David Josephs Posted July 11, 2020 Share Posted July 11, 2020 (edited) Deleted Edited July 11, 2020 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 11, 2020 Share Posted July 11, 2020 2 hours ago, Larry Hancock said: 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. I’m thinking Pervasive more so than random... FBI did that in virtually every area of the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Simpich Posted July 11, 2020 Share Posted July 11, 2020 David, Your Duran argument hinges on your belief that she is deliberately lying about Oswald. Could you briefly state the five best pieces of evidence that illustrate your theory that LHO never went to Mexico City? (I thought the two different LHO signatures on the visa form would be one of them - but that could have been done for a variety of reasons.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 11, 2020 Share Posted July 11, 2020 21 minutes ago, Bill Simpich said: Your Duran argument hinges on your belief that she is deliberately lying about Oswald Does she confirm Azcue’s statement that it was not the man Ruby killed? iow, she knew it was not Oswald yet continued on as if it was... how is that not lying? As for 5 things... Odio Evidence of the journey in total, you’d have to read the articles... 1500 docs to hide that he didn’t go... The call transcripts and timings Litamil 9 & 7 Summary Reports of all intel activity never mention Oswald 9/28 Sports Drome Marina’s lies about Mex The ticket found by Marina in Aug 64 Ochoa and the hotel registry, FM11 which puts HOLee under “O” Gaudet and 9/17 The Paine typewriter letter reiterating those 15 days back from Oct 2... to 9/17 when the clock doesn’t start until the traveler gets there... la PAZ bs rave story Alvarado as CIA asset trying to place Ozzie there on the 18th.... the taxi story from morning of 10/2 did I mention Odio? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Simpich Posted July 11, 2020 Share Posted July 11, 2020 If you can't offer your analysis concisely and clearly, the problem speaks for itself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 11, 2020 Share Posted July 11, 2020 Bill, I don’t know why you are choosing this path of discussion. If the photo on the apps they show her in 1978 are not the man who was there, makes sense the Lopez report took so long to get released and why Sprague was removed... Why can’t you answer the question Bill? If Duran knows it’s not Oswald, and Azcue knows, and Litamil/9 says he was never there... and the FBI FUBARs the investigation... ....how is that her NOT LYING about it 15 years later when she most certainly knew it was not Oswald when asked about it... CORNWELL - Okay. What specifically about the report was it that makes you angry?TIRADO - That I was a--let me see how to say it--, I don't remember exactly, but uh, I did more to Oswald when he was here than was my job, that it was extra. LOPEZ - Did you ever have a conversation with Azcue when Oswald was not in the office about the possibility that he was an intelligence agent for some country?TIRADO - No, no. I don't think so. We only thought that he was a crazy man, an adventurer, or something like that.LEAP - Did it ever enter your mind that that he was a penetration agent?TIRADO - Perhaps. Perhaps, because it happened, it happened sometimes that somebody came and say this is a policeman or something like that. TIRADO - .....So, Azcue went to the door, he opened the door and told Oswald to go away I think we both know Azcue’s job re an American Communist... recruit, question, delay.... but not this time? The items I listed all pan out as well Bill... for you to dismiss them out of hand seems out of character... Besides, instead of Having me repeatedly proving the negative... prove he was there... when they show none of the evidence can be tied to Oswald.... just this OTHER” Second person.... so Hooveresque DJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 11, 2020 Share Posted July 11, 2020 1 hour ago, Bill Simpich said: If you can't offer your analysis concisely and clearly, the problem speaks for itself. Guess so Bill. One of the most document heavy subjects we have.... and yet the images below don’t help u see clearly and concisely, he wasn’t there... This statement got me started along with the Faked hotel registry matching the bs tourist visa Lee, Harvey Oswald... OH LEE.... Between Mann and FBI sources... And Ochoa... only the CIA remains the sole source.. Enough tit-for-tat for one day, yeah? What the WCR says is pure junk... Lopez and Hardaway were snowed.... it offers none of these report’s conclusions for good reason... