Did Oswald deny he went to Mexico City in his interrogation?

[Paul Cummings]

1 hour ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

I'm sure he does but the way you worded it made it sound like he was "running" you.

You can resist all you want but you are the textbook definition. See Uscinski, p. 23.

No. If it did that the mainstream media, politicians and everyone else would be forced to admit it.

Forced to admit to it? Years ago I was in the media and the station I worked with started it's first news cast at 10PM. Station management was convinced the other stations in the market would give them notice. Years later they would expand to all different dayparts and and to this day they haven't acknowledge them as a competitor.

Edited July 7, 2022 by Paul Cummings

[James DiEugenio]

Thanks Sean.

Duran was arrested on 11/23  and she was accused of having a sexual affair with Oswald. She was also accused of being a communist in cahoots with Oswald.

From that first interrogation, the CIA made changes and this was submitted to the WC about six months later. Duran was beaten up and allegedly, according to her husband, had some kind of breakdown. Her husband now forbade her from talking about the Oswald episode and so did her doctor. So, in that sense, you can say she was broken.

To my knowledge, it was not until Eddie Lopez questioned her for the HSCA that she said the guy she talked to was short, about  5 feet 5 and had blonde hair.  it would seem to me, as it does to some others, this was the reason she was abducted.  I mean if she says that, and there are no pics of Oswald, then it would be a prima facie  case of impersonation.

Edited July 7, 2022 by James DiEugenio

[James DiEugenio]

TG: Basically, if Oswald took a car to Mexico, it’s just as bad as if he didn’t go, IMO.

I agree and that is why Hoover did what he did.

[James DiEugenio]

Paul:

That would make sense about an air flight.

But in the 2017 releases by the ARRB, the CIA checked all the flight records in and around Mexico City and could find no trace of Oswald coming in or leaving.

Now, that does not mean there could have been an assumed name used.

[James DiEugenio]

BTW, its  interesting to read those 2017 releases.

its pretty clear that the CIA is worried that they cannot account for Oswald coming or going from Mexico City and they cannot find any evidence of him at either embassy.  As i said they went as far as checking all the air fields in Mexico City.

So they then go to their plants inside the Cuban consulate.  And both said they never saw him.  Then, they go back again!  Yep a second time, like, pretty please, just can you just say you saw him? Same reply, negative.

They knew this was going to be a problem.  And as you can see above, it was.

Edited July 7, 2022 by James DiEugenio

[James DiEugenio]

BTW, let me add, it was weird to me that none of the first generation critics ever really questioned this tale about Mexico City: Meagher, Weisberg, Epstein etc.

The first critic to do so was Jim Garrison.  And as he wrote about it, to him it was crucial to what really happened.

Of course, since JG got buried by those same critics, and later ignored, almost no one knows this. Just like no one knows about him and Vietnam.

[Paul Cummings]

6 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Just like no one knows about him and Vietnam.

Sorry not understanding would you expand on this please? 

[James DiEugenio]

Jim Garrison was the first critic to make the case that Vietnam was the reason Kennedy was killed.

He said this in two radio interviews he did in 1968. And in his first book in 1970.

The reason he made the case was that he was mailed a 26 page handwritten, on a yellow legal pad,  treatise by a professor at Miami of Ohio who had concluded this was the case.  Peter Vea, the forerunner to Malcolm Blunt , found that essay at NARA back in 1994 and sent it to me.

[Paul Cummings]

9 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Jim Garrison was the first critic to make the case that Vietnam was the reason Kennedy was killed.

He said this in two radio interviews he did in 1968. And in his first book in 1970.

The reason he made the case was that he was mailed a 26 page handwritten, on a yellow legal pad,  treatise by a professor at Miami of Ohio who had concluded this was the case.  Peter Vea, the forerunner to Malcolm Blunt , found that essay at NARA back in 1994 and sent it to me.

Thank you.

