Oswalds Notebook No.108

[Gerry Down]

Oswalds Notebook No.108

After the assassination, the DPD found a notebook among Oswalds possessions. They assigned No.108 to this notebook. Commission Document 735 (https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=11133 ) pages 461 and 462 give details about this notebook):

https://i.ibb.co/JzH8fG0/108.png

In another section of Commission Document 735 (pages 395 to 398), further detail is given about these phone numbers:

[img]https://i.ibb.co/NC1cknk/n1.png[/img]

[img]https://i.ibb.co/dMG7vCg/n2.png[/img]

[img]https://i.ibb.co/bQ0QVX1/n3.png[/img]

[img]https://i.ibb.co/BLx3nLH/n4.png[/img]

The document about Andy Anderson is interesting. This is the same name that appeared on a document regarding the CIA domestic contacts division apparently relating to Oswald. This document was highlighted in the 1993 documentary (Frontline: Who Was Lee Harvey Oswald?). See 32 minutes in on the below video:

https://youtu.be/PYI4PqtIyE0

From notebook no.108, it appears that Oswald was gathering a list of switchboards. So why would Oswald do this?

One possibility is that Oswald was working for intelligence agency and that intelligence agency had not identified itself to Oswald. And this collection of switchboard numbers in Oswalds notebook was Oswalds attempt to help locate the geographic location his handler was in and therefore help narrow down which intelligence agency was in that location.

For example, Oswalds handler might have told Oswald to wait by a certain public telephone at a certain time. The phone would then ring and Oswald could talk to his handler. But before Oswald would talk to the handler, he would have to talk to the operator to accept the call. In talking to the operator, Oswald could have asked the operator what switchboard they were, asked for their number, and then jotted this down in his notebook. Oswald might have thought this would narrow down where his handler was based and calling from.

This info would not have been particularly useful, but it might have been Oswalds crude attempt to try and identify the location that his handler was based from, and thus identify which intelligence agency the handler was working for.

To learn more about these phone numbers, check out the following podcast from Rob Clark and Doug Campbell (2 minutes to 12 minutes):

https://youtu.be/Q2vFOQ_fz7k

I'm trying to fugure out more about switchboards of the early 1960's to help pint down the significance of these numbers in Oswalds notebook. Is anyone on here more familiar with how switchboards operated in the early 1960’s and perhaps could shed light on this issue?

From the below video it would appear that switchboard operators when they would ring a phone (like a public phone) would not identify themselves to the person picking up the phone (ie Oswald).

https://youtu.be/fywnyDqMN6U

So from what I understand, Oswald would have had to ask the operator what their switchboard number was and would then jot that switchboard number down in his notebook as seen in notebook no.108.

Edited July 31, 2022 by Gerry Down

[Larry Hancock]

Gerry,  just to note, there are a couple of types of switchboards in the diary (and yes for a time I operated a switchboard myself).  Several on the list were business or government boards...where incoming calls were routed to different offices in the building.  Those boards would normally have been listed by the number of the business or agency and they could have been physically listed by address.  Key systems were an alternative for smaller businesses or officers where an incoming line was shared between one or more key positions key system hand sets.  As an example, some of the publishing firms in the TSBD had key systems and one witness remarked that all the lights lit up at the time of the shooting, meaning everyone in the offices was trying to grab a line to make calls.

Oswald could easily get numbers for the public boards though regular telephone listings for businesses, and agencies.

The second type of board is an actual telephone company switchboard, normally associated with a larger switching center.  Those boards were reached though operator assistance calls for various types of service including long distance billed calls.  Not really sure why such a board would have a number per se and they would not necessarily be located with a local exchange, but rather with a call centralized call center for a larger area (an area normally involving several local exchanges).

 

 

[Gerry Down]

28 minutes ago, Larry Hancock said:

Gerry,  just to note, there are a couple of types of switchboards in the diary (and yes for a time I operated a switchboard myself).  Several on the list were business or government boards...where incoming calls were routed to different offices in the building.  Those boards would normally have been listed by the number of the business or agency and they could have been physically listed by address.  Key systems were an alternative for smaller businesses or officers where an incoming line was shared between one or more key positions key system hand sets.  As an example, some of the publishing firms in the TSBD had key systems and one witness remarked that all the lights lit up at the time of the shooting, meaning everyone in the offices was trying to grab a line to make calls.

Oswald could easily get numbers for the public boards though regular telephone listings for businesses, and agencies.

The second type of board is an actual telephone company switchboard, normally associated with a larger switching center.  Those boards were reached though operator assistance calls for various types of service including long distance billed calls.  Not really sure why such a board would have a number per se and they would not necessarily be located with a local exchange, but rather with a call centralized call center for a larger area (an area normally involving several local exchanges).

 

 

So what do you think we are looking at with those numbers in his notebook? Do you think these numbers could have anything to do with him researching trying to get his undesirable discharge changed (i.e. offices to contact)? Or perhaps research as part of his journey to Mexico City?

Or perhaps LHO was collecting phone numbers so he could submit these to the unemployment commission where he could pretend he had been looking for work in those offices to continue claiming his unemployment benefits?

Edited August 1, 2022 by Gerry Down

[Larry Hancock]

I don't really see any pattern in the calls where the actual numbers were tied down to places - other than the Anderson number which is interesting and seems to ring a bell in regard to Jack Ruby and where he had his car work down, very possibly a mis-remembering on my part though.    What doesn't make much sense to me is a reverse engineering attempt to find someone calling him by locating boards/exchanges, not given the fact that most of the actual numbers involved would have been in the phone directories.

[Gerry Down]

18 minutes ago, Larry Hancock said:

I don't really see any pattern in the calls where the actual numbers were tied down to places - other than the Anderson number which is interesting and seems to ring a bell in regard to Jack Ruby and where he had his car work down, very possibly a mis-remembering on my part though.    What doesn't make much sense to me is a reverse engineering attempt to find someone calling him by locating boards/exchanges, not given the fact that most of the actual numbers involved would have been in the phone directories.

I was considering the hypothesis that Oswald didn't fully understand the setup of switchboards and thought he could achieve something (i.e. narrow down the location of someone who might have been trying to phone him) which in reality doesn't appear to have been something that was possible. But that hypothesis seems to be a long shot with not alot of evidence to go on. 

If someone with your experience of switchboards cant make sense of these numbers, then it sounds like these numbers will continue to be a mystery to JFK researchers. 

[Larry Hancock]

I'm not sure there is a mystery since each number was investigated and is explained in the records.  It is true that several of the numbers associated city Forth Worth and Federal government offices would have gone into switchboards, to be routed depending on what department the caller would be deemed to have wanted - assuming the caller did not have the number for a direct line to an individual or office.  I would assume most if not all of the city and government general numbers would have been in the White Page directory and easy enough to find.  The numbers do relate to particular switchboards but only per se since they are actually the numbers of that particular office or agency.

Given that I'd have to also assume Oswald was calling the general office numbers and ending up at a switchboard because he did not know specifically who or what department would be right for the purpose of the call. 

The only exception is Anderson, which might be interesting or simply a misdial,  several folks think Oswald may have had at least a slight reading disability or perhaps he did just misdial the number in trying to reach the office he wanted to call.  

[Gerry Down]

Ok, i think i'm getting 1963 switchboards and exchanges mixed up. A switchboard is something like you might have in a hospital admin office. You would ring the admin office and the operator at the switchboard in the admin office would put you through to whatever office in the hospital you wanted (ie the heart consultant etc). An exchange is a stand-alone building with maybe 20 operators (usually women) who connect calls from one city to another city.

So taking the above example, if i wanted to phone the heart consultant but did not have their direct number, i would first have to ring the exchange (the stand-alone building) and tell them to put me through to the hospital admin office. The exchange operator would put me through to the hospital admin office, and the operator there at that switchboard would put me through to the heart consultant. And that's how i would get through to them.

If i did have the heart consultants direct phone number, i would still have to ring the exchange (the stand-alone building) and give them the heart consultants phone number and tell them to put me through to him. The exchange operator would then put me directly through to the heart consultant without ever going through the switchboard at the hospital admin office. 

Is that correct?

[Larry Hancock]

That's getting very close....basically a larger office building would have a small switchboard to route incoming calls to the desired department or individual.  Of course many individuals at the business or office would have their own outside lines as would departments - so they could receive and make calls on their own.  The major departments would most likely have listed telephone numbers in the directory and then there would be a general number for the business or agency.   By the 1960s key systems were already coming into play so a secretary might have a key system and take calls for a department or office that did have a listed number, they they would tell the right individual to pick up on a line. The Key System served as a mini-switchboard and also might have a published number in the directory.

An exchange is actually a telephone switch which automatically routes dialed calls, at that time exchanges were named and the prefix was part of the number.  Depending on size an exchange (switch) might have a switchboard for operator assistance, charged calls etc or, if smaller. multiple exchanges might all be routed to a set of operators at a large switchboard.  You would get to that telephone company switchboard by dialing operator assistance from within the exchange and the operators would provide help or assist with calls.

It appears that Oswald generally was having to call agencies at their listed numbers and then most likely try to get the operator to assist with directing him to the right department or individual.

In  your examples, if  you had the the heart consultants actual direct line you would be able to dial right through the telephone exchange switch to their phone and ring it..of course the number would more likely be that for their office/secretary and you would would end up at a small switchboard or key system where they would forward you to the consultant's own phone or just let him know he had a call to pick up on an extension.

If you just had a number for the hospital where the heart doctor had an office you would definitely to to a building switchboard (through the telephone exchange switch) and then be connected to their office number where the secretary would do the same as described above.  

Basically exchanges are automatic switching systems and if someone has a direct line which is connected to that switch you can ring them directly with no intervention.   Switchboards come into play if you need assistance from the telephone company or if you are dialing a number for a business or agency which does not list all its direct lines and  there is an operator at a small switchboard or key system that routes you on to internal numbers which are connected to the office switchboard/key system.

