James Wilcott

[W. Tracy Parnell]

24 minutes ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Tracy,

For how many years have you defended the CIA?  

Well, I don't believe it is moral to "out" people so they can potentially be killed even if those people are members of the CIA. That is way over the top for me anyway and I don't condone it. So, if that is "defending the CIA" then I plead guilty.

[Jim Hargrove]

Understood, Tracy....

You defend the Agency.... That's what you do....

Even though the Agency murdered JFK!!!

 

[David Andrews]

I think everyone here should read Tracy's article, and savor the vehemence with which he makes his points against the character and motives of a person who spoke up despite the danger to his own life, which he was aware of.  And, by the way, a person who - unlike Richard Case Nagell - was not alone in this, and had the support of his wife, also former CIA, and his attorney.

Among many quibbles: Though it was not a criminal proceeding, Wilcott may have doubted the wisdom of stating that he checked any paymaster's records beyond the personal ledger he kept.  In the testimony record, he House counsel is particularly pointed and pressing in this area, and Wilcott, or his attorney, may not have wanted to fall into a security violation trap.

It's important to have materials like Tracy's as a corrective against gullibility, but in that piece overall, someone's protesting overly much.  After the atmosphere at Tokyo Station that Wilcott describes, and the in the worldwide conduct of CIA overseas throughout the 1960s and 1970s, the actions of whistleblowers like Wilcott may have saved lives by affecting Agency culture.

If Wilcott's interrogators noted that Wilcott laughed at inappropriate times, it may have been in recognition of the absurdity of intelligence culture and Agency behavior.  It's a reaction you see frequently in the heroes of the Frank Capra films that Joe McBride loves so much, and Wilcott may even have learned it there.

Edited June 13, 2019 by David Andrews

[Jim Hargrove]

3 hours ago, David Andrews said:

I think everyone here should read Tracy's article, and savor the vehemence with which he makes his points against the character and motives of a person who spoke up despite the danger to his own life, which he was aware of. 

Well said, David.  Tracy's piece is just a hatchet job, and not a very skilled one at that.  There is lots of evidence that the CIA ran the Oswald project.  Here's a list I post from time to time.

20 Facts Indicating the Oswald Project Was Run by the CIA

1. CIA accountant James Wilcott testified that he made payments to an encrypted account for “Oswald or the Oswald Project.”  Contemporaneous HSCA notes indicate Wilcott told staffers, but wasn't allowed to say in Executive session, that the cryptonym for the CIA's "Oswald Project" was RX-ZIM.

2. A 1978 CIA memo indicates that a CIA operations officer “had run an agent into the USSR, that man having met a Russian girl and eventually marrying her,” a case very similar to Oswald’s and clearly indicating that the Agency ran a “false defector” program in the 1950s.

3. Robert Webster and LHO "defected" a few months apart in 1959, both tried to "defect" on a Saturday, both possessed "sensitive" information of possible value to the Russians, both were befriended by Marina Prusakova, and both returned to the United States in the spring of 1962.

4. Richard Sprague, Richard Schweiker, and CIA agents Donald Norton and Joseph Newbrough all said LHO was associated with the CIA. 

5. CIA employee Donald Deneslya said he read reports of a CIA "contact" who had worked at a radio factory in Minsk and returned to the US with a Russian wife and child.

6. Kenneth Porter, employee of CIA-connected Collins Radio, left his family to marry (and probably monitor) Marina Oswald after LHO’s death.

7. George Joannides, case officer and paymaster for DRE (which LHO had attempted to infiltrate) was put in charge of lying to the HSCA and never told them of his relationship to DRE.

8. For his achievements, Joannides was given a medal by the CIA.

9. FBI took Oswald off the watch list at the same time a CIA cable gave him a clean bill of political health, weeks after Oswald’s New Orleans arrest and less than two months before the assassination.

10. Oswald’s lengthy “Lives of Russian Workers” essay reads like a pretty good intelligence report.

11. Oswald’s possessions were searched for microdots.

12. Oswald owned an expensive Minox spy camera, which the FBI tried to make disappear.

13. Even the official cover story of the radar operator near American U-2 planes defecting to Russia, saying he would give away all his secrets, and returning home without penalty smells like a spy story.

14. CIA's Richard Case Nagell clearly knew about the plot to assassinate JFK and LHO’s relation to it, and he said that the CIA and the FBI ignored his warnings.

15. LHO always seemed poor as a church mouse, until it was time to go “on assignment.”  For his Russian adventure, we’re to believe he saved all the money he needed for first class European hotels and private tour guides in Moscow from the non-convertible USMC script he saved. In the summer of 1963, he once again seemed to have enough money to travel abroad to Communist nations.

16. To this day, the CIA claims it never interacted with Oswald, that it didn’t even bother debriefing him after the “defection.” What utter bs….

