David Josephs Posted July 8, 2020 Share Posted July 8, 2020 2 minutes ago, David Boylan said: It is good to have David back! Sometimes you just need a break... 46 minutes ago, John Butler said: Are you saying the passport application is as phony as the photo? Or, am I misreading? Not really a "passport" application" but I get you... I'm simply not sure if the application sent to Cuba, is the same as the one we see first in the WCR without a STAMP or the second one at the HSCA - fully stamped - yet with a different signature and completely askew to the "original".... But like all things from that time period, the evidence was created to fit the situation... standard FBI MO. And that everything goes thru OCHOA, #2 at Gobernacion behind the CIA asset Echeverria. There is no authenticated evidence available that puts Oswald in Mexico.... and those who were there and were our assets were not able to place him there. We find it was Phillips and his assets who created much of the Oswald fallacy in Mexico... every BS story and bit of evidence traces back to him or OCHOA who was basically helping cover Hoover's butt by offering (creating) evidence for Mexico when Hoover knew Oswald was doing his job traveling from New Orleans thru Austin to Dallas. Hoover had no choice but to back the CIA's play, even if he had no idea what happened down there If our man Ozzie wasn't there... how "real" can those applications be? Here are the 2 items and superimposed using the #779 as the anchor. Is it possible the captions are backward in the HSCA? the one on the right looks like the original based on the thinness of the lettering yet that is the one they claim was photographed when HSCA staff met with Fidel. If the fixed writing on these 2 sheets of this form line up for the carbon... the text would also line up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Mugan Posted July 9, 2020 Author Share Posted July 9, 2020 14 hours ago, David Josephs said: Sometimes you just need a break... Not really a "passport" application" but I get you... I'm simply not sure if the application sent to Cuba, is the same as the one we see first in the WCR without a STAMP or the second one at the HSCA - fully stamped - yet with a different signature and completely askew to the "original".... But like all things from that time period, the evidence was created to fit the situation... standard FBI MO. And that everything goes thru OCHOA, #2 at Gobernacion behind the CIA asset Echeverria. There is no authenticated evidence available that puts Oswald in Mexico.... and those who were there and were our assets were not able to place him there. We find it was Phillips and his assets who created much of the Oswald fallacy in Mexico... every BS story and bit of evidence traces back to him or OCHOA who was basically helping cover Hoover's butt by offering (creating) evidence for Mexico when Hoover knew Oswald was doing his job traveling from New Orleans thru Austin to Dallas. Hoover had no choice but to back the CIA's play, even if he had no idea what happened down there If our man Ozzie wasn't there... how "real" can those applications be? Here are the 2 items and superimposed using the #779 as the anchor. Is it possible the captions are backward in the HSCA? the one on the right looks like the original based on the thinness of the lettering yet that is the one they claim was photographed when HSCA staff met with Fidel. If the fixed writing on these 2 sheets of this form line up for the carbon... the text would also line up. Hi David J Thanks for the info...it's taking me a while to go through and I'm still trying to get my head around it. Can I just check I've got this right? In the post I've quoted above the visa application image on the right is from a photograph taken by HSCA investigators in Cuba from a Cuban government source and has the staple in the photo and fairly genuine looking signature and a Cuban stamp. The one of the left (which looks older???) is the one the WC had and that has the faded photo with no obvious staple, the odd signature and no Cuban stamp?? Is that the right way around or am I getting muddled up here? That is just weird...not at all sure how to interpret that... Anthony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 (edited) 3 hours ago, Anthony Mugan said: The one of the left (which looks older???) is the one the WC had and that has the faded photo with no obvious staple, the odd signature and no Cuban stamp?? The notes at the top of the 2 images from the HSCA claim so... as does the WCR exhibit of the app. Might be hard to read but it’s there... the wonderful world of JFK Assn evidence... DJ Sadly the interpretation is colored with the fraud perpetrated by the investigation. Most are unaware of RAFAEL OCHOA.. who handled every item of Mexico side evidence... Edited July 9, 2020 