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted July 12, 2020 Share Posted July 12, 2020 David, I agree...my thought was random but the pattern is "pervasive". We just have to keep in mind the FBI was given its marching orders....write a report on Oswald as the sole culprit, if you have a lead involving Oswald track it down, if it involves others close it off as quickly as possible. We want a case against Oswald and only Oswald (some FBI agents have described their verbal instructions in exactly that fashion). The only exception was if the lead pointed back to Cuba...if so it got Hoover's personal attention. Beyond that the FBI's role was as much to simply confirm the simple story of Oswald as a lone nut as anything else. If they ran across exceptions or anomalies they worked at making it go away or diverting attention from it. Ray January called them to talk about suspicious incidents at Red Bird, they only wanted to talk about whether or not he had visited Ruby's club. The closed off Harlandale by taking the work of an informant who was himself a suspect. And on and on. Even the WC members knew the info they were getting from the FBI was filtered ....and when they raised questions in the very last months the FBI literally fed them bogus reports as I mentioned above. Of course we also have to accept this sort of behavior is not unknown in other matters, the FBI works to give prosecutors what they need for the case they are pursuing, the are acting for the prosecution, certainly not the defense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Bulman Posted July 12, 2020 Share Posted July 12, 2020 8 minutes ago, Larry Hancock said: David, I agree...my thought was random but the pattern is "pervasive". We just have to keep in mind the FBI was given its marching orders....write a report on Oswald as the sole culprit, if you have a lead involving Oswald track it down, if it involves others close it off as quickly as possible. We want a case against Oswald and only Oswald (some FBI agents have described their verbal instructions in exactly that fashion). The only exception was if the lead pointed back to Cuba...if so it got Hoover's personal attention. Beyond that the FBI's role was as much to simply confirm the simple story of Oswald as a lone nut as anything else. If they ran across exceptions or anomalies they worked at making it go away or diverting attention from it. Ray January called them to talk about suspicious incidents at Red Bird, they only wanted to talk about whether or not he had visited Ruby's club. The closed off Harlandale by taking the work of an informant who was himself a suspect. And on and on. Even the WC members knew the info they were getting from the FBI was filtered ....and when they raised questions in the very last months the FBI literally fed them bogus reports as I mentioned above. Of course we also have to accept this sort of behavior is not unknown in other matters, the FBI works to give prosecutors what they need for the case they are pursuing, the are acting for the prosecution, certainly not the defense. Did January go to the Carousel, any suggestion of this else where? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Simpich Posted July 12, 2020 Share Posted July 12, 2020 (edited) David, I'm going to try this one more time. And then I'm going to stop. I am an agnostic on your argument that LHO was never in Mexico. It's not my case to make. I don't have a case. Pretend I know nothing about your argument - which is basically the case. Make the argument for a fifth grader. I will say one thing - when Silvia Duran was interviewed by Tony Summers years later, and carefully shown some photos and film, she came to the conclusion that the LHO shot by Jack Ruby was not the man she saw in Mexico City on September 27. That is an item that I don't think you know about. See this Jerry Rose article - you might have seen it - "The Trip That Never Was - Oswald in Mexico", endnote 5. What's out of character for me is not offering comradely criticism earlier to a colleague who is not squarely addressing the evidence. I don't know the history of your debate with Jeremy Bojczuk, or have a dog in that fight, but I was stunned when you accused him of "standard COINTELPRO techniques for disrupting forums" when he tried to discuss the "quality of evidence" in making one's case. It's one thing to fight with an Ed Forum member about differences about politics or evidence. It's another to say that. I have been waiting to see the evidence on which you base your belief that Ochoa and others dummied up the case about Oswald. The two signatures on