Jump to content
The Education Forum

Edwin Lopez: Oswald never visited embassies in Mexico City


Gil Jesus

Recommended Posts

On 8/21/2023 at 9:38 AM, Paul Jolliffe said:

Sandy,

I agree with you that the CIA plotters wanted to fool the FBI into believing that the short, blond "Oswald" visitor to the Cuban Embassy on the 26th and the Cuban Consulate on the 27th was an imposter (he was!) AND that this imposter was Nikolai Leonov (of course, it wasn't!)

You and I agree that the "Oswald" imposter at the Cuban Consulate on the 27th was unlikely to be the same blond, pudgy-faced man photographed outside the Cuban Embassy on the 26th.

Note that the FBI was told in January of 1964 (by an informant who had spoken with Elizabeth Mora) that the first person with whom the blond "Oswald" imposter came in contact at the Cuban Embassy was Teresa Proenza:

124-10003-10386 (maryferrell.org)

 

Thanks for bringing the Teresa Proenza story to my attention. It's amazing what the CIA had going on in Mexico City at the same time!

Also I'm happy to hear that I'm not alone in my belief about how the CIA was trying to implicate Nikolai Leonov in their fabricated Oswald/Cuban/Russian conspiracy to kill Kennedy. But I have a question about that:

 

post-6350-082029800%201303067107_thumb.j

 

First you said:

I agree with you that the CIA plotters wanted to fool the FBI into believing that the short, blond "Oswald" visitor to the Cuban Embassy on the 26th and the Cuban Consulate on the 27th was an imposter (he was!) AND that this imposter was Nikolai Leonov (of course, it wasn't!)

Then you said:

You and I agree that the "Oswald" imposter at the Cuban Consulate on the 27th was unlikely to be the same blond, pudgy-faced man photographed outside the Cuban Embassy on the 26th.

 

The only way I've been able to reconcile those two statements is by assuming you believe that the CIA plotters used two different guys for the Nikolai Leonov lookalike. The pudgy-faced one at the Cuban Embassy, and the slender-faced one at the Cuban Consulate.

Do I understand that correctly?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 190
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

6 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Thanks for bringing the Teresa Proenza story to my attention. It's amazing what the CIA had going on in Mexico City at the same time!

Also I'm happy to hear that I'm not alone in my belief about how the CIA was trying to implicate Nikolai Leonov in their fabricated Oswald/Cuban/Russian conspiracy to kill Kennedy. But I have a question about that:

 

post-6350-082029800%201303067107_thumb.j

 

First you said:

I agree with you that the CIA plotters wanted to fool the FBI into believing that the short, blond "Oswald" visitor to the Cuban Embassy on the 26th and the Cuban Consulate on the 27th was an imposter (he was!) AND that this imposter was Nikolai Leonov (of course, it wasn't!)

Then you said:

You and I agree that the "Oswald" imposter at the Cuban Consulate on the 27th was unlikely to be the same blond, pudgy-faced man photographed outside the Cuban Embassy on the 26th.

 

The only way I've been able to reconcile those two statements is by assuming you believe that the CIA plotters used two different guys for the Nikolai Leonov lookalike. The pudgy-faced one at the Cuban Embassy, and the slender-faced one at the Cuban Consulate.

Do I understand that correctly?

 

 

Sandy,

Yes (probably.)

The CIA photographed the pudgy faced blond "Oswald" outside the Cuban Embassy (twice) on the 26th. We have no evidence that anyone ever showed those two images of that guy to either Azcue, Duran or Mirabal at the Cuban Consulate. (Why not? Because that would be a tacit admission that our Dallas "Oswald" was probably impersonated.)

I agree with your implication that it is hard to reconcile their physical descriptions of the man at the Cuban Consulate on the 27th with the images of the man outside the Cuban Embassy on the 26th.

Note that the Cuban Embassy "Oswald" on the 26th was highly provocative and threatening. His behavior (as we understand it from the FBI's SOLO material) would seem to have been "unprofessional."

Note also that as late as 1978, the CIA had persuaded Bob Blakey of the HSCA that a violent "Oswald" at the Cuban Embassy really had threatened to kill the president.

Castro 03.pdf (hood.edu)

My contention is that this "Oswald" confrontation at the Cuban Embassy on the 26th was a part of the assassination conspiracy, which was separate from the "approved" CIA operation/s against the Cuban diplomatic personnel, or the hunt for Popov's Mole, or anything else.

Two separate operations (at least.)

So yes, I do think (for now) that the evidence available to us indicates that there were two separate "Oswald" imposters: one at the Cuban Embassy on the 26th (the photographed pudgy faced blond man) and a separate one at the Cuban Consulate who (apparently) was much more of a Nikolai Leonov-lookalike.

Did the assassination plotters deliberately use an "Oswald" imposter who somewhat resembled the Leonov/"Oswald" imposter? 

Yes - the plotters believed (correctly) that this would not only confuse later investigators but would induce later CIA internal investigators to hide the fact there were two men. (The CIA would never admit that their own "approved" operations using sensitive sources and methods had been compromised by people who had committed the assassination. Plus, who outside of the CIA would ever later believe that the CIA had NOT been a part of the assassination conspiracy? No one!)

Also note that the CIA was NOT going to share any details of the operations against Teresa Proenza with the HSCA in 1978, and that they managed to keep those operations secret until 1999. 

Whatever the overlap between the "approved" anti-Cuban diplomatic personnel operations and the highly provocative "Oswald" confrontation/operation at the Embassy, the CIA was determined to hide from the HSCA. (What the HSCA didn't know, they couldn't ask about.)

104-10052-10191.pdf (theblackvault.com)

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/19/2023 at 6:12 PM, Paul Jolliffe said:

The Cuban Consulate and the Cuban Embassy in Mexico City in 1963 were two separate buildings, both on Francisco Marquez Street. The CIA's surveillance post at 149 Francisco Marquez was across the street from both buildings. A CIA asset manning the 3rd floor apartment could manually photograph every visitor to the embassy, and a pulse camera could cover the consulate.

History Matters Archive - 2003 Release: Oswald, the CIA, and Mexico City ("Lopez Report"), pg (history-matters.com)

Hi Paul, i've started a thread trying to map out the cuban compound. Can you take a look at it and give me your opinion as to accuracy of the map of the cuban compound i have drawn?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO, LHO did visit MC and was also impersonated while there. 

We have three KGB agents, filmed and on the record, stating they met the bona fide LHO in MC at the Soviet Embassy. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYI4PqtIyE0

Start at the 1:03 mark. 

Jim DiEugenio has pointed out the makers of the above documentary are known state-hacks. 

It may be that the three KGB agents, including Valery Kostikov, were somehow induced to make their joint appearance; even simple bribery would suffice. 

But, barring that, it appears to me LHO did visit the Soviet Embassy, and made a display of himself, even showing a revolver.

I doubt the KBG agents would have met with LHO, on a Saturday no less, unless they had been (intentionally) tipped off that LHO was a CIA asset. So, Kostikov met with LHO to try to figure out what he was up to. 

My take is that the meeting between Kostikov and LHO was arranged by the CIA, to help build the LHO legend. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/23/2023 at 9:05 AM, Paul Jolliffe said:

Sandy,

Yes (probably.)

The CIA photographed the pudgy faced blond "Oswald" outside the Cuban Embassy (twice) on the 26th. We have no evidence that anyone ever showed those two images of that guy to either Azcue, Duran or Mirabal at the Cuban Consulate. (Why not? Because that would be a tacit admission that our Dallas "Oswald" was probably impersonated.)

I agree with your implication that it is hard to reconcile their physical descriptions of the man at the Cuban Consulate on the 27th with the images of the man outside the Cuban Embassy on the 26th.

Note that the Cuban Embassy "Oswald" on the 26th was highly provocative and threatening. His behavior (as we understand it from the FBI's SOLO material) would seem to have been "unprofessional."

Note also that as late as 1978, the CIA had persuaded Bob Blakey of the HSCA that a violent "Oswald" at the Cuban Embassy really had threatened to kill the president.

Castro 03.pdf (hood.edu)

My contention is that this "Oswald" confrontation at the Cuban Embassy on the 26th was a part of the assassination conspiracy, which was separate from the "approved" CIA operation/s against the Cuban diplomatic personnel, or the hunt for Popov's Mole, or anything else.

Two separate operations (at least.)

So yes, I do think (for now) that the evidence available to us indicates that there were two separate "Oswald" imposters: one at the Cuban Embassy on the 26th (the photographed pudgy faced blond man) and a separate one at the Cuban Consulate who (apparently) was much more of a Nikolai Leonov-lookalike.