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Butler Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 Thanks David, This visa application was made in Mexico City at the Cuban Embassy by someone posing as Oswald on 27 Sept.? Or, is it just paperwork prepared by various government folk later to say that Oswald was in Mexico City at the time that they claim? Could this application have been made at an earlier time by someone else and then adjusted to fit Harvey Oswald? Photo, time, date, and signature adjusted? Kerry Thornley went to Mexico in August, 1963 according to A Farewell to Justice: I once had a speculation that Kerry Thornley is the man in the photo covered with an Oswald face mask. This spec was mainly based on Garrison's info that Thornley had made a trip to Mexico City in August and the appearance of the photo which has been altered. Thornley was mucking around in New Orleans for months in the same areas and with the same people as Oswald. I tried to get him into some of the Pamphlet photos, but Jim DiEugenio put the deep six to that spec. And, I can probably put this spec to rest. That is if I can get your opinion on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 1 hour ago, John Butler said: This visa application was made in Mexico City at the Cuban Embassy by someone posing as Oswald on 27 Sept.? Or, is it just paperwork prepared by various government folk later to say that Oswald was in Mexico City at the time that they claim? Could this application have been made at an earlier time by someone else and then adjusted to fit Harvey Oswald? Photo, time, date, and signature adjusted? Well John, that would fit in with a pet theory that no one was actually there impersonating Oswald... and it was all an Intelligence Operation... with the key players told what they needed to say... kinda like McFarlands and the Aussie girls, Bledsoe and Whaley in their time and place, etc.... I'm not sure we can say much with certainty about the origination of the 2 applications. How much of DURAN do we believe? Seems she has little clue what the processes are.... AZCUE would interview anyone trying to do what "Oswald" was trying to do.... he was a Cuban Intel agent This info from AMMUG/1 suggests that none of the SOPs were followed with this person... it suggests to me that a real american trying to get to Cuba was not there... As LITAMIL/9 confirmed.... ....or Duran and Azcue are part of the lie/project going on at that embassy. Not a single thing is "right" with Mexico... not one. DJ CORNWELL - Would it have been consistent with the procedures in the consulate or you to have allowed him to take one or both of the applications typed up outside the Consulate?TIRADO - I don't remember very well if uh, there were only two copies. I mean, one original and one copy, but uh, it could have happened, but I don't remember.CORNWELL - Okay. To the best of your memory then, the person who made the application was not permitted to have a copy.TIRADO - I don't know. I don't remember. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Simpich Posted July 9, 2020 Share Posted July 9, 2020 (edited) David, What evidence do you have that Silvia Duran is not telling the truth on any subject? I watch her record carefully. So far, she seems to me to be on the mark. CIA officers complained about her not being one of their agents. I know that her sister-in-law Lydia was a CIA source in Bolivia - KLAMBROSIA-29. She was in a relationship with the married man Carlos Lechuga - AMLAW-3 - while the CIA was trying to convince Lechuga's wife and ultimately Lechuga to defect. I have always viewed Silvia Duran as someone who was being spied on. Edited July 9, 2020 by Bill Simpich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Mugan Posted July 10, 2020 Author Share Posted July 10, 2020 18 hours ago, David Josephs said: The notes at the top of the 2 images from the HSCA claim so... as does the WCR exhibit of the app. Might be hard to read but it’s there... the wonderful world of JFK Assn evidence... DJ Sadly the interpretation is colored with the fraud perpetrated by the investigation. Most are unaware of RAFAEL OCHOA.. who handled every item of Mexico side evidence... Hi David Could I play a 'devil's advocate' role here? In reality I am in no way decided on these visa applications, one way or the other. I should be clear that I have no expertise in questioned document analysis so I am just going to ask a few questions and hopefully we can see where it goes... My starting assumptions are that Duran made two copies of the visa application, a top copy that went off to Cuba and a carbon copy that was retained in the Consulate files. She stapled a seperate passport sized photo of the applicant to each copy and got the applicant to sign both copies individually. The WC obtained a copy of the version held in