverage where needed. Without Mexico, nothing challenges the Odio story. Add now the entire traveling Oswald's - job hunting show at around the same time and my guess is these travels are back up for where Oswald was if not in Mexico.... We'd have to both agree I think, that what transpires is vintage Phillips/Hunt layered onions. Where else do we suppose the Elena de la Paz story comes from and who continues to support it years and years afterward.... From Sept 24 until Oct 31 there is not a single FBI report, or attempt to report on Lee Oswald... and amazingly enough the Oct 31 Kaack report has no idea where he is other than having moved to TX with his wife... he had already been working at the TSBD for 2 weeks... I firmly believe Oswald believed he was doing FBI work identifying Castro supporters... possibly at the request of his CIA masters as both a great source of info and doing the sheepdipping that will eventually be used to help incriminate him in public opinion... (edit: and that's why I find it makes sense that Hoover assists the CIA with their Mexico false story... or risk it being exposed that Oswald was an informant for the FBI) FWIW... DJ Edited January 16, 2020 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S.T. Patrick Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 17 hours ago, James DiEugenio said: I wish someone would post that article here, since it deserves everyone's attention. To just make one comment for starters, there were two applications and the signatures do not match. Thanks, Jim. Larry did a great job, correct. I'll post the article here as a new thread this evening. But thanks for the kind words about the magazine. Larry Rivera will be back in the April issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 (edited) 2 hours ago, Larry Hancock said: I wonder about your thoughts on how Mexico was indeed significant to the basic conspiracy (edit: and that's why I find it makes sense that Hoover assists the CIA with their Mexico false story... or risk it being exposed that Oswald was an informant for the FBI) Totally agree with this David, in fact compliance was insured because full disclosure would have exposed the fact that the FBI was using him as a source and had him under subversive group monitoring - as well as the fact that the CIA was using him - in Alan Kent's (Joinnedes supervisor's) term as a "useful idiot". https://aarclibrary.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/dan_hardway_aarc_9_26_14.pdf Edited January 17, 2020 by Larry Hancock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Allison Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 Obviously I could be mistaken, but I always assumed the "useful idiot" remark was being used in the traditional way; in this case, a snide comment about Oswald being a stooge for Communist propaganda. But if Kent had knowledge of Oswald's bizarro behavior prior to the assassination, then it would take on a much more nefarious meaning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 If anything Oswald represented a great source of anti-Russian, anti-Communist propaganda. Having essentially chosen the Soviet Union and spent time there, his unpublished monograph contains harsh remarks about Russia essentially using ideology strictly for their nationalist purposes. It would have been great stuff...and Domestic Ops was fully aware of it. For some reason the decision was made to defer on that, taking advantage of Oswald's interests in Cuba and Castro's socialist revolution - apparently with the hope of using him against the FPCC - a new target for both the FBI and the CIA in 1962/63. The result in New Orleans was the production a major propaganda piece built around Oswald (including a record of his radio appearance), published by INCA, scheduled for wide scale distribution across Latin America and failing in that purpose only by being subsumed in the assassination. The fact that Kent himself had taken up office in New Orleans during that period suggests Oswald being a useful idiot against communism and Cuba and the FPCC...and the refusal to release CIA files related to Joinnedes and the DRE is another indication that CIA was using Oswald's connection with the DRE and subsequent events (very likely manipulated via DRE) as a propaganda tool. --- at least to me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Allison Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 I'm probably in the minority on that, as I lean towards believing Oswald's beliefs were genuinely oriented to the left. But I don't know what to think about the FPCC stuff in NO, as it seems pretty clear he had some kind of relationship with Banister there. I don't know if each of them thought they were using the other guy or what, but I seem to remember it was Oswald that initiated the contact, with Delphine Roberts saying he went into 544 Camp looking to apply as one of Banister's agents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted January 17, 2020 Share Posted January 17, 2020 I think the best characterization of Oswald - from George D. - was that he was a proto hippie, interested in a great many things and not at all willing to accept established practices (or orders in the Marines), wanting adventure, to try new things, ready to start an argument with anyone appearing to be traditional or dogmatic. Delgado described him as interested in the revolution against Batista but as much so for adventure as for social justice. But he did sour on the Russians, you see that in the manuscript, and hippies could be patriotic as well, some even enlisted. In the end it might was likely his sense of adventure and willingness to play outside the box that made him useful....to people with quite different agendas. 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