Did the assassination plotters deliberately use an "Oswald" imposter who somewhat resembled the Leonov/"Oswald" imposter? 

Yes - the plotters believed (correctly) that this would not only confuse later investigators but would induce later CIA internal investigators to hide the fact there were two men. (The CIA would never admit that their own "approved" operations using sensitive sources and methods had been compromised by people who had committed the assassination. Plus, who outside of the CIA would ever later believe that the CIA had NOT been a part of the assassination conspiracy? No one!)

Also note that the CIA was NOT going to share any details of the operations against Teresa Proenza with the HSCA in 1978, and that they managed to keep those operations secret until 1999. 

Whatever the overlap between the "approved" anti-Cuban diplomatic personnel operations and the highly provocative "Oswald" confrontation/operation at the Embassy, the CIA was determined to hide from the HSCA. (What the HSCA didn't know, they couldn't ask about.)

104-10052-10191.pdf (theblackvault.com)

 

Interesting theory, Paul.

I couldn't follow everything you said because it contradicts some of my own notions. But that's not unusual. Whenever I hear a new hypothesis, I usually have to keep it in mind and mull it over for some time before ultimately accepting or rejecting it.

The only difference between what you believe and what I believe is that the two blond guys represent two Oswalds, and that they were used in two different CIA operations. If we were to ignore the pudgy-faced Oswald impersonator, our theories would be much the same if not identical.

I would like to created a thread titled "The two Blond Oswalds" where we can discuss and study the two impersonators. Since you have a developed (at  least somewhat) hypothesis for the pudgy one and I don't, I'd hope that you would contribute to the thread. Would you be willing to do that?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

IMHO, LHO did visit MC and was also impersonated while there. 

We have three KGB agents, filmed and on the record, stating they met the bona fide LHO in MC at the Soviet Embassy. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYI4PqtIyE0

Start at the 1:03 mark. 

Jim DiEugenio has pointed out the makers of the above documentary are known state-hacks. 

It may be that the three KGB agents, including Valery Kostikov, were somehow induced to make their joint appearance; even simple bribery would suffice. 

But, barring that, it appears to me LHO did visit the Soviet Embassy, and made a display of himself, even showing a revolver.

I doubt the KBG agents would have met with LHO, on a Saturday no less, unless they had been (intentionally) tipped off that LHO was a CIA asset. So, Kostikov met with LHO to try to figure out what he was up to. 

My take is that the meeting between Kostikov and LHO was arranged by the CIA, to help build the LHO legend. 

 

 

Benjamin,

At this point, it's impossible to say for certain exactly who appeared before the three Soviet agents. While in theory it could have been our Dallas "Oswald", there is no evidence of it apart from the belated say-so of these three men.

No photos or voice tapes at a time when the CIA had round-the-clock eyes and ears on the Soviet compound. That the alleged assassin made an appearance at the most highly sensitive intelligence outpost in the Western Hemisphere just two months before the assassination and left no discernible trace, well, I don't believe it. 

But that's old news - someone did go and have some kind of interaction with at least some of the men there. Your guess that this was some kind of "Oswald legend-building CIA operation is undoubtedly correct. But as to who that person really was, I just don't know. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

 

Interesting theory, Paul.

I couldn't follow everything you said because it contradicts some of my own notions. But that's not unusual. Whenever I hear a new hypothesis, I usually have to keep it in mind and mull it over for some time before ultimately accepting or rejecting it.

The only difference between what you believe and what I believe is that the two blond guys represent two Oswalds, and that they were used in two different CIA operations. If we were to ignore the pudgy-faced Oswald impersonator, our theories would be much the same if not identical.

I would like to created a thread titled "The two Blond Oswalds" where we can discuss and study the two impersonators. Since you have a developed (at  least somewhat) hypothesis for the pudgy one and I don't, I'd hope that you would contribute to the thread. Would you be willing to do that?

 

Yes, Sandy I would be happy to add whatever I could to such a thread. However, I am not sure how much I have to add. I don't know the identity of the pudgy faced blond visitor to the Cuban Embassy on the 26th, and (at least for now) we have no photos of the visitor to the Cuban Consulate on the 27th.

