Morley Revelant Story

[Calvin Ye]

Jeff Morley stated on Twitter that he took down paywall on his website so that everyone could read the relevant story. Here is the link:

https://jfkfacts.substack.com/p/exclusive-whistleblower-cites-explosive

[Benjamin Cole]

6 hours ago, Calvin Ye said:

Jeff Morley stated on Twitter that he took down paywall on his website so that everyone could read the relevant story. Here is the link:

https://jfkfacts.substack.com/p/exclusive-whistleblower-cites-explosive

Thanks for posting. 

Long story, not quite the bombshell advertised, but lots of good stuff. 

Morley does stretch the truth a bit, and unnecessarily.  

"The HSCA was created in 1976 when Congress reopened the investigation of Kennedy’s murder amid revelations about CIA plots to assassinate foreign leaders. After a three-year investigation, the committee concluded that “in all probability” JFK had been caught in crossfire and killed by conspirators who could not be identified."--Morley

Actually, the HSCA said the SBT was correct, but that someone fired a gun in the GK area during the JFKA, and evidently missed (or fired a blank, or an intentional miss), and that JFK likely murdered as a result of a conspiracy. The HSCA did not contend JFK was struck by bullets from two different directions. 

For participants in the endless debate about whether the real LHO was in MC: 

"The congressional investigators doubted that claim after interviewing two retired CIA officers who said, independently, that Mexico City station chief Win Scott had shown them surveillance photos of Oswald. Their testimony led the committee to conclude that the CIA “probably” had obtained photos of Oswald in Mexico City."

That sure seems like the real LHO was in MC. There is more on the topic, including comments by a lady who said she photographed LHO in MC on behalf of the government. It sure seems like LHO was in MC. 

IMHO, there are no valid reasons for the ongoing secrecy regarding the JFK Records, and related records. It is just a snuff job on the truth.

 

 

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 08:20 PM by Benjamin Cole

[Ben Green]

I hold Jeff in extremely high esteem but I feel slightly underwhelmed by this 'revelation' given the billing it's had in recent days.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

1 hour ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Morley does stretch the truth a bit, and unnecessarily.  

Good catch on what the HSCA really said. Lots of old canards in this latest "smoking gun." Something will be coming from me or someone on our side eventually.

[Pat Speer]

2 hours ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Good catch on what the HSCA really said. Lots of old canards in this latest "smoking gun." Something will be coming from me or someone on our side eventually.

This story might lead somewhere, but is nothing as of now. 

What it amounts to is this. Some unidentified person told Jeff there are files in a building outside the control of the archives that contain a CIA review of the HSCA, which amounts to a damage control report. And this report made clear that the CIA had sought to mislead the HSCA.

While I do not really doubt such a report exists, or even that it exists in the building Jeff has identified, the fact this all comes from an anonymous source is a big big problem, and will probably doom the story to oblivion. 

NOW...if, say, someone from congress takes an interest, and Jeff's source comes out of the shadows and testifies as to what he/she saw before a house committee, well, then, it's possible this will lead to an actual bombshell. 

But as it is...not so much...

[Pat Speer]

5 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Thanks for posting. 

Long story, not quite the bombshell advertised, but lots of good stuff. 

Morley does stretch the truth a bit, and unnecessarily.  

"The HSCA was created in 1976 when Congress reopened the investigation of Kennedy’s murder amid revelations about CIA plots to assassinate foreign leaders. After a three-year investigation, the committee concluded that “in all probability” JFK had been caught in crossfire and killed by conspirators who could not be identified."--Morley

Actually, the HSCA said the SBT was correct, but that someone fired a gun in the GK area during the JFKA, and evidently missed (or fired a blank, or an intentional miss), and that JFK likely murdered as a result of a conspiracy. The HSCA did contend JFK was struck by bullets from two different directions. 

For participants in the endless debate about whether the real LHO was in MC: 

"The congressional investigators doubted that claim after interviewing two retired CIA officers who said, independently, that Mexico City station chief Win Scott had shown them surveillance photos of Oswald. Their testimony led the committee to conclude that the CIA “probably” had obtained photos of Oswald in Mexico City."

That sure seems like the real LHO was in MC. There is more on the topic, including comments by a lady who said she photographed LHO in MC on behalf of the government. It sure seems like LHO was in MC. 

IMHO, there are no valid reasons for the ongoing secrecy regarding the JFK Records, and related records. It is just a snuff job on the truth.

 

 

 

 

You made a typo, I believe.

You wrote: "The HSCA did contend JFK was struck by bullets from two different directions." when I think you meant to write "The HSCA did NOT contend JFK was struck by bullets from two different directions."  

Edited Tuesday at 08:19 PM by Pat Speer

[W. Tracy Parnell]

38 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

This story might lead somewhere, but is nothing as of now. 

What it amounts to is this. Some unidentified person told Jeff there are files in a building outside the control of the archives that contain a CIA review of the HSCA, which amounts to a damage control report. And this report made clear that the CIA had sought to mislead the HSCA.

While I do not really doubt such a report exists, or even that it exists in the building Jeff has identified, the fact this all comes from an anonymous source is a big big problem, and will probably doom the story to oblivion. 

NOW...if, say, someone from congress takes an interest, and Jeff's source comes out of the shadows and testifies as to what he/she saw before a house committee, well, then, it's possible this will lead to an actual bombshell. 

But as it is...not so much...

Yes, some good points Pat. Of course, the CIA IG could have sought to determine if any classified material had been compromised. That would not be surprising and is totally plausible. I am a little more skeptical that the report would say or even imply that the CIA had tried to mislead the HSCA as the unnamed source says. That could be just their interpretation of it.

[James DiEugenio]

Both the CIA informants inside the Cuban embassy said they never saw Oswald there.

And the CIA asked them twice.

When the CIA checked the photo box that day, there was no such picture.

The voice on the tapes was not Oswald, and the FBI confirmed this. 

This is all evidence at the time. Not years later.

It would be much to the CIA's benefit if they could produce a picture of Oswald.  Where is it?

And why did Phillips cover up for the lack?  His excuses were: tapes recycled and camera being out.

Both of those were neutered by the Lopez Report.

[Benjamin Cole]

2 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

You have a typo, I believe.

You wrote: "The HSCA did contend JFK was struck by bullets from two different directions." when I think you meant to write "The HSCA did NOT contend JFK was struck by bullets from two different directions."  

PS Thanks. Will fix.

[Benjamin Cole]

41 minutes ago, James DiEugenio said:

Both the CIA informants inside the Cuban embassy said they never saw Oswald there.

And the CIA asked them twice.

When the CIA checked the photo box that day, there was no such picture.

The voice on the tapes was not Oswald, and the FBI confirmed this. 

This is all evidence at the time. Not years later.

It would be much to the CIA's benefit if they could produce a picture of Oswald.  Where is it?

And why did Phillips cover up for the lack?  His excuses were: tapes recycled and camera being out.

Both of those were neutered by the Lopez Report.

JD--

Getting off-topic here, but...

The three Russians with whom LHO met in MC, including Kostikov, all told PBS they met the real LHO in MC. They were recoded and filmed for a Frontline special. There are also contemporary cables to Moscow about his visit.  After I:03 mark.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYI4PqtIyE0&rco=1

Then we have from Morley: 

"The congressional investigators doubted that claim after interviewing two retired CIA officers who said, independently, that Mexico City station chief Win Scott had shown them surveillance photos of Oswald. Their testimony led the committee to conclude that the CIA “probably” had obtained photos of Oswald in Mexico City."

Then also from Morley: 

The HSCA’s conclusion was corroborated last year. In an exclusive interview with JFK Facts, Andres Goyenechea, a former CIA employee who lives in Washington state, said he worked in the surveillance base overlooking the Soviet Embassy. His mother Greta Goyenechea (code name: LIEMPTY-14) was chief of the base for a decade and praised for competence by her CIA handlers. Goyenechea recalled that his mother told him that she had taken Oswald’s picture “coming and going” from the Soviet Embassy, and that she had delivered the film to the CIA’s courier.

---30---

It appears LHO was also impersonated in MC, likely by US intel, but possibly also by Russians. 

My take is the real LHO visited the Russian Embassy, and also the Cuban Embassy, but he was also impersonated at the Cuban Embassy. There was a fake phone call to the Russian Embassy (I may be mixing up some details). 

I wish I knew the answer why the CIA never gave up the photos of LHO, or admitted it had surveilled LHO in MC. 

My guess is that LHO was being run by the CIA, and as an organization they decided the safest thing was to destroy any and all evidence that even remotely linked them to LHO, and deny they had anything to do with LHO, or even interviewed him after his return from the Soviet Union. 

Morley has shown that LHO was a topic of intense interest for the CIA in the Soviet Union and after he came back, but they never admitted to that. 

 

 

 

 

[James DiEugenio]

If the Russians met with him, then where is the picture of him entering the embassy?

And why did they not mention him on the next day calls.

Understand, these are really KGB agents.

They wanted no part of a conspiracy that would endanger Moscow.

Just look at the story they told about Oswald.  Does that much up with what we know about him?  

Let me know if you are unaware of it. But as one observer said, it was out of Chekhov.

[Benjamin Cole]

3 hours ago, James DiEugenio said:

If the Russians met with him, then where is the picture of him entering the embassy?

And why did they not mention him on the next day calls.

Understand, these are really KGB agents.

They wanted no part of a conspiracy that would endanger Moscow.

Just look at the story they told about Oswald.  Does that much up with what we know about him?  

Let me know if you are unaware of it. But as one observer said, it was out of Chekhov.

"Just look at the story they (KGB'ers) told about Oswald.  Does that much up with what we know about him?"  --JD

I surmise you are referring to the LHO drama with the revolver, inside the Soviet Embassy.  

Actually, LHO slashed his wrists in Moscow (1959), in a successful faux-suicide attempt to gain entry to the Soviet Union. Drama!

So, yes, LHO was capable of drama when the role called for it. He appeared on radio shows (back when radio was big), he got into fights on city streets (New Orleans). 

LHO resisted arrest in the Texas Theater.  He may have participated in exile military training. He slugged a sergeant when in the Marines. 

...

Was LHO shadowed in MC, impersonated? Likely. Was paperwork ginned up? Probably.

Did the CIA destroy true records that explained what they were doing with LHO in MC? Very likely. Angleton took Scott's records, as I recall. 

just IMHO

 

 

 

[W. Tracy Parnell]

Joe Backes takes Morley to task:

Where is Morley's bombshell? - by Joseph Backes (substack.com)

[Benjamin Cole]

1 hour ago, W. Tracy Parnell said:

Joe Backes takes Morley to task:

Where is Morley's bombshell? - by Joseph Backes (substack.com)

WTP--

A harsh review, but then sometimes there is jaundice in the JFKA/RFK1A research community.  

Side note: For me, the potty-mouthed language always makes the writer/speaker look juvenile.

I guess this is the new norm, but the English language has vast reservoirs of choice expressions and words. 

 

[Denis Morissette]

Even if we had a photo of Oswald in Mexico, CTers would say the photo is fake. They’d find differences in the size of the chin, the head, etc You know the drill!