Morley and Nagle on Mexico City

[James DiEugenio]

Unfortunately its behind a wall.

Apparently there is new material in it.

 

https://jfkfacts.substack.com/p/the-man-who-photographed-oswald

[Gerry Down]

If those two Mexican agents talked, it could blow the case wide open. 

[Larry Hancock]

From the memo it appears the photo in question was taken of someone at the Soviet embassy...."thought to be Oswald".

On another note I can say that Hosty was quite clear during his talk at a Lancer conference and later with me personally that his FBI buddies in MC told him in no certain terms that they  had heard Oswald was under surveillance in MC and had been photographed.

[Jonathan Cohen]

1 minute ago, Larry Hancock said:

On another note I can say that Hosty was quite clear during his talk at a Lancer conference and later with me personally that his FBI buddies in MC told him in no certain terms that they  had heard Oswald was under surveillance in MC and had been photographed.

Which, if true, would naturally destroy the years-long insistence of many, many members of this forum that Oswald was never physically present in Mexico City...

[Benjamin Cole]

How would Mexican intel even have known LHO was in Mexico City? 

If true, then likely they were informed as such by US intel. 

How would US intel know LHO was in MC? 

From his border crossing? That seems unlikely. Paper records in 1963, and thousands of people crossing every day? BTW, the last time I went to Tijuana, I walked across the border without so much as a hi-de-do. 

US intel spotted and ID'ed LHO in MC? 

My guess is US intel set up the LHO-Kostikov meeting, meaning they had sent LHO to MC, so they knew he was there. 

[Benjamin Cole]

9 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

From the memo it appears the photo in question was taken of someone at the Soviet embassy...."thought to be Oswald".

On another note I can say that Hosty was quite clear during his talk at a Lancer conference and later with me personally that his FBI buddies in MC told him in no certain terms that they  had heard Oswald was under surveillance in MC and had been photographed.

LH--

Hosty told you in no (un)certain terms? Or "no certain terms"?

Did Hosty indicate it was the FBI or CIA that had LHO under surveillance? 

[Jean Ceulemans]

Just some thoughts : once they knew LHO had been in Mexico (or even as little as "had wanted to go to Mexico")

intel would not hesitate to use that to their benefit.  At least some of that stuff was made up post factum (to be used or not).

So one fact, doesn't exclude another.   Having a picture of him : keep it just in case... untill that it doesn't exist.  The same for "a meeting", "a date with a girl",... if we have it we keep it, if we don't have it : we could fabricate it.  Just in case...

And wouldn't the CIA just love to have a guy like LHO available ? He could be connected to pretty much everybody (pro-Castro, communists, socialistst, ACLU, extreme right, left... You name it, he was there, he was a member, written letters, etccccc

That is not a usefull idiot, that's an extremely usefull idiot..., at least to certain elements, IMO.  

On 11/22 the CIA was ready to tell LBJ pretty much any story they wanted to (or whatever LBJ needed), and they could "proof" it.

Like a menu from Chez Antony : "Today's Suggestion" or "Specialty of the House" or something really exotic perhaps ?

Any country would love to have an IA like that...

So, did it really happpen or not ? Mmmmm... the information sure was available, that's important (Win Scott would have done a terrible job if he wasn't on top of it all to direct the information, again just MO).

To what extend it backfired, that's the million dollar question

Edited October 6, 2023 by Jean Ceulemans

[Larry Hancock]

Hosty said that he had been told directly by his friends who had been working in Mexico City at the time that Oswald had been  photographed in Mexico City, that he had been observed making contact with Russian embassy staff and that pictures of him had been obtained. 

They did not specify who had taken the pictures, but as far as I know the FBI itself did not maintain photo surveillance teams nor   conduct photo surveillance of the diplomatic facilities, that was done by the CIA.

As I recall Hosty did not state who actually did the surveillance or photography, just that it had occurred. He may have said more but at this point in time I'm certain he made those specific remarks.

[Benjamin Cole]

12 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

Hosty said that he had been told directly by his friends who had been working in Mexico City at the time that Oswald had been  photographed in Mexico City, that he had been observed making contact with Russian embassy staff and that pictures of him had been obtained. 

They did not specify who had taken the pictures, but as far as I know the FBI itself did not maintain photo surveillance teams nor   conduct photo surveillance of the diplomatic facilities, that was done by the CIA.

As I recall Hosty did not state who actually did the surveillance or photography, just that it had occurred. He may have said more but at this point in time I'm certain he made those specific remarks.

LH--

Thanks. 

Well, as usual, a puzzle. 

Stray thought: I am in the camp that contends the real LHO was in MC, and did meet with Kostikov. He was likely impersonated in MC also. 

So why no LHO photos, or records of surveillance, while LHO was there?

If Hosty was told the truth, my guess is a lot of evidence was immediately destroyed after the JFKA. It was "too hot' to have around, as it was evidence of a relationship between the CIA and LHO. 

Even if LHO had become a lone wolf by 11/22, the CIA could not have the story come out that a CIA asset had murdered the president. (In fact, I believe there were at least two gunman in Dallas). 

Who were the two Mexican nationals who surveilled LHO? I wonder if they are still alive. 

 

 

[David Andrews]

Larry, not contradicting, but did the agents who ID'd Oswald ID him correctly?  From photos and direct observation, or from rumor and disinfo (false hotel/transportation records and Oz-name dropping by the "subject")? 

In the absence of photos, can we ever know?

It would seem that those photos would be used to bolster the WCR, did they exist.

Edited October 7, 2023 by David Andrews

[Larry Hancock]

In that regard, and anecdotally, Host was told explicitly by his FBI contacts that it was Oswald himself who was photographed.   However, based on only the document linked above its possible that photos were taken at the Russian embassy and misidentified as Oswald - and that just got translated into rumor and gossip that it was him.

Nothing ever seems definitive in these incidents - although it could have been resolved early on if the names had been provided and the individuals interviewed....which might cause one to think that it would have been confirmed as Oswald.  On the other hand we have the perennial question of why an actual photo of Oswald in Mexico City would be concealed at all since it would simply support the official story of his activities?

The counter to that is that CIA was so ultra-sensitive to exposing the extent of its activities in MC, at all levels including photo surveillance, that it blocked the showing of anything that might become public and expose that.  As I recall they went ballistic when a request was made to show a photo from Mexico in Dallas for identification purposes related to Jack Ruby.....there was a whole series of memos stonewalling it simply on the basis that under no circumstances must photo surveillance of any sort be shared if there was a potential that it might become public and expose sensitive national security activities in a foreign country (including the fact that it would jeopardize the political relationship that enabled that activity).

  -- to quote Paul Simon in Slip Sliding Away  -  "the answer is unavailable... to the mortal man"

[David Andrews]

Thanks. Larry.

[David Josephs]

FBI looking for traces of OSWALD all thru Nov.  None found and they buried these reports with coded names. (see bottom composite)

ANY evidence he was done there would have been brought out, front and center, but they couldn't do that since he wasn't there... only the legend exists.

On the other hand, we have to give some thought to the Davis/Oswald/Cobb/Hotel Luna connection.  All we have is the word of those I wouldn't believe too easily: Davis and Cobb.  

On Sept 22 - from the Lafitte notebook - it says "OSWALD - MEX CITY GAUDET?"
On Sept 27 there is a note about DAVIS and OSWALD at the LUNA.

Hosty eh.  Real fountain of reliable JFK assassination info is he?

2 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

As I recall they went ballistic when a request was made to show a photo from Mexico in Dallas for identification purposes related to Jack Ruby.....there was a whole series of memos stonewalling it simply on the basis that under no circumstances must photo surveillance of any sort be shared if there was a potential that it might become public and expose sensitive national security activities in a foreign country (including the fact that it would jeopardize the political relationship that enabled that activity)

Couple things about that Larry.  The documents related to ODUM showing Marge the MM photos - I believe suggest they were trying to find HIDELL as this CIA report mentions the FBI still not knowing who HIDELL was on the 23rd after meeting with them.

The pdf below comes 4 days after 104-10013-10189 where CIA questions publishing the MM photo at all while mentioning "since Oswald mother has no copy of photos shown her..."  This from ODUM is July 1964.

64-09-28 DISCUSSION RELATED TO ODUM SHOWING MRS OSWALD MYSTERY MAN PHOTOS CROPPED - TWICE - ONCE BEFORE 11-23 docid-32352812.pdf

PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION
ON THE ASSASSINATION OF
PRESIDENT JOHN F. KENNEDY
STATE OF TEXAS,
County of Dallas, ss :

I, Bardwell D. Odum, having first been duly sworn, depose as follows:

I am presently a Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Justice, and have been employed in such a capacity since June 15, 1942.

On November 23, 1963, while acting officially in my capacity as a Special Agent of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, I obtained a photograph of an unknown individual, furnished to the Federal Bureau of Investigation by the Central Intelligence Agency, and proceeded to the Executive Inn, a motel, at Dallas, Texas, where Marina Oswald was staying.