If by some miracle we got identities of the CIA's human assets in Mexico City in 1963, we could compare their physical descriptions with what we suspect about both visitors. But I doubt that information even exists anymore. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Gerry Down said:

Hi Paul, i've started a thread trying to map out the cuban compound. Can you take a look at it and give me your opinion as to accuracy of the map of the cuban compound i have drawn?

 

Gerry,

Yes, your map seems correct to me. Good work!

Here is a current street view of the old CIA listening post at 149 Francisco Marquez. It appears to be the same building from 1963. The CIA post was on the third floor.

149 Francisco Márquez - Google Maps

And across the street, the Cuban Consulate would have been in here:

149 Francisco Márquez - Google Maps

And down the block a little, the Cuban Embassy was about here:

164 Francisco Márquez - Google Maps

The block is not very big: this aerial view shows it before some more recent buildings were put up:

Metro Jose Vasconcelos, Mexico City - Google Maps

Gerry, I think your guess about the picture here being taken on Francisco Marquez is correct - it seems to show the boulevard with some trees.

Cuban-Compound-Aug-24th-2023-2.png

Your map is very helpful, and it raises an obvious question: Why didn't the Lopez Report include a map of the Cuban diplomatic compound?

My guess is that such a map might have stirred people to speculate that an "Oswald" made two appearances in September of 1963 - one at the Cuban Embassy and one at the Cuban Consulate.

(Did the CIA manage somehow to make sure the Lopez Report had no such map?)

Jim DiEugenio, is there any chance you could ask Ed Lopez if his report originally included a map of the Cuban diplomatic compound in Mexico City in 1963? If it didn't, why wasn't there one included?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Paul Jolliffe said:

Your map is very helpful, and it raises an obvious question: Why didn't the Lopez Report include a map of the Cuban diplomatic compound?

My guess is that such a map might have stirred people to speculate that an "Oswald" made two appearances in September of 1963 - one at the Cuban Embassy and one at the Cuban Consulate.

(Did the CIA manage somehow to make sure the Lopez Report had no such map?)

Jim DiEugenio, is there any chance you could ask Ed Lopez if his report originally included a map of the Cuban diplomatic compound in Mexico City in 1963? If it didn't, why wasn't there one included?

Interesting point. Why didn't the Lopez report include a map of the cuban compound? I've speculated a theory regarding this in my second post on the other thread. Could it have anything to do with the possibility the CIA had a second monitoring house on Zamora street which the CIA never admitted to having? Have a look at my second post on this thread:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Paul Jolliffe said:

Benjamin,

At this point, it's impossible to say for certain exactly who appeared before the three Soviet agents. While in theory it could have been our Dallas "Oswald", there is no evidence of it apart from the belated say-so of these three men.

No photos or voice tapes at a time when the CIA had round-the-clock eyes and ears on the Soviet compound. That the alleged assassin made an appearance at the most highly sensitive intelligence outpost in the Western Hemisphere just two months before the assassination and left no discernible trace, well, I don't believe it. 

But that's old news - someone did go and have some kind of interaction with at least some of the men there. Your guess that this was some kind of "Oswald legend-building CIA operation is undoubtedly correct. But as to who that person really was, I just don't know. 

PJ-

Agree, although your use of the word "belated" may be unfair---the KGB'ers were not asked by Westerners about LHO until to the Frontline interview. 

It was not like the KGB'ers suddenly "remembered" a fact, or changed their tune or recanted testimony. They may have been saying they met the real LHO, consistently, all along. 

I wonder if there are contemporary (to 1963)  internal Soviet cables, memos etc from the KGB'ers, saying something along the lines of, "This guy accused of shooting the US president is the same guy who visited the embassy." 

Seems to me I have read something along those lines....

 

 

Edited by Benjamin Cole
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/104-10429-10091.pdf

For what it is worth, the Russian defector Nosenko also said the real LHO visited the Soviet Embassy in September 1963. 

Pages six and seven

"The Mexico Legal Residency reported his (LHO's) visit to KGB headquarters (Mexico City) by cable"

Well, maybe Nosenko was dissembling too. 

But...sure seems likely the real LHO visited the Soviets Embassy in Mexico City....

How LHO got there, and back to the US, and why he was shadowed and impersonated, and why photographs of him were destroyed or never taken....

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

It seems to me that Lopez and the report are tiptoeing through the tulips. They say one thing in one place and another somewhere else.  Here is an example where the report says that they cannot confirm (nor deny the possibility) that there was an imposter...