[James DiEugenio]

Welcome Paul, I have always thought this was important.

But to give Peter Scott his due--he thinks I ignore what he did--he wrote about this in 1971.

[David Boylan]

2 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Jim Garrison was the first critic to make the case that Vietnam was the reason Kennedy was killed.

He said this in two radio interviews he did in 1968. And in his first book in 1970.

The reason he made the case was that he was mailed a 26 page handwritten, on a yellow legal pad,  treatise by a professor at Miami of Ohio who had concluded this was the case.  Peter Vea, the forerunner to Malcolm Blunt , found that essay at NARA back in 1994 and sent it to me.

Jim,

Didn't Peter Vea produce  an index of Garrison's docs from way back? I think I might still have that.

If I remember right Jim Lesar had most of the docs.

Edited July 8, 2022 by David Boylan

[James DiEugenio]

Yes that is true about the Garrison index by Peter.

Peter actually sent me a listing of the documents that NARA had declassified from the Garrison inquiry at that time.

That was the first time I think that these had been made available to the general public at NARA.

Amid those documents was the essay about Vietnam from that professor.

Although Lesar had some of these documents, he was so crowded that he could not fit all of them in his main office.

Peter's index, as I recall, was really the first descriptive such listing of the Garrison files.  Because he actually did describe the contents of the documents with a couple of sentences or more. 

We sold a lot of those through Probe Magazine. A lot of people were interested in the index since it was their first real exposure to the contents of Garrison's files.

[James DiEugenio]

Let me add something on this.

Wallace Milam, a friend and colleague of Lifton back in those days, asked me for some of these files on that list.

Now recall, for two decades, all one heard from  critics like LIfton, Hoch and Summers etc, was that there was nothing in those files.  And my God what Garrison did to that innocent man and stellar citizen of New Orleans, Clay Shaw--and in Lifton's case Kerrry Thornley-- was simply a disgrace.

When I met with Wallace in Dallas that fall, he insisted on buying me lunch. He brought all the documents I sent with him.  He said something like, "Jim, I was shocked when I read this stuff.  I had no idea Garrison had uncovered so much incriminating material.  I couldn't stop reading it."

This was the reaction of many people upon ordering that index, and sending away to NARA for the documents. What they were getting from people like Hoch was nothing but misinformed ignorant bias.  And people like him had so polluted the well that no one even looked to see if they were wrong.

 

Edited July 9, 2022 by James DiEugenio

[Tom Gram]

4 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

Let me add something on this.

Wallace Milam, a friend and colleague of Lifton back in those days, asked me for some of these files on that list.

Now recall, for two decades, all one heard from  critics like LIfton, Hoch and Summers etc, was that there was nothing in those files.  And my God what Garrison did to that innocent man and stellar citizen of New Orleans, Clay Shaw--and in Lifton's case Kerrry Thornley-- was simply a disgrace.

When I met with Wallace in Dallas that fall, he insisted on buying me lunch. He brought all the documents I sent with him.  He said something like, "Jim, I was shocked when I read this stuff.  I had no idea Garrison had uncovered so much incriminating material.  I couldn't stop reading it."

This was the reaction of many people upon ordering that index, and sending away to NARA for the documents. What they were getting from people like Hoch was nothing but misinformed ignorant bias.  And these people had so polluted the well that no one even looked to see if they were wrong.

 

Is Paul Bleau still doing an article on the Garrison files for K&K? I’m really interested to see what he does with Oswald’s dark-skinned, muscular Cuban “escort” that he talked about on BOR. I looked through pretty much every page in the files myself, and Garrison’s material on this “escort” is proof beyond a reasonable doubt, IMO. It’s really that good. 

 

[James DiEugenio]

Yes he is doing it.  

And I agree that this character is beyond provocative.

BTW, Paul's essay will be in more than one part.  There was too much to fit into just one essay.

Edited July 9, 2022 by James DiEugenio