the visa application are one good example. I still have hope. So please - without rhetorical flourishes or those very confusing two-tone overlays - what are the five best pieces of evidence proving Oswald was never in Mexico? Can you provide that analysis? Edited July 12, 2020 by Bill Simpich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Hancock Posted July 12, 2020 Share Posted July 12, 2020 Yes, January did tell the FBI that he had been to the Carousel club on a couple of occasions. He was trying to tell them something much more suspicious in regard to Oswald and possible associates but they repeatedly diverted the questioning to the Carousel Club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 12, 2020 Share Posted July 12, 2020 (edited) 8 hours ago, Bill Simpich said: I have been waiting to see the evidence on which you base your belief that Ochoa and others dummied up the case about Oswald. The two signatures on the visa application are one good example. I still have hope. Bill - all you need do is read the work .... be like trying to explain State Secret in a few sentences.... the concept is easy to understand just like this one - it wasn't Oswald -... showing the evidence for what it is takes a bit more time. I'm sorry we are disconnected here and that it takes me a bit longer to explain what I see as a fairly complicated situation. 8 hours ago, Bill Simpich said: I will say one thing - when Silvia Duran was interviewed by Tony Summers years later, and carefully shown some photos and film, she came to the conclusion that the LHO shot by Jack Ruby was not the man she saw in Mexico City on September 27. That is an item that I don't think you know about. See this Jerry Rose article - you might have seen it - "The Trip That Never Was - Oswald in Mexico", endnote 5 Correct Bill... didn't read the Rose article but I have "Conspiracy" and have been thru that.... I prefer to use the source documents like I do with H&L or any other subject for that matter.... They do seem to speak volumes on their own... which is again why I include them in my posts... they are an integral part of how I present my analysis.... I posted the passage from the Lopez report (Same source where Summers/Rose got the info?) How else did we/Summers/HSCA find out Duran's description was of a different person? I looked up the reference in end-note 5 in Conspiracy p.376, and it offers nothing about DURAN or photos of Oswald, only that Summers "reluctantly" reaches the conclusion about an Oswald impersonator being very possible... The WCR has left me with a bad taste for footnotes that do not support or refer to the passage footnoted.... why bother if the note doesn't clarify the passage? I posted the Lopez/Duran discussion along with AZCUE's denial of Oswald earlier.... If someone was lucky enough to find and read Rose's article... or "Conspiracy", great.... the Rose article was in 1977... so unless they were privy to this Lopez conversation, there must have been other signs it wasn't actually Oswald from the evidence... This I both say and prove in my series of articles on the topic. === Rose takes 7 pages to summarize what he learned in the book CONSPIRACY about Oswald and Mexico... How exactly do you want me to sum up hundreds pages of analysis and research on thousands of documents without taking a few paragraphs... Why do you NEVER address the DURAN question about her lying about OSWALD to the HSCA if she knew in 1977 as did AZCUE that it was not Oswald....? Why redact LITANIL/9 reports about Oswald not being there for 50+ years - didn't help the WCR case much, did it? I'm not sure why we're having all this difficulty communicating.... do you want, like, 5 sentences to sum up years of work? It remains the totality of the evidence which creates the wall... not the composition of the bricks. What "double dealing" about Oswald's trip to Mexico do you think Hoover was referring to in January 1964? And like "Patsy", "Double-dealing" has a deeper meaning here... "double" here could be taken to mean Hoover knew the CIA knew where Oswald was, and that's why they used him at that moment... I wanted to use the source documents themselves... plus with L/9 no longer redacted and the Lopez report available, and more notes on the CIA dog and pony visits of staffers down there... I guess I am confirming/re-examining what Weisberg mentions/concludes over 10 years prior to Summers in a piece called "Could Oswald have visited Sylvia Odio?" which is fully endnoted with WCD and WCE documents.... Rose offers 3 areas of concentration: Hotel Registry, fellow passengers, & bus/frontier evidence... all of which I repeatedly addressed on the pages of this and many other threads... The Sept 17 tourist visa made out to "LEE, HARVEY OSWALD" is signed "Lee H. Oswald" in a hand we've seen repeatedly and is recognized as the signature of the man Ruby killed... yet the Hotel Registry (one of Rose's main points) is signed "Lee, Harvey Oswald" as it appears on the Visa... OCHOA is the source for the HOTEL REGISTRY... something Summers hadn't learned. Speaking of OCHOA... The first response we see from GOBERNACION is on Nov 8th - Crawford's report shown in the FBI composite of Mexi informants looking for Oswald - prev post... - and there is they have NO INFORMATION on Oswald... we have to consider they asked OCHOA at Gobernacion given his position and place as an FBI asset. Then not again until DEC 3, 1963... when the FBI finally starts to get the evidence from OCHOA, and Mexico in general https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=61172#relPageId=2&tab=page fbi oswald mexico city file (105-3702)/ NARA Record Number: 124-10243-10017 Rose cites the same things: Hotel registry anomalies among process, procedure, handwriting... it appears as if all the names were written in by the same person which is procedure if all checked in prior to that same day... but they're all the same except Oswald's... and then his is the only name block lettered for the remainder of his "stay" Rose calls out these as seen in CONSPIRACY. but fails to mention OCHOA or the Dec 3 1963 docs like the one above listing everything... "Fellow passengers" is Jerry's next batch of problems... I spend numerous pages in the work tracking these "witnesses" and finding they were planted, never on the buses, on different buses (eg.. in Monterrey a new group of passengers gets on the FLECHA ROJAS bus on which they've put Oswald. The WCR publishes the passenger list and departing time... The Aussie girls who stopped in Monterrey before getting back on the bus to Mexico City are of course not on this list since they took the DEL NORTE bus... The FBI can't decide which of the bus lines to put him on.... one of the girls claims they called him "Texas" as he kept saying he was from Fort Worth... despite the McFarlands claiming he told them he was from New Orleans.... Then there's BOWEN/OSBORNE who does not confirm it was Oswald, in fact quite to opposite stating there were no other English speaking people on the bus. As I said Bill... I spent many, many pages of analysis on these "fellow traveler" statements only to find out that the FBI could find virtually every person mentioned, except Oswald. Paula Rusioni was placed on the DEL NORTE bus leaving 8:30am Oct 2nd... (among a number of others whose stories also do not pan out) except Del Norte did not create passenger lists according to the information https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11550#relPageId=53 WCD1154 p20... yet there it is and with an amazing assortment of names... https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11183&relPageId=5 WCD785 p4... they claimed Oswald was in seat 12 listed as "Chihuahuenses" PAULA is never found and her ticket number was never issued... according to the investigation. Finally Rose offers the "bus and frontier" records as further proof Oswald didn't go... The perpetually cheap/frugal Oswald would have bought a 3 or 4 part ticket to Mexico from New Orleans... instead he supposedly travels piece-meal buying a ticket at each stop.... He talks about the FLECHA ROJAS conflict on his way down and that like the other 3 bus lines, the records for those days were taken the day of the assassination... as were copies sent to other border crossings and Mexico City... Arturo BOSCH literally takes a pen and changes a FRONTERA manifest to include Oswald, the FBI uses FRONTERA as Oswald's bus line for months...before finding out it didn't work, and changed it to Del Norte... how much PROOF do you need Bill? The inverted name from LH Oswald to HO Lee is interesting yet as I pointed out... when it came time to see the FM-11 and other "recap" documents, he is repeated alphabetized under OSWALD, "O"... almost as if they were retyped... quite a level of Hubris in compiling this "evidence" and then recompiling it again in March/Apr/May 1964... with even more stragglers in Aug/Sept... right up to publication with the discovery Sept 14th there was a bus to Houston at 12:20 he could have taken... MUST have taken as no other bus works, yet neither did this one as it gets to Houston at around 11pm... well after the call to the TWIFORDS was supposed to have happened.... Rose finishes by looking at the specifics of the return trip.... Had you ever wondered about the HIDEEL VACCINATION CARD found in his possession with JUNE 8 stamped all over the practice area? By having it in evidence they could avoid the fact there were no records of Vaccination for Oswald on the trip... so he MUST have had something to show them..When these were created is a mystery as the Stamp kit was not something that existed until the evidence returned from the FBI on Nov 24th to be picked up again on the 26th... OCHOA add "notes for clarity" to the FM-11 record for Oswald and tells FBI that they must return all items as they are internal government docs and should not be out of his control.... That he was in a "car" at any point in time going in or out was part of the CIA plan to put Ozzie with Cuban conspirators... Even the one investigation of the "young couple" was turned on its head since the people who went into Mexico are not the people the FBI investigated... SOP.... The FBI changes its mind about the journey's evidence repeatedly because as it is being constructed they find conflicts which require earlier travel to change so later KNOWN appointments like the TEC on Oct 3rd can be met.... this is SOP for the FBI... fit the timeline of Oswald's movements to known, fixed event times.... The VISA application from Sept 17th as offered in the WCR is split over 2 images.. one image has no signature, the other no No. or Serie: 24085... The application is for a 6 month stay and nowhere but the Visa itself do we see a 15 day limit... https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1141#relPageId=708&tab=page All the dates are designed to just work in our timeline... 15 days from Sept 17 to Oct 2.... 5 days/nights from Sept 27 to Oct 2 based on the allowable time on the back of the visa (which again makes little sense if it was a 6 month or 15-day visa.... If this doesn't do it for you I recommend reading the articles themselves... If that's no good either... I guess I need to come up with something a 5th grader would understand... Thanks for taking the time and for your thoughts.... you remain one of the most important sources of info as well as a shining light in our community. Many, many others have told me the work changed their minds about Oswald being in Dallas with Odio, not in Mexico... I hope it can do that for you to some day... Take care DJ Edited July 12, 2020 by David Josephs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Simpich Posted July 12, 2020 Share Posted July 12, 2020 Thank you. That's what I was looking for, a considered summary. I will study it - no comments on that subject until after I have reviewed it. Jerry Rose, a great researcher who I regret never meeting before his recent death, was one of the first people to study the question of whether LHO went to Mexico. Rose's article was in 1985, not in 1977. The Anthony Summers interview with Duran was in 1979. The reason for my immediate concern about your analysis because Silvia Duran is "one of the most important witnesses there is" - if she is not a truth teller, that puts an entirely different cast on her statements and testimony. Jerry, like all of us, has made mistakes along the way - his mistake here was that he should have cited page 350 of Anthony Summers' book, not page 376. Here is Summers' verbatim description of his 1979 interview with Duran: "Today the consul's assistant, Sylvia Duran, points out sensibly that the passing of the years has blurred her recollection of Oswald. "She emphasizes that, back in 1963, it never occurred to her that the Dallas Oswald and the Embassy Oswald might be different people... "Sylvia Duran did see the fleeting television film of Ruby shooting Oswald and noticed nothing to make her feel the victim was different from the man she had encountered. "Astonishingly, no official investigators have ever asked to her to study either that footage or a longer film of Oswald which has been readily available ever since the assassination. "In 1979 I made arrangements for Duran to see the filmed interview of Oswald made in New Orleans a few weeks before the Mexico episode. "She was thus able to see and listen to Oswald addressing the camera for some minutes. "Duran's reaction was disturbing. She said, 'I was not sure if it was Oswald or not...the man on the film is not like the man I saw here in Mexico City.' "Asked what struck her as different, Duran replied, 'The man on this film speaks strongly and carries himself with confidence. The man who came to my office in Mexico City was small and weak and spoke in a trembling voice.' Duran found herself thoroughly confused. "The investigator can build no