Jump to content
The Education Forum

The Odio Incident


Tim Gratz
 Share

Recommended Posts

James I should have made it clear in the above post that it was the

26th and Communist leaders that gave me instructions to join the CIA anti- Castro

group,and was not a request by Bureau agents. (Harry Dean)

Thanks, Harry.

Did you ever get any sense as to how the Communist leaders viewed Manuel Ray? Even though he was anti-Castro, did they see him as being different than contemporaries like Jose Miro Cardona and Tony Varona?

I ask as it relates to how right minded CIA guys like Morales and Phillips saw Manuel Ray, and what they could do to agitate the widening divide.

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 166
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

James I should have made it clear in the above post that it was the

26th and Communist leaders that gave me instructions to join the CIA anti- Castro

group,and was not a request by Bureau agents. (Harry Dean)

Thanks, Harry.

Did you ever get any sense as to how the Communist leaders viewed Manuel Ray? Even though he was anti-Castro, did they see him as being different than contemporaries like Jose Miro Cardona and Tony Varona?

I ask as it relates to how right minded CIA guys like Morales and Phillips saw Manuel Ray, and what they could do to agitate the widening divide.

James

James

The 26th Of July Movement, with the Communist Party leaders in Chicago and elsewhere, were only concerned with pushing the 'powerful' Fair Play For Cuba Committee agenda, confident that it, they, and Castro would succeed. There were no statements from them to my knowledge re; Manuel Ray in particular. They grouped all anti-Castro movements as the common enemy.

Harry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The 26th Of July Movement, with the Communist Party leaders in Chicago and elsewhere, were only concerned with pushing the 'powerful' Fair Play For Cuba Committee agenda, confident that it, they, and Castro would succeed. There were no statements from them to my knowledge re; Manuel Ray in particular. They grouped all anti-Castro movements as the common enemy. (Harry Dean)

Thanks, Harry. Appreciated as always.

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Re Steve's Post #43.

This is a VERY interesting thought.

I, like many others, suspect LHO was acting in some capacity for US intelligence.

Our country was by the fall of 1963 concerned about violence from both pro and anti Castro Cubans.

What if Oswald had indeed made the remark attributed to him, that anti-Castro Cubans should have shot Kennedy over the BOP? Perhaps, as Steve suggests, he was an agent provocateur, trying to "flush out"anti Castro Cubans who might take violent actions against Kennedy.

I believe Gerry Hemming has stated that at least one occasion he was requested to kill Kennedy but he was convinced it was a "set up".

If indeed LHO was acting for the US, Steve's suggestion is perfectly logical and makes sense of the Odio incident.

It is at least a possibility deserving serious consideration.

I don't think anyone else has suggested this possibilty before.

Good thinking, Steve!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim,

Re Steve's Post #43.

This is a VERY interesting thought.

I, like many others, suspect LHO was acting in some capacity for US intelligence.

Our country was by the fall of 1963 concerned about violence from both pro and anti Castro Cubans.

What if Oswald had indeed made the remark attributed to him, that anti-Castro Cubans should have shot Kennedy over the BOP?  Perhaps, as Steve suggests, he was an agent provocateur, trying to "flush out"anti Castro Cubans who might take violent actions against Kennedy.

I don't think anyone else has suggested this possibilty before.

Good thinking, Steve!

Thank you.

I believe the same thing was happening in the Parrot Jungle Pet place in Florida.

Steve

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's important for historical accuracy to recall that all three intelligence

agencies (CIA, FBI and the regional MI groups like the 111th and 112th)

had very active programs underway in 1963 against both sides of the

Cuban conflict.

All three groups, with the lead by the FBI and CIA were actively penetrating, bugging, monitoring and performing psych ops and more overt disruption against the FPCC not to mention Counter Intelligence against Cuban intelligence.

All three groups were monitoring targeted exile groups who might engage

in missions against Cuba from U.S. soil and all were active in trying to

identify and disrupt individuals involved in organizing and supporting such

actions. An example of that can be seen in the sting run against Masen

by a combination of MI and FBI (with Ellsworth and ATF totally out of the loop)

with the objective of finding out more about the Cubans talking about a new

military action against Cuba.

If you belive Oswald was being used by U.S. intelligence as a "dangle" as I do, then standard practice would be to have him associate with any Cubans of whichever stripe and change his tune to match the circumstances. That gives maximum "production" and the agencies watching him would be interested in anybody who approached him from either direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you belive Oswald was being used by U.S. intelligence as a "dangle" as I do, then standard practice would be to have him associate with any Cubans of whichever stripe and change his tune to match the circumstances. That gives maximum "production" and the agencies watching him would be interested in anybody who approached him from either direction.

I agree with Larry,

Oswald working both sides would make him feel as if he was doing his "job", which he was, little did he know, this all led to him being set up as the scape goat ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Larry,

If you belive Oswald was being used by U.S. intelligence as a "dangle" as I do, then standard practice would be to have him associate with any Cubans of whichever stripe and change his tune to match the circumstances.  That gives maximum "production" and the agencies watching him would be interested in anybody who approached him from either direction.

And isn't it interesting that in spite of taking some rather public pro-Castro positions - leafletting, radio debates, street fights, etc. that as far as we know, Oswald was not approached by anyone from the pro-Castro camp.

It was only anti-Castro people who sought him out, or that he sought out - visiting Bringuer and Bannister, etc.

Steve Thomas

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thought that Oswald was an agent/provacateur has run through my head many times. Even in jail, he seemed overly anxious to tie the ACLU into his actions, when he'd only been to one meeting, and that was with Michael Paine. His dragging the FPCC into his New Orleans actions, when he'd never met a single FPCC representative face to face, is perhaps the best example. And then, of course, there are the backyard photographs (which may or may not be faked--I still can't decide) which tie in two opposing groups of American communists.

An often overlooked dangle I believe is Oswald's late night phone call to Mrs. Horace Twiford, while on his way to Mexico. To me this is an obvious attempt to tie Twiford, a member of the Socialist Labor Party, into Oswald's Mexican excursion, and thus the assassination attempt. Mrs. Twiford said Oswald asked if he could come by and talk to her husband, and she said no because her husband was out of town. The WC went to great pains to show that Oswald could have made this call from a bus stop on his way into Houston. But Mrs. Twiford was under the impression it was a local call. If it was a local call, however, that would mean that Oswald had arrived in Houston by means other than Continental Trailways, which would imply he had an accomplice, which would make his appearance in Dallas at the Odios possible.

Well, if there's anything that people who knew Oswald could agree on, it's that he was very polite with strangers, even aloof. And I just don't see him trying to stop by Twiford's house late at night unless he was asked to do so. A second trait of Oswald's on which people seem to agree is that he was cheap, and I don't see him paying for a 6 mile cab ride (each way) to Twiford's just to talk to a man he's never met and never plans to see again for a few hours in the middle of the night. The WC went to great lengths to show how Oswald could have saved up just enough to pay for his trip to Mexico, but they never mentioned his setting aside money for a cab ride. In fact, they made great hay over Oswald taking a cab on the day of the assassination, to show how desperate he was to escape. I seem to remember they even insisted it was the first cab ride of his life. And Oswald couldn't have expected the Twifords to pick him up and drop him off so late at night, his never having met them, could he? That doesn't sound reasonable at all. Besides, Mrs. Twiford's recollection was that he said he wanted to stop by.

Oswald was with someone else in Houston, probably Angel and Leopoldo. They either drove there or were flown, perhaps by David Ferrie. Mrs. Twiford, intriguingly, stated that Oswald said he was flying to Mexico. If Oswald was hoping the Twifords would pick him up he would have had to explain why he wanted to be picked up and dropped off at the bus station when he was flying out. The Houston Trailways station and airport were miles apart.

I conclude therefore that it's probable Oswald's phone call to Twiford was an attempt to drag yet another leftist into the assassination web, the web in which Oswald himself was entangled.

Edited by Pat Speer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pat, right on target. When you look a little further at Twiford's Merchant

Marine background and add in the interviews by a researcher who has found

Oswald apparently spent a good deal of time down by the docks in NO talking

to seaman coming in and hanging around the boats....well you could get the idea that one of his minor assignments was to poke around looking for ways for people to get in or out to Cuba....something the FBI and even MI was extremely sensitive aobut in 1963. That was part of their FPCC crackdown.

Then consider his appearance at McKewons, trying to trap him into another gun dealing rap....and McKewon's background was with Castro.

When you look at the things Oswald was doing - well if he wasn't a dangle they should have been watching him like a hawk anyway.

And then there is the thing Oswald didn't do (in tribute to Holmes). Oswald, the outspoken, always ready to debate, supposed Marxist political student....didn't ever hunt up any actual Socialists or Marxists.....even in the Soviet Union he appears to have avoided personally entering into any of the available political forums. He would write (think paper trail) to the organizations at length but as far as contacting them in person no dice......and we know he wasn't bashful.

You might almost think it was the "game" that interested him, not the politics per se.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely, the game has winners and losers...

The game with David Ferrie, the game of defector and counter-defector, the extremes that Oswald went to to involve those groups Pat mentioned are obvious signs of manipulation, and LHO should be seen as a program (or LEGEND) rather than a person, like the Minsk diaries and embassy appeals, the Connally letter.... Read some Grahame Greene or John Le Carre and you will get this sense that people use allegiance, alliance and identification in multiple orders of false ways, and Oswald was of that special time, of that era, in that Milieux.

For the agencies and commisssions (and Tim Gratz ) to walk us through a "Communist" conspiracy based on Oswald, is almost laughable at this point.

Oswald comes across as a loyal American kid, given over to intrigue, used by forces in ways that he never imagined, since he was lost in a Cold War counterintelligence program and assassination deception plan.

I call him a "burn card," a programmed guy in the bowels of the Marine/ONI list of loyal losers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

There has been a major development in this case.

Professor Joan Mellen, author of the upcoming "A Farewell to Justice" wrote a letter to "The Key West Citizen" prompted by the articles Mark and I wrote. In that article, she states that in her book she identifies Angel as Angel Murgado, and Leopoldo as Bernardo de Torres.

Mark interviewed her on Monday and she stated that a few months ago she interviewed Mr. Murgado and he confirmed that he was indeed at Odio's door with Lee Harvey Oswald, confirming what Mr. Hemming had told us.

In my opinion, this demolishes the Warren Commission report's "rush to judgment" on the Odio incident as well as Posner's curt dismissal of its importance in "Case Closed".

More details must await the issuance of her book in November.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's with this? In my previous post, where I wrote "Mellen states" the program underlined "states" and put it in blue. When I checked on it, a pop-up said" "Looking for states?" Well, I wasn't. It's a bit annoying. Capitalism run amock!

John, can I edit my posts to get rid of this stuff? The program could not even distinguish that I used "states" as a verb rather than as a noun.

In summary, to put it in the third person:

Tim states that he is not looking for any states.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thought  that Oswald was an agent/provacateur has run through my head many times.  Even in jail, he seemed overly anxious to tie the ACLU into his actions, when he'd only been to one meeting, and that was with Michael Paine. 

And that was the night that Edwin Walker was a speaker.

- lee

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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...