Mapping out the Cuban Compound (Mexico City)

[Gerry Down]

I'm trying to map out the 1963 cuban compound in Mexico City in order to see what angles the CIA cameras located at 149 Francisco Marquez Street were able to pick up and what they were not able to pick up.

I've checked the Lopez report and the only map in that entire report is of the soviet compound and the two CIA surveillance stations that were monitoring it - https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/lopezrpt_2003/html/LopezRpt_0045a.htm .

Even that map is not great as it does not show where the soviet consulate is inside the compound, only the soviet embassy. BTW, does anyone know where the soviet consulate was inside the compound in relation to the soviet embassy?

Getting back to the cuban compound. According to the Lopez report, “The Cuban diplomatic compound covered one city block in Mexico City between Tacubaya, Francisco Marquez and Zamora Streets”. Here is what the Lopez report says:

 

LINK: https://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/lopezrpt_2003/html/LopezRpt_0025a.htm

It would appear that Tacubaya street has since been renamed to “Cto. Interior Mtro. Jose Vasconcelos”. The reason I know this is because on the map of the soviet compound above is the street labelled “Tacubaya” and the corresponding street to this on a modern google map is “Cto. Interior Mtro. Jose Vasconcelos”.

Therefore the cuban compound was located between Cto. Interior Mtro. Jose Vasconcelos, Francisco Marquez and Zamora streets on a modern google map. Using this, I have mapped out what I believe is a rough outline of the cuban compound in 1963 on a modern google map including the 3 entrances which entered the cuban compound from Francisco Marquez street (the 3 entrances are mentioned in the Lopez report as being the cuban embassy entrance on the corner of Tacubaya and Francisco Marquez, an automobile entrance which was next to the cuban embassy entrance and the cuban consulate entrance which was located at the corner of Francisco Marquez and Zamora).

I presume these 3 entrances were all located on Francisco Marquez street in order to be picked up by the CIA monitoring house at 149 Francisco Marquez street. I have presumed the cuban embassy entrance and cuban consulate entrance opened straight out onto Francisco Marquez street and were not diagonal entrances similar to the diagonal entrance going in to the soviet compound. I am just assuming this, I have no actual knowledge of what these two entrances looked like.

Here is a 1960s image of the cuban compound which appears to have been taken from Francisco Marquez street. I presume the white building is the cuban embassy rather than the cuban consulate, and I presume the gate shown at the front is the automobile entrance mentioned in the Lopez report:

What do people think? Is my map of the cuban compound which is said to have been 1 city block and with 3 entrances leading out on to Francisco Marquez street correct? Was there a wall going all the way around the back of the compound as i have shown in my rough map?

Do you have any better, ie accurate, map showing the layout of this compound?

[Gerry Down]

If we were to take the Lopez report literally, then the cuban compound took up the whole of the block. And assuming the block we see there now in 2023 is the same as in 1963, then the block would include the southern tail section as shown in my map above. This tail section has a boundary with a pedestrian walkway. Though this pedestrian walkway could have been an actual street back in 1963 and was possibly converted to a walkway in recent years. Here is an image of the southern tail section today. The photo also shows a green wall with barb wire on top which is possibly a section of the original white wall that apparently went all the way around the compound. 

The Lopez report gives the impression that the only entrances into the cuban compound were from Francisco Marquez street. And hence why the CIA only needed one monitoring house on Francisco Marquez street to monitor those entrances. However if there was a continuous 10 foot high wall all the way around the compound, this appears to pose a problem in relation to Zamora street as that street has two rather old looking buildings on it. Here are those two old looking buildings:

And here:

So if the cuban compound was to encompass one city block and the block is the same now as it was in 1963, then these two old buildings would have had to form part of the cuban compound. If these buildings did form part of the cuban compound, then why didn't the CIA monitor those entrances? Were these staff entrances and therefore the CIA was not interested in them? In other words, the CIA was only interested in seeing members of the public who entered the embassy and consulates?