certainties on Duran's new bouts. Yet she supplies one further detail, and it increases the suspicion that her visitor was bogus. "In her notes on the incident, Duran writes that the man at the consulate was a diminutive fellow - at the most about 5 feet 6 inches tall. That is short for a man, the sort of detail a woman might indeed remember. "Duran told Assassinations Committee staff that Oswald was 'short...about my size.' Duran is a little woman herself, only 5 feet 3 1/2 inches. "This is noticeably shorter than the real Oswald's height of 5 feet 9 1/2 inches. "Duran and her former boss both remember the Oswald at the consulate as being blond haired. She also thinks he had 'blue or green eyes'. If she is right, neither detail fits with the authentic Oswald." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Josephs Posted July 12, 2020 Share Posted July 12, 2020 8 minutes ago, Bill Simpich said: Rose's article was in 1985, not in 1977. The Anthony Summers interview with Duran was in 1979. Sorry, the 1st article by Hoch is dated in 1977... and I didn't catch the 1984 date on the Rose article in the end notes... I saw that the entire thing was dated in 1985.... 14 minutes ago, Bill Simpich said: The reason for my immediate concern about your analysis because Silvia Duran is "one of the most important witnesses there is" - if she is not a truth teller, that puts an entirely different cast on her statements and testimony. So from you're understanding, when in the timeline does DURAN become aware Mexi Oswald wasn't Ruby's Oswald... before or after her HSCA testimony? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill Simpich Posted July 12, 2020 Share Posted July 12, 2020 (edited) Yes, Tony Summers conducted this interview with Duran and showed her the film of LHO in New Orleans in 1979, the year after her testimony before the HSCA. I should add that there was a CIA-driven smear of Duran after the assassination. Elena Garro, one of the foremost playwrights in Mexico - and the ex-partner of the famed poet and diplomat Octavio Paz - came up with a story that Duran and Oswald were sleeping together in Mexico City. Alonso Lujambio of the Mexican freedom of information institute released information pursuant to the Mexican FOIA laws about 15 years ago making it plain that Elena Garro was a spy. Because of her support for the students in 1968 - some question the veracity of the claim, saying that DFS' Fernandez Gutierrez Barrios/LITEMPO-4 made it up - the man that Silvia Duran kicked in the balls when he tried to get her to lie about Oswald. I believe Silvia - not the untrustworthy Gutierrez. (There is another story, years later, from CIA officer Wallace Rowton/pseudo unknown claiming that CIA agent LIRING-3 claimed that Duran told him she slept with Oswald - I don''t believe Rowton either!) I just found another report on a document in the Mexican archives stating that Garro was reporting on the whereabouts of the student leaders themselves in 1968 - and the authenticity of this report seems pretty well buttoned down. All this is important - because Elena Garro is not a credible witness and she has done real damage to the progress of understanding in the JFK case. Furthermore, I interviewed Gerardo Ochoa Sandy, a diplomat, who provided me with an article where Garro admitted that the whole story about Oswald and the twist party was "made up". Here is the summary of the document and the document itself, which is in Spanish. (if the document doesn't open - let me know) I read all of the articles. It was a little confusing and hard to > make out some parts. However, this last snippet says that Garro, in her > last interview said that the story of her meeting Oswald in Mexico was not > true. She says she was never at the party, she never met Oswald, and she > was never interrogated. She says she never took refuge in the Hotel > Vermont > either. She says she knew Charles Williams Thomas (U.S. intelligence > officer) vaguely, that they weren’t friends like he claimed, but she did > recall someone introducing him to her. She admitted to going to the Cuban > Embassy and yelling “Asesinos (Killers)!”, but said that the Cubans just > laughed at her. She said she was invited to Cuba by Fidel Castro, but > didn’t go because she was afraid to fly. In short, she says that it was > all made up, not by her, but by others. Why? Because she is a wild and > solitary woman. Her last line is really funny! She says I didn’t have a > veil in that funeral… in other words, I didn’t have a horse in that race. Edited July 12, 2020 by Bill Simpich 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