Hope that helps, Larry

 

 

 

 

[Gerry Down]

So the "U.S. Government Switchboard" as listed below could simply have been Oswald trying to get through to a department that could fix his undesirable discharge. The "City County Health Center" could have been Oswald trying to plan ahead for a place for Marina to give birth to Rachel. Also, Oswald was trying to contact two Courts building (The Federal Court Clerks Office in Fort Worth & The Tarrant County Criminal Courts in Fort Worth). Perhaps Oswald was trying to get info from these courts buildings to see if someone had a criminal conviction, could they get into Mexico City? Perhaps Oswald was worried being arrested in New Orleans over the Bringuier incident might act as a bar to him being able to travel to Mexico. If that's the case, then these numbers are potentially benign.

    

On a separate issue, Oleg Nechiporenko said that the Saturday Sept 28th phone call (which was supposedly from "Duran and Oswald" after Oswald had already been to the Russian embassy that morning) to the Russian embassy could not have been made because the Russian embassy switchboard was not operational that day (Saturday being a day off). But as you said, if someone had the direct phone number of an office in the Russian embassy, then they could bypass the switchboard altogether. Therefore, Nechiporenkos assertion that the call could not have been made because the switchboard was not operational that day is false. All "Duran and Oswald" had to do was ring a direct phone number in the Russian embassy and bypass the switchboard. Is that the case?

[Larry Hancock]

Gerry,  I think your description of the Oswald calls is right on the money; we can never know for sure at this point but the agencies called seem consistent with issues Oswald was concerned with,  ranging from legal to health for Marina and the family.

And yes, the Mexico City call could have been made to a direct outside line at the Russian embassy.  I'm not sure if the Russians allowed such a thing given security protocols but its certainly not impossible.   Bill Simpich and I have done a lot of studies in regard to the embassy lines, taps etc in Mexico City and there is also a related question - and that is where the call itself originated as  well as where it was recorded. 

The Cuban embassy was subject to a number of US taps, both inside the building at times and at other times physically outside the building where the building wires were connected into the telephone network.  Mexico city CIA operatives monitored both types of taps...and since they were indeed taps, a call could have originated from a CIA monitoring point via the tap and on  to the Russian embassy.  It would not have to come from inside the Cuban embassy.  

In turn the Russian embassy was served off a telephone exchange/switch where a whole series of taps were made within the switching equipment and taken directly to recorders. That set up was done by the CIA with Mexican govt. permission and was a huge operation with a number of targets, not just the Russians. 

I'd refer you to Bills writing about this but the basic point is that calls could be made and conversations recorded totally from outside the embassy building themselves; I also write about it in some detail in my book Creating Chaos.

 

 

As an example.

[Gerry Down]

Where is the best place to get the research Bill Simpich and you have done regarding the taps? Is it "State Secret" and "Creating Chaos"?

Off hand - consider the situation that if someone in the Russian embassy tried to phone someone in the Cuban embassy (one direct phone number to another direct phone number), but the call did not go through - would the CIA monitoring station know that the Russian embassy had tried to make that call? Would the CIA tap pick that up? And would the CIA know from what phone number at the Russian embassy was trying to make contact with what phone number at the Cuban embassy even if the call never went through?

In other words, did the CIA monitoring station only know if a call was made if the call actually went through? And would not know if someone had tried to make a call but the person a the other end never picked up the phone. 

 

Edited August 1, 2022 by Gerry Down

[Larry Hancock]

Yes on both State Secret and Creating Chaos.

Basically the CIA had installed telephone taps on lines coming out of the Cuban embassy and those lines had to be either monitored in real time or tape recorded - it would be just like having another phone or phone/tape recorder connected to your telephone at a wiring point you were unaware of....its not an electronic bug but literally parallel wire tap.

The CIA has also managed to arrange that dozens of telephone lines for embassies and other targets be tapped in a similar fashion and a Mexico City telephone exchange switch...again, a physical tap going to recorders with someone later transcribing the calls.

Because they were physical wire taps,  someone could actually place a call to the telephone system as if they were the originator. 

To answer your question, either people listening to the phone tap or recorders on the tap would simply record everything that occurred on the telephone line - including the dialed digits, the ring back tones from ringing and any conversation that resulted from the call being answered.

 

[Gerry Down]

You're a fountain of knowledge. I must start on both State Secret and Creating Chaos to get a better handle on these taps. I've heard of and own your other books (Tipping Point, Someone Would Have Talked etc), but Creating Chaos is not one I knew about.

[Larry Hancock]

Well after 30 some years on this I probably know more than I can remember...grin.  Creating Chaos is actually a study of the different levels of political warfare as the US conducted it during the first Cold War and how Putin moved into it in this century as well as other players such as China and Iran.  

The reason it explores Mexico City is that serves as an excellent example of how the US managed to very effectively conduct a deep level of political action due to a positive relationship with the Mexican government at the time, something Jeff Morley has written about extensively.  The extensive phone tap and related surveillance operations have now been thoroughly documented in Mexico City the extensive CIA Mexico City history as well as related CIA documents.