the Consulate files and the HSCA got a copy of the top copy that went to Cuba. In each case each image that we see has gone through several processes. There is a reference to Xeroxing the one from the Consulate and the HSCA photographing the version they saw. Presumably each copy has gone through various processes along the way to publication. Q1. Could the various copying and photographing and printing processes done on the seperate images we see account for the distortions in the typed part of the document? Q2. If you look at CE 2564, the visa application form from the WC report you can see a faint line of black dots in the photo of LHO running slightly diagonally in the upper part of the image, above his head. Could this be a trace of the staple on that photograph (a separate image to the one used in the top copy the HSCA got)? This image is much lighter than the HSCA one which presumably relates to the copying processes done on the different documents. Could this have led to the much fainter image of the staple in CE 2564? https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1141#relPageId=844&tab=page Q3. As the applicant would have had to sign both copies of the application is it possible that the applicant signed the top copy neatly but quickly scribbled his signature on the second copy? Has a specialist in handwriting looked at this at any time? Q4. Is it likely that the top copy got the official stamp but the carbon going into the local file didn't? Q5. As the version which looks most unusual is the WC version, obtained from the Consulate in Mexico, that would require the Cuban government to have co-operated in 'tidying up' the HSCA version at a later date or for the US to have modified the document to create a less than ideal forgery for the WC version in 1964 in a way that runs counter to their basic hypothesis. At first sight that seems the wrong way around for there to be forgery involved or am I missing something? As I say, I'm just trying to play devil's advocate here to test out the possibilities...would actually be quite pleased if I could get to a point were I could 'sign off' on LHO not being physically present in Mexico as it would open the door to tying up the Odio incident, but I'm just not there yet. Regards Anthony Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthony Mugan Posted July 10, 2020 Author Share Posted July 10, 2020 11 hours ago, Bill Simpich said: David, What evidence do you have that Silvia Duran is not telling the truth on any subject? I watch her record carefully. So far, she seems to me to be on the mark. CIA officers complained about her not being one of their agents. I know that her sister-in-law Lydia was a CIA source in Bolivia - KLAMBROSIA-29. She was in a relationship with the married man Carlos Lechuga - AMLAW-3 - while the CIA was trying to convince Lechuga's wife and ultimately Lechuga to defect. I have always viewed Silvia Duran as someone who was being spied on. Hi Bill That is also the way I've always seen Silvia Duran too, for whatever that's worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 5 hours ago, Anthony Mugan said: Q1. Could the various copying and photographing and printing processes done on the seperate images we see account for the distortions in the typed part of the document?I truly do not see how Anthony. The HSCA version surely seems to be the "top" copy... while the other screams carbon copy.... the thinness of the type on one versus the other.. We NEVER see original items of evidence... copies or photos. Below is a 1 page analysis concluding the typewriter at the embassy was used for the application... but they use the word "APPEARS" a whole bunch... Also have a pdf rif: 104-10005-10059 which has a CIA routing slip and poor photos of the WCR version of the application.. 5 images of the signature alone while the application itself is completely unreadable. I am searching my files now for info on how the WCR came to acquire that version of the application. ok... found it CE2564 Q2. If you look at CE 2564, the visa application form from the WC report you can see a faint line of black dots in the photo of LHO running slightly diagonally in the upper part of the image, above his head. Could this be a trace of the staple on that photograph (a separate image to the one used in the top copy the HSCA got)? This image is much lighter than the HSCA one which presumably relates to the copying processes done on the different documents. Could this have led to the much fainter image of the staple in CE 2564? https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1141#relPageId=844&tab=page Possible... yet doesn't it look like the darkness of the staple would be as dark as the other dark things in the image on the left? Also notice the faint crease/line across Oswald's mouth, especially seen on the