17. After he “defected” to the Soviet Union in 1959, bragging to U.S. embassy personnel in Moscow that he would tell the Russians everything he knew about U.S. military secrets, he returns to the U.S. without punishment and is then in 1963 given the OK to travel to Cuba and the Soviet Union again!

18. Allen Dulles, the CIA director fired by JFK, and the Warren Commission clearly wanted the truth hidden from the public to protect sources and methods of intelligence agencies such as the CIA. Earl Warren said, “Full disclosure was not possible for reasons of national security.”

19. CIA's Ann Egerter, who worked for J.J. Angleton's Counterintelligence Special Interest Group (CI/SIG), opened a "201" file on Oswald on December 9, 1960.  Egerter testified to the HSCA: "We were charged with the investigation of Agency personnel....”  When asked if the purpose was to "investigate Agency employees," she answered, "That is correct."  When asked, "Would there be any other reason for opening up a file?" she answered, "No, I can't think of one."

20. President Kennedy and the CIA clearly were at war with each other in the weeks immediately before his assassination, as evidenced by Arthur Krock's infamous defense of the Agency in the Oct. 3, 1963 New York Times. “Oswald” was the CIA’s pawn.

[Michael Clark]

@Jim Hargrove

Jim, why don’t you have the Jane Roman “Keene Interest” story listed close to number 9? 

[Jim Hargrove]

1 hour ago, Michael Clark said:

@Jim Hargrove

Jim, why don’t you have the Jane Roman “Keene Interest” story listed close to number 9? 

Maybe I should, Michael, but it's a little hard to reduce it to a single sentence for a list like this, and, to me at least, it's perfectly obvious that high-ranking CIA officials were lying about "Oswald" in that infamous cable just weeks before the assassination.  The timing also suggests that at least some FBI officials were also helping take Federal heat off Oswald, clearing the way for his patsification on 11/22/63.  Some people suggest that the Agency's lie was part of a mole hunt, but I don't believe it.  The "Oswald project" had to be a high level secret, and I can't imagine them risking exposure of it with that cable.

[W. Tracy Parnell]

2 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

Well said, David.  Tracy's piece is just a hatchet job, and not a very skilled one at that.  There is lots of evidence that the CIA ran the Oswald project.  Here's a list I post from time to time.

20 Facts Indicating the Oswald Project Was Run by the CIA

Jim,

I see you've taken Veciana out of the top 20 so we must be making progress.

[David Andrews]

Jim Hargrove - you might add to your list, if you are able, the degree to which John Newman's viewpoint on Oswald's CIA involvement has increased in acceptance since Oswald and the CIA, and the reasons for it.  Some of that is in his recent book series, and some in his public presentations available on YouTube.

[Jim Hargrove]

David,

I definitely should do that, but it is just so hard to distill Mr. Newman’s analyses to a short sentence or two.  He has important stuff on the U-2s, on the Agency’s counterintelligence operation against FPCC, on all those black holes where Oswald files should have been, and especially on Mexico City, including the Kostikov disinformation.  It’s all in the details, though, which this sort of list can’t cover. Can you give me any specific suggestions?
 

[David Andrews]

14 hours ago, Jim Hargrove said:

David,

I definitely should do that, but it is just so hard to distill Mr. Newman’s analyses to a short sentence or two.  He has important stuff on the U-2s, on the Agency’s counterintelligence operation against FPCC, on all those black holes where Oswald files should have been, and especially on Mexico City, including the Kostikov disinformation.  It’s all in the details, though, which this sort of list can’t cover. Can you give me any specific suggestions?
 

Check Jim Di Eugenio's Kennedys and King website for what John Newman has been up to.  Also see Newman's most recent talks on YouTube to learn which CIA historian changed his mind on whether Oz was on the payroll -- I think b/c of facts Malcolm Blunt brought up.  Newman's and Morley's Jane Roman interview is older than that.

I may be able to give better pointers next week.  Too busy at work right now.

Edited June 14, 2019 by David Andrews

[Ron Bulman]

 

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=john+newman+jeffmorley+jane+roman&view=detail&mid=55F2A123BA9626988A7B55F2A123BA9626988A7B&FORM=VIRE

https://www.history-matters.com/essays/frameup/WhatJaneRomanSaid/JaneRomanTranscript.htm

It's 1994, is this why Jeff Morley left the Washington Post?

Edited June 14, 2019 by Ron Bulman

[David Andrews]

On 6/13/2019 at 7:31 PM, Jim Hargrove said:

David,

I definitely should do that, but it is just so hard to distill Mr. Newman’s analyses to a short sentence or two.  He has important stuff on the U-2s, on the Agency’s counterintelligence operation against FPCC, on all those black holes where Oswald files should have been, and especially on Mexico City, including the Kostikov disinