FBI Agent Fain Testifies That Oswald Was An FBI Informant

[David Andrews]

When Fain says that an "informant ... would  furnish information," he uses would in the sense of volition or surrender to compulsion, but "generally" in referring to a category of person.  The would is conditionalized in Oswald's case, as Fain says on the same page that this would (*) happen if Oswald "were ever contacted" by a Soviet, preterite form.  A future performance is demanded, and past performance not stated. 

 

Edited March 4, 2023 by David Andrews

[Ron Ege]

3 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

From this it would appear the FBI wanted to know if any foreign networks inside the U.S. would try to make contact with LHO.

In a recent interview, Larry Hancock suggested it was somewhat more the CIAs role to see if LHO would make contact with any foreign network inside the U.S. See 37 to 40 minutes on the below video:

So was it both the FBI and CIA job to investigate to see if LHO was going to make contact with any foreign network inside the U.S.?

I mean if this was the FBIs job, then why would the CIA also be doing this? Surely the CIA should have left this job to the FBI and then the FBI liaison office would make contact with the CIA to inform them if LHO did make contact with any foreign network inside the U.S.

Why would the FBI and CIA independently of one another both be investigating to see if LHO would make contact with any foreign network inside the U.S. ?

Gerry, thanks.

Given all we've learned over the past almost six decades, it would appear (to me) that both the bureau and the agency were -  shall we say, "interested" in Oswald.

Far be it from me to definitively determine which one's "job" it actually was.  I'm sure the more learned here, can weigh in on that.

If the CIA and the FBI were both independently investigating Oswald, could it have simply just fallen under the category of an intentional, interdepartmental "power struggle" action by either or both, ignoring its respective "chartered" investigatory responsibilities?

Would be hard to believe that either one did not understand it's own "charter", no?

Considering the FBI and CIA's histories, it seems that "fudging" of same should not surprise anyone; maybe each (or both) viewed their investigation as a sort of "it's better to apologize than ask for permission" scenario?

Or given Oswald's biography, and allowing for that fact that both the agency and the bureau were definitely investigating him - did both "charters" allow for them to investigate him - just for different reasons?

Seems like there has been a previous discussion here about the FBI vs CIA actions - relative to their "interest" in Oswald.

Anyone?

 

[Jonathan Cohen]

On 3/3/2023 at 1:06 PM, Mark Ulrik said:

In another thread, you were also confused by the word "effect" and thought it meant the same as "affect".
Perhaps your English is not as good as you think it is.

Thank you for calling this out, and not dignifying his disgusting implication that "a guy allegedly from Denmark" couldn't possibly know more about the English language than him.

[Bob Ness]

13 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

From this it would appear the FBI wanted to know if any foreign networks inside the U.S. would try to make contact with LHO.

In a recent interview, Larry Hancock suggested it was somewhat more the CIAs role to see if LHO would make contact with any foreign network inside the U.S. See 37 to 40 minutes on the below video:

So was it both the FBI and CIA job to investigate to see if LHO was going to make contact with any foreign network inside the U.S.?

I mean if this was the FBIs job, then why would the CIA also be doing this? Surely the CIA should have left this job to the FBI and then the FBI liaison office would make contact with the CIA to inform them if LHO did make contact with any foreign network inside the U.S.

Why would the FBI and CIA independently of one another both be investigating to see if LHO would make contact with any foreign network inside the U.S. ?

@Ron EgeI don't think that would be unusual. In fact, I would expect them both to have concurrent investigations. They both have their own patch to tend and different resources as well as remits. Just as their names imply, the CIA collects intelligence and the FBI investigates federal crimes. The CIA doesn't and has no particular expertise in collecting evidence for a criminal prosecution. Foreign intelligence concerns would be of interest to the FBI but I'm sure they would pass that off.

I'm sure you know this but I don't find it remarkable that they would both have an interest and in fact the ONI was probably looking at him also, although their files seem to have found a burn barrel.

Edited March 5, 2023 by Bob Ness

[Gerry Down]

25 minutes ago, Bob Ness said:

@Ron EgeI don't think that would be unusual. In fact, I would expect them both to have concurrent investigations. They both have their own patch to tend and different resources as well as remits. Just as their names imply, the CIA collects intelligence and the FBI investigates federal crimes. The CIA doesn't and has no particular expertise in collecting evidence for a criminal prosecution. Foreign intelligence concerns would be of interest to the FBI but I'm sure they would pass that off.

I'm sure you know this but I don't find it remarkable that they would both have an interest and in fact the ONI was probably looking at him also, although their files seem to have found a burn barrel.

What exactly did Moore want GDM to find out about LHO?

A: To see if LHO was trying to make contact with any foreign networks inside the U.S.?

B: To gather foreign Intel on the workings inside the Soviet union, such as details on the Minsk radio factory?

Was it more B than A do you think?

[Bob Ness]

33 minutes ago, Gerry Down said:

What exactly did Moore want GDM to find out about LHO?

A: To see if LHO was trying to make contact with any foreign networks inside the U.S.?

B: To gather foreign Intel on the workings inside the Soviet union, such as details on the Minsk radio factory?