In view of the source of this picture, and, in order to remove all background data which might possibly have disclosed the location where the picture was taken, I trimmed off the background. The straight cuts made were more quickly done than a complete trimming of the silhouette and I considered them as effective for the desired purpose.

I desired to show this photograph to Marina Oswald in an attempt to identify the individual portrayed in the photograph and to determine if he was an associate of Lee Harvey Oswald.

It was raining and almost dark. I went to the door of Marina Oswald's room and knocked, identifying myself. Marguerite Oswald opened the door slightly and, upon being informed that I wished to speak to Marina Oswald, told me that Marina Oswald was completely exhausted and could not be interviewed. Marguerite Oswald did not admit me to the motel room. I told her I desired to show a photograph to Marina Oswald, and Marguerite Oswald again said that Marina was completely exhausted and could not be interviewed due to that fact. I then showed Marguerite Oswald the photograph in question. She looked at it briefly and stated that she had never seen this individual. I then departed the Executive Inn. The conversation with Marguerite Oswald and the exhibition of the photograph took place while I was standing outside the door to the room and Marguerite Oswald was standing inside with the door slightly ajar.

Attached hereto are two photographic copies of the front and back of a photograph.* I have examined these copies and they are exact copies of the photograph of the unknown individual which I showed to Mrs. Marguerite Oswald on November 23, 1963.

Signed this 10th day of July 1964.
(s) Bardwell D. Odum,
BARDWELL D. ODUM.

 

Hoover took the info he got from HOSTY from his I&NS contact JEFF WOOSLEY on Oct 18th and had SA PECK and others look for traces of OSWALD in MX as I think he knew Oswald wasn't there the minute he gets the 10/10 cable.  Anyway, below are the summary reports of not only scores of assets but to the Gobernacion which their asset OCHOA oversees.  OCHOA provides all the MX Oswald evidence. 

At the bottom is the file inventory for the FBI with those 5 reports highlighted.

Oswald at the Cuban or Soviet compounds = Red Herring

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Larry Hancock]

That was indeed one of the related incidents over material from MC that I recall David, but I also know that there also a separate chain of CIA communications expressing virtual panic over material that might expose their activities in MC - and of course it was the CIA who had an immense infrastructure and political connections to pretect in terms of doing espionage in Mexico, not in regard to just Mexico but all of Central America.  There electronic and film and travel surveillance "takes" were routinely provided to multiple nations and were the backbone of monitoring Cuban covert activities throughout central and even south America.

As to reliability, personally I think JFK research in general sometimes goes over the edge in judging reliability based on whether sources are saying what we expect to hear, or want to hear.  Probably better to admit that to a large extent we are simply left to make subjective calls on credibility and reliability.

I found Hosty to be quite sincere, but also to only talk about what he was interested in, and to totally avoid certain direct questions - particularly in regard to FBI knowledge of Oswald in Dallas, and the FBI monitoring of Oswald in contact with "subversives", as reported in his very early remarks to Secret Service, remarks heard by DPD officers. Which also reinforces the issue that we have to accept that information from virtually any source can be "situational".

 

 

Edited October 7, 2023 by Larry Hancock

[Paul Brancato]

4 hours ago, Larry Hancock said:

That was indeed one of the related incidents over material from MC that I recall David, but I also know that there also a separate chain of CIA communications expressing virtual panic over material that might expose their activities in MC - and of course it was the CIA who had an immense infrastructure and political connections to pretect in terms of doing espionage in Mexico, not in regard to just Mexico but all of Central America.  There electronic and film and travel surveillance "takes" were routinely provided to multiple nations and were the backbone of monitoring Cuban covert activities throughout central and even south America.

As to reliability, personally I think JFK research in general sometimes goes over the edge in judging reliability based on whether sources are saying what we expect to hear, or want to hear.  Probably better to admit that to a large extent we are simply left to make subjective calls on credibility and reliability.

I found Hosty to be quite sincere, but also to only talk about what he was interested in, and to totally avoid certain direct questions - particularly in regard to FBI knowledge of Oswald in Dallas, and the FBI monitoring of Oswald in contact with "subversives", as reported in his very early remarks to Secret Service, remarks heard by DPD officers. Which also reinforces the issue that we have to accept that information from virtually any source can be "situational".

 

 

Last paragraph is sure interesting - Hosty did not want to talk about the subjects he would have known the most about. He is quite sincere about what he was interested in (or perhaps what he was interested in talking to you about?). Do you think that Hosty knew much more than he was telling? You mention contact with subversives. Could you elaborate? What is it that you suspect Hosty may have held back about Oswald’s activity in Dallas re subversives? 

Edited October 8, 2023 by Paul Brancato