right, even seems the photo is darker below that line.. strange shading Q3. As the applicant would have had to sign both copies of the application is it possible that the applicant signed the top copy neatly but quickly scribbled his signature on the second copy? Has a specialist in handwriting looked at this at any time?"Is it possible" and the JFK Assn.... of course it's possible... when the FBI rewrote Oswald's TSBD application it was signed "By Brian" with a signature eerily the same as others attributed to our man. The 2 signatures are above and below the "employment app" designation. It should be no surprise that the FBI/CIA had some of the best forgers available to them in the world..... Q4. Is it likely that the top copy got the official stamp but the carbon going into the local file didn't?Yes... that's exactly what the story is.... But I came to find that the carbon application was not provided until Aug 28, 1964 (CE2564 above)... 2 or so weeks before publishing. Q5. As the version which looks most unusual is the WC version, obtained from the Consulate in Mexico, that would require the Cuban government to have co-operated in 'tidying up' the HSCA version at a later date or for the US to have modified the document to create a less than ideal forgery for the WC version in 1964 in a way that runs counter to their basic hypothesis. At first sight that seems the wrong way around for there to be forgery involved or am I missing something?As mentioned to Q4... Aug 28, 1964.... from Nov 23, 1963. To get the Carbon Copy from Mexico City.... the original is mentioned in the reply to Mexico from Cuba in early October 1963 as being received, stamped, and basically refused until he has a Russian Visa. CE2564 still. As I say, I'm just trying to play devil's advocate here to test out the possibilities...would actually be quite pleased if I could get to a point were I could 'sign off' on LHO not being physically present in Mexico as it would open the door to tying up the Odio incident, but I'm just not there yet.That's fair... also remember there is testimony that puts Oswald in Dallas at the Sports Drome the weekend of Sept 28.... Odio is near Dallas. Why else would Hoover's FBI cover up where he was in favor of a bus journey and a 5 day stay that never happened? Sept 30th was a Monday... Every embassy/consulate he needs to do his business is open... and he was portrayed as being in such a rush since he had to leave based on the 15-day visa which was 1- a 180-day visa, and 2 -the days don't start until you enter the country... 15 days back from Oct 2 is..... Sept 17th. Any reason not to do any business in line with why he was there, on Monday? (I seem to remember it may have been a holiday in Mexico... but not sure) Love this SOP... "even though he couldn't have, he did in any case".... When Hoover talks to LBJ and says the man down there did not sound like Oswald... so instead of Oswald NOT being there, Hoover's solution is magical: "It appears there is a 2nd person"... cause for Hoover, he can't be in Dallas assisting the FBI... FWIW DJ . Regards Anthony HSCA conclusion from: HSCA VISITS CUBA RELATED TO OSWALD VISA APPLICATION docid-32272523https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32272523.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 21 hours ago, Bill Simpich said: David, What evidence do you have that Silvia Duran is not telling the truth on any subject? Oswald wasn't there. Not trying to be flip here Bill... both Azcue and Duran say it wasn't him... plus, how do you address what AMMUG/1 tells us about how those not "with us" are interrogated when submitting a Visa app? Azcue supposedly just yells at this person for a bit and throws him out... Isn't that the opposite of his job? I believe her when she says he didn't come back... I believe her that she typed up an application... With the assets we had in that Embassy/Consulate... why does it take until Aug 28th to get it to the WC? How could so much detail have been written about the Mexico trip when the book was being printed at the time they get the info? Is there evidence the WC sees this application prior to August 64? CIA says the WC decides not to show DURAN the application and by default the photo so it is not until HSCA... the photos of the application are in many cases just crap without the ability to tell who is in the photo... so I doubt there'd be a reason for her to comment... I realize this is 15 years later.... but her job was to process these applications and she doesn't know how many copies there were or if she gave a copy to the man before her....You feel this is truthful - all the instances of forgetfulness on key items? CORNWELL - Would it have been consistent with the procedures in the consulate or you to have allowed him to take one or both of the applications typed up outside the Consulate?TIRADO - I don't remember very well if uh, there were only two copies. I mean, one original and one copy, but uh, it could have happened, but I don't remember.CORNWELL - Okay. To the best of your memory then, the person who made the application was not permitted to have a copy.TIRADO - I don't know. I don't remember. and the fact anyone can take with them a blank version of this application.. she talks as if she'd done many of these applications yet still does not rmember the most basic things about them, the processes or the photos.... CORNWELL - Would you have ever allowed a person to take all of the applications outside and attach the photos or sign them themselves?TIRADO - Yes, because you may come, ask for the application and you may keep it. So, assuming an impostor is there on Friday the 27th (Since Ozzie was on a different journey in TX) we have no idea whether what we see today was the application taken at the time... Why do you think it took until Aug 64 to get the carbon if the trip down there was discussed immediately after the assassination? Cheer Bill... hope you and yours are well DJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Simpich Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 David, Could you try again, I don't follow you. 1. Your opening argument that "Oswald wasn't there" is irrelevant to the question of why you think Duran is not telling the truth on any subject. This commentary is very confusing and unhelpful. 2. It remains confusing when you write "she doesn't know how many copies there were or if she gave a copy to the man before her...." What are you referring to? Can you cite your source? 3. You write: "Would it have been consistent with the procedures in the consulate or you to have allowed him to take one or both of the applications typed up outside the Consulate?" Same problem. It goes from there. I assume you are saying that because she forgot certain procedures that is evidence of lying. That is a big burden you haven't met at this point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 10, 2020 Share Posted July 10, 2020 Sorry Bill... this is the way I answer questions... I found what you were referencing and would like to address it. 23 hours ago, David Josephs said: I'm not sure we can say much with certainty about the origination of the 2 applications. How much of DURAN do we believe? I believe her and Azcue that it was not the man Ruby killed... in this reference I am specifically talking about the applications... I will copy the Q I ask at the end of this post: At what point does DURAN repeating it was our Oswald to every HSCA question cross the line into lying about it Bill? The AMMUG/1 described application process / applicant scrutiny was still completely ignored....Why wouldn't AZCUE be interested in this American wanting to go to Cuba/Russia as a potential double agent? Wasn't that a big part of his job? The way LITAMIL/9 describes Duran after she returns from interrogation also seems to me she was playing a part..."Happy with her performance" is how L/9 put it, and may have been bullied to agree it was Oswald... Furthermore, Lit/9 and LIT/7 are repeatedly asked about Oswald at the Embassy and all answers are negative... L/9 was a close friend to AZCUE yet he is unaware of the American causing all the commotion? The LITAMIL/9 references have been redacted for over 50 years... and we come to find he does not support the story... and he was CIA!?! While Sylvia was in Mexican police custody.... L/9 story doesn't change... not a single one of his October '63 and forward summary reports contain info on this Oswald visit.... https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10262-10355.pdf https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/docid-32389430.pdf is another L/9 report saying that as DURAN spoke of her arrest. 1 hour ago, Bill Simpich said: David, Could you try again, I don't follow you. Of course Bill.... sometimes I can't even follow myself.... 1. Your opening argument that "Oswald wasn't there" is irrelevant to the question of why you think Duran is not telling the truth on any subject. This commentary is very confusing and unhelpful. If it wasn't Oswald then she would realize the whole thing was a scam.... and I didn't say "any subject"... we are talking about the 2 applications.. yet as I realize... if she describes someone who is not Oswald and continues on agreeing that is was Oswald... how is that not lying? 2. It remains confusing when you write "she doesn't know how many copies there were or if she gave a copy to the man before her...." What are you referring to? Can you cite your source? Bill - these are Q & A's of Duran... She can't remember how many copies of a visa application are created - which she did primarily after answering phones - in her job? Same with #3 below... If anyone can walk in and get a blank Visa Application and walk out how can we possibly know whether those WCR/HSCA applications are the original ones... especially since it takes until Aug 64 to get the carbon and 15 years to get the original? "It could have happened..."TIRADO - I don't remember very well if uh, there were only two copies. I mean, one original and one copy, but uh, it could have happened, but I don't remember. 3. You write: "Would it have been consistent with the procedures in the consulate or you to have allowed him to take one or both of the applications typed up outside the Consulate?" Same problem. She can't remember the most simple aspects of her job? One copy to file, one copy to Cuba... the person themselves would not get a copy? But she can't remember that... the person filing has no record of the application at all? Maybe, but like Marina and the photos... she conveniently can't remember how many there were... It goes from there. I assume you are saying that because she forgot certain procedures that is evidence of lying. That is a big burden you haven't met at this point. Not "lying" in every case but omitting... her allowing it to be Oswald despite knowing it wasn't is not fibbing just a little? Below, a note to Win Scott to use CIA assets, who in turn informs WS of what happened... sure looks like the CIA/DFS making sure everyone's story is properly "motivated." Again, if it wasn't Oswald - as I think most are starting to fully understand - then DURAN is indeed complicit when finally questioned 15 years later... She tells Lopez he was barely 5'4" and very slight... Azcue confirms... The WCR et al has him 5'11" 165.... Even our guy was 5'9" 135.... Marina was 5'4" At what point does DURAN repeating it was our Oswald to every HSCA question cross the line into lying about it Bill? DJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Bulman Posted July 11, 2020 Share Posted July 11, 2020 DJ, you and Mr. Simpich are way over my head on Mexico here, I need a lot of reading to catch up. But this 5' 4" Oswald per Duran, confirmed by Azcue, could that be the same 5' 5" Oswald described by Kerry Thornley to Jenner of the Warren Omission? Sarcasm on behalf of levity. I didn't mean to distract from serious discourse here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 11, 2020 Share Posted July 11, 2020 Bill is in another league altogether.... I am still working on a easier to digest version of the info... all in good time. I really spent my time on the journey and the dates before and after... Like 1954, ...the FBI went the extra mile piling on the BS.... Like the discovery of the 12:20pm bus to Houston... not part of a ticket to Laredo or Mexico City... just Houston ...and the details tell us he was headed for the Greyhound Terminal in New Orleans (Del Norte in Mexico)... not Continental which becomes Flecha Rojas from there it only gets worse... btw... currently digesting a 20 page Weisberg analysis of the trip I came across in his files... he always seems to spark a new line of thinking... amazing really. DJ The first interview with Green on the 10th, no bus for Ozzie On "Dec 16" we now have a bus... but for some reason we have a virtually identical report but in September 1964... at the moment of the WCR publishing... Ballsy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted July 11, 2020 Share Posted July 11, 2020 Its sort of a random observation but the difficulties you have with the FBI work on Oswald's trip to MC remind me a bit of their investigation of the Odio visit. Initially they blew it off by making Odio look unreliable, then when the WC pressed them later in 1963 they came up with the simplistic explanation of mistaken identify involving three characters from Miami who had ended up in Dallas as part of their effort to collect donations (going to Dallas hunting for donations seems to have been the thing to do - of course there was actually much bigger money to be had in NYC where many of the truly wealthy Cuban exiles lived, or even in Miami itself). I guess rich ultra right Texans were thought to be easier marks? Anyway, after dragging in Howard, Hall et al and offering the WC a simple solution to their query, we find that internal documents within the FBI clearly show it was not those three guys at Odio's door (including the fact she didn't identify them from their photos). Internally the FBI did quite good case of documenting why it could not have been - that was just compartmentalized from the feedback given the WC. So we are left with an easy answer wiping away all the Odio issues which was given to the WC and all sorts of loose ends internally within the FBI investigative reports which counter what they told the Warren Commission. Just feels a bit like Oswald and Mexico City. 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