Was it more B than A do you think?

I would just guess the CIA or ONI would have debriefed him already about his time in the USSR. Perhaps they may suspect he wasn't entirely forthcoming about that, but I find Marina as suspicious as Lee. If he was acting as some sort of dangle during that time, the Soviets wouldn't have been stupid enough to expose him to anything of import I imagine. My understanding of the theory is that Oswald's (and others) possible use as a dangle was really meant to create comm traffic between the various Soviet assets in the states and possibly expose a mole. An interesting theory with some grounds for discussion and even some indications that may have been the case.

On the other hand, at first blush and with no other information, the FBI may have been suspicious that he was sent back home with his new toy sparrow and handler, Marina, to create political hay, which they are very good at. You can see that today with news reports and social media that they are a very good humint type of operation and were reported to have 120,000 assets in the states at one point. The FBI could have very well suspected his return to be something along those lines and kept tabs for those reasons. That is well within their remit.

If Oswald was indeed a straw man communist, another possibility, I'm not convinced that information would have been shared between agencies. The CIA and/or ONI would likely wall that off unless absolutely necessary to protect him or a project. The intel agencies are loath to get cross threaded with the other agencies because their projects could often times be at odds with federal law and the less people know the better.

I guess the short answer, IMO, is that GDM was introduced to Oswald to verify his activities independent of whatever information he gave in interviews to whomever. I rather doubt radio factories in Minsk would have much value. The activities he may have been verifying is hard to say but I suspect actual networks wasn't one of them. The Russians wouldn't have trusted that information to Oswald.

[Denis Morissette]

On 3/3/2023 at 1:07 PM, Michael Crane said:

Oswald rumor with link.This is not the first place that I have read it.

J. Lee Rankin, the Warren Commission’s General Counsel, was told in January 1964 by a reliable source that it was common knowledge among journalists in Texas that Oswald had regularly received $200 per month from the FBI. If Oswald had indeed been secretly employed by a federal agency, the Commission would of course have found it almost impossible to make a convincing case that he had acted alone. Rankin and Earl Warren were determined to silence the rumor.

The matter was discussed at an emergency meeting of the Commission on 22 January 1964. Two days later, Rankin and Warren met officials from Texas, who repeated the FBI rumor and mentioned other rumors about a connection between Oswald and the CIA. According to FBI interviews with one of the officials, Rankin swore them to secrecy. At the next meeting of the Warren Commission, on 27 January, Rankin discussed the FBI rumor but did not mention Oswald’s alleged connection with the CIA.

 

http://22november1963.org.uk/memo-was-oswald-an-fbi-agent

Rumor spread by Houston Post reporter Hudkins, not Thayor Waldo.

Edited March 5, 2023 by Denis Morissette

[Denis Morissette]

 

[Denis Morissette]

 

[Bill Brown]

On 3/3/2023 at 1:13 PM, Gil Jesus said:

I don't care what the FBI said, as a former police officer, I find it hard to believe that some "nobody", who is arrested for a misdemeanor "disturbing the peace" charge is going to ask to talk to an FBI agent. I find it harder to believe that the FBI would respond to such a request because they have no jurisdiction. And I find it equally hard to believe the "nobody" who requested to talk to the agent would then refuse to answer his questions after he arrived.

It doesn't add up, folks. There's something else going on here.

 

Where were you a police officer and for how long?

 

[Jonathan Cohen]

1 hour ago, Bill Brown said:

Where were you a police officer and for how long?

It's the classic/pointless argument of, "well, I PERSONALLY don't think something is logical so that MUST mean something fishy is going on." Gil's one-sided analysis fails to consider anything whatsoever about Oswald's known actions and penchant for inflating his own activities as ones he considered of vital importance to foreign governments and oppressed peoples.

[Mark Ulrik]

On 3/4/2023 at 7:28 PM, Jonathan Cohen said:

Thank you for calling this out, and not dignifying his disgusting implication that "a guy allegedly from Denmark" couldn't possibly know more about the English language than him.

Thank you for noticing. Gil can get a bit salty sometimes, but I'm sure he means well.

[David G. Healy]

13 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

It's the classic/pointless argument of, "well, I PERSONALLY don't think something is logical so that MUST mean something fishy is going on." Gil's one-sided analysis fails to consider anything whatsoever about Oswald's known actions and penchant for inflating his own activities as ones he considered of vital importance to foreign governments and oppressed peoples.

sitdown... classic argument -- sheeeesh!

[Jonathan Cohen]

8 hours ago, David G. Healy said:

sitdown... classic argument -- sheeeesh!

Do you ever.. literally ever.. have anything of substance to add to the discussion other than jive-talking gobbledygook?

[David G. Healy]

On 3/6/2023 at 9:48 AM, Jonathan Cohen said:

It's the classic/pointless argument of, "well, I PERSONALLY don't think something is logical so that MUST mean something fishy is going on." Gil's one-sided analysis fails to consider anything whatsoever about Oswald's known actions and penchant for inflating his own activities as ones he considered of vital importance to foreign governments and oppressed peoples.

getting tough supporting the 1964 WCR is it? LMAO!