Oswald in Cuba?

[Ron Ecker]

In his 11/22/63 memo Hoover states that Oswald "ran into two police officers . . . and killed one of them."

I wonder if Hoover was told this before the Tippit murder scenario was set in stone that day. Hoover's statement may confirm the story of the witness who saw a second police car on the scene at the time of the Tippit shooting, backing away up an alley.

Ron

[Pat Speer]

The Hoover memo confirms what we already know, that Hoover was out of the loop and had a terrible grasp of the information. His explanations to Bobby, LBJ, and others all reek of someone acting like he knows more than he does, trying to remember what someone told him on the phone an hour before. The two cops is probably a reference to Baker and Tippitt, but he makes it sound like they were together. The reference to Cuba is almost undoubtedly him mixing up Oswald's going to Russia with his trying to go to Cuba. LBJ's own grasp of the information was so clouded at the time that he told a bunch of Governors on the 25th that Connally's LEFT hand was blown OFF.

Which brings up another question entirely. Why were Hoover and LBJ so lackadaisical about figuring out what REALLY happened, and yet so anxious to push what MAY HAVE happened (a lone-nut scenario)? Were they afraid to find out? Were they fairly certain that if they dug too deep it would lead back to someone they knew? Or were they merely in over their heads?

Edited March 4, 2005 by Pat Speer

[Ron Ecker]

I just acquired a copy of Alexander Haig's book Inner Circles. On page 116 he writes, "Very soon after President Kennedy's death, an intelligence report crossed my desk. In circumstantial detail, it stated that Oswald had been seen in Havana in the company of Cuban intelligence officers several days before the events in Dallas, and that he had traveled there by way of Mexico City, where, as the Warren Commission later established, he had been received at the Soviety Embassy. The detail--locale, precise notations of time, and more--was very persuasive. . . . I walked it over to my superiors. . . . 'Al,' said one of them, 'you will forget, as from this moment, that you ever read this piece of paper, or that it ever existed.' The report was destroyed."

How credible is Alexander ("I'm in charge here") Haig? About as credible, IMO, as Califano, his source for the following preposterous claim on page 115: "Lyndon Johnson . . . considered reopening the investigation a couple of years after (the Warren Commission Report) but desisted, according to Califano, because he did not believe it was in the interests of the country and he did not want to inflict any additional pain on the Kennedy family."

Ron

[Pat Speer]

I just acquired a copy of Alexander Haig's book Inner Circles. On page 116 he writes, "Very soon after President Kennedy's death, an intelligence report crossed my desk. In circumstantial detail, it stated that Oswald had been seen in Havana in the company of Cuban intelligence officers several days before the events in Dallas, and that he had traveled there by way of Mexico City, where, as the Warren Commission later established, he had been received at the Soviety Embassy. The detail--locale, precise notations of time, and more--was very persuasive. . . . I walked it over to my superiors. . . . 'Al,' said one of them, 'you will forget, as from this moment, that you ever read this piece of paper, or that it ever existed.' The report was destroyed."

How credible is Alexander ("I'm in charge here") Haig? About as credible, IMO, as Califano, his source for the following preposterous claim on page 115: "Lyndon Johnson . . . considered reopening the investigation a couple of years after (the Warren Commission Report) but desisted, according to Califano, because he did not believe it was in the interests of the country and he did not want to inflict any additional pain on the Kennedy family."

Ron

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think Haig and Califano were both telling the truth as they remembered it. Haig probably saw one of the many discredited reports based on Cuban exile and Nicaraguan (and CIA?) disinformation. Califano was probably repeating something LBJ told him after looking at the IG Report on the atttempts on Castro. Of course LBJ was talking for effect and would never have reopened the case due to the political damage it would cause.

[Tim Gratz]

I think Pat is right that both Haig and Califano were telling the truth as they knew it. Whether the report Haig had seen was correct or false must remain a matter of conjecture since it was destroyed.

Hemming's identification of an anti-Castro Cuban as a participant in the assassination runs contrary, of course, to my "Castro did it scenario". I still believe the Castro scenario deserves investigation and should not be dismissed out-of-hand. For instance, I would like to see the actual CIA reports that identified Miguelito as a DGI operative, to determine the source of the reports.

Presumably, a DGI operative in Dallas on November 22, 1963 raises as many troublesome questions as do the reports of Robertson's prescence in DP.

Re Oswald in Cuba after he was in Mexico City, it does not seem possible given the tracking of Oswald's whereabouts. And I tend to believe that LHO, despite his pro-Castro stance, was probably an agent of American intelligence.

Edited March 5, 2005 by Tim Gratz