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/lopezrpt_2003/html/LopezRpt_0264a.htm

Their approach seems also somewhat ham-handed.  They say that Lee spoke good Russian, so anyone speaking broken Russian could not be Lee.  Well, suppose when agitated and under pressure, Lee spoke broken Russian.  Or suppose Lee hired someone to impersonate him (for reasons unknown).

In another place the report acknowledges that Lee himself must have come to the Cuban embassy at least once because he filled out and signed a visa with a signature consistent with his handwriting. But they also say that they cannot confirm that it was Lee who visited the Cuban embassy.  

For whatever reason, including the possibility that Lopez/Hardway were denied information that they needed or were instructed to keep things purposefully vague by powers unknown, it seems as though they were incapable of coming completely to grips with the mystery that is Lee Oswald and Mexico City.

Edited by Pamela Brown
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Pamela Brown @Benjamin Cole

it seems as though they were incapable of coming completely to grips with the mystery that is Lee Oswald and Mexico City

Or... they fully understood what was to be done related to Mexico City and did it by repeatedly claiming he went despite all the evidence to the contrary.

Based on what they were told - this was their terrible conclusion.. So I reinvestigated it.

5a99b3b957456_LopezreportstatementaboutOswaldtriptoMexico.jpg.769c4885e984bce12daa6981e0cf9ae6.jpg

As I've said, if Oswald was at the LUNA during that time, his presence there was not acknowledged in the official docs - while these same official docs were stolen and manipulated by MX FBI assets.

"investigative assistance in the OSWALD case"

5a73406176f3e_64-03-24FBIHQ105-82555Sec111p37-OCHOAaddedinfointheremarkscolumnofFM-11notoriginallythere-redacted.jpg.b01b92baec4c49af876d7e1217c3403e.jpg752453798_Rafael_Hernndez_OchoaPhoto.jpg.d4241110401e34af6760fd51237a6688.jpg1371131912_63-10-26HoovertoRankin-OCHOAnamedasFBIresource.jpg.e07bfb93eb4c40daf22de9a18d45225a.jpg

ECHEVERRIA WAS CIA, OCHIA FBI.

1511097257_EchevarriaandOchoaoftheGobernacion.jpg.38ec55d4ff6a90abb77588dbc9e430b6.jpg

5a207cdd7a70b_63-11-26FBImexifile105-3702NARA124-10230-10442Anotehrbusline-ANAHUACaskedforallNorthbo-dbusrecordstobesenttoPIEDRASNEGRASbordercrossing11-26.thumb.jpg.22f6273bf1942bf4838cf1d757e508cc.jpg

 

image.thumb.jpeg.1156d1382d7dffc508726064ba0b2830.jpeg

566347750_63-10-02CE2527-Fronterabuspassengermanifest-Oswaldseat4-writtenbyBosch.jpg.f73f7f1552647988d3dbdfea8a84f9c1.jpg

    133955240_63-11-25FBI105-3702NARA124-10230-10432MexisourcescheckedallbuslinesOct1-2-3allNEGATIVEforOSWALDtravelp1Anahuacnowinvolved-highlighted.thumb.jpg.826a7796868f24129dbaad109136ee62.jpg   

 

image.png.7746e672549bc40d7b89c37578e22347.png 

1931956282_WCRBus340FronterawasnotOswald.jpg.55f8832d35751a66564fd071ddd85d64.jpg1114352780_BowendoesNOTIDOswaldasbeingthemannexttohimonthebustoMexicoCity.jpg.223a679a3f542b4b76f79536a26e4287.jpg

 

5a207c43aefe2_63-11-26CIAMexicosummaryhasOswaldarrivingonAnahuacbuslineandleavingsameOct1.jpg.2a594a01113466cd48c128aa2bb65207.jpg

 

5aba5ec7b3540_LITAMIL-9CIAassetwithinCubanEmbassyinMexicoCitysaysheneversawOswald.jpg.3ede49c0fc42566f4f755f641bd88adf.jpg

 

1522557893_75-05-02RussHolmes104-10428-10021CIAsummaryofOswaldinMexicoCityp1-2-CROPPEDp2Sept28info.jpg.b4d90a233093b0544660b02881ec139c.jpg

 

 

 

Edited by David Josephs
Link to comment
Share on other sites

David:

 

Please address Pam's issue with the visa, as you have done before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...