One noticeable issue in relation to the CIA monitoring house at 149 Francisco Marquez street is that that monitoring house would have had to monitor the cuban embassy entrance at a diagonal across the tree lined street. These trees can be seen in the old photo of the embassy in opening post above. One would imagine these trees would have obscured the view of the entrance to the cuban embassy. Though maybe not, as i recall at some stage seeing some of the photos of random people entering and leaving the cuban embassy or consulate.

The thing that has stuck out for me here is did the CIA really only have one monitoring house, the one at 149 Francisco Marquez street, or did they also have one on Zamora street monitoring people entering and leaving the old style buildings on Zamora street. And the CIA did not want to admit to having that monitoring house for some reason? Perhaps the person who operated the camera in that house was a liability in some way and the CIA could not risk allowing the HSCA (ie Lopez and Hardway) to interview them. 

Additionally, has this anything to do with why there is no map of the cuban compound in the Lopez report? To obscure the fact there were entrances to the cuban compound off Zamora street (to the old style buildings) well out of view of the only monitoring house the CIA were admitting to having at 149 Francisco Marquez street?

[Paul Jolliffe]

Gerry,

Good questions.

(I hope to have an answer soon as to why the current version of the Lopez Report has no Cuban Compound map. If I get an answer, I will let you know promptly.)

Meanwhile, those two houses you identified do look as if they could have been there in 1963. And if so, then they presumably were a part of the Cuban Compound. 

The CIA was testing a pulse camera aimed at the Cuban Consulate on Friday, September 27 and (apparently, according to its own words) "(The base agent) used the K-100 with the 150 mm lens for one day, turning in ten fee (sic) of 16 mm film . . . "

Oswald, the CIA, and Mexico City ("Lopez Report") - II. CIA Surveillance Operations (history-matters.com)

"On October 1 the Mexico City station sent "bulk materials" to Headquarters by an untraceable transmittal manifest in a diplomatic pouch "to be held in registry until picked up by Michael C. Choaden presently TDY HQS." ("Michael C. Choaden" was an alias used by the CIA's David. A. Phillips. Phillips, of course, was the godfather of the DRE, having founded it in Havana in the late 1950's. By the fall of 1963, Phillips was the chief of anti-Castro operations in Mexico City - the Cuba desk.)

https://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/hsca/lopezrpt/pdf/LopezRpt_2_CIA_Surveil.pdf

So swore Dan Hardway.

But what's fascinating is Hardway's belief that the mysterious "bulk package" contained . . . the now missing (and infamous) ten feet of footage of the CIA's coverage of the Cuban Compound on September 27, the very day that our "Oswald" allegedly visited the Cuban Consulate!

(See this clip of Hardway from the 27 minute mark):

https://www.c-span.org/video/?321703-2/oswald-cia-mexico-city

Might that ten feet of 16 mm film have revealed that the CIA had a second, undisclosed observation post?

Maybe.

Could it have revealed that our Dallas "Oswald" was impersonated at the Cuban Consulate?

Absolutely.

That's why I doubt it will ever see the light of day (if it still exists.)

 

 

[Paul Jolliffe]

Below is the correct link to the Dan Hardway deposition which I quoted here:

 "On October 1 the Mexico City station sent "bulk materials" to Headquarters by an untraceable transmittal manifest in a diplomatic pouch "to be held in registry until picked up by Michael C. Choaden presently TDY HQS." ("Michael C. Choaden" was an alias used by the CIA's David. A. Phillips. Phillips, of course, was the godfather of the DRE, having founded it in Havana in the late 1950's. By the fall of 1963, Phillips was the chief of anti-Castro operations in Mexico City - the Cuba desk.)

Doc.-156-1.-Dan-L.-Hardway-Declaration.pdf (aarclibrary.org)

[Gerry Down]

This document suggests the Embassy and Consulate buildings in the cuban compound were "parallel" to one another:

LINK: https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=62964#relPageId=3

In my sketch in my opening post i have drawn the embassy and the consulate co-linear to one another. 

[Gerry Down]

With regard to the first image here, the top picture in that image apparently shows the north west section of the cuban compound and shows the entrance to the cuban consulate:

And this is what the old cuban consulate entrance looks like today. The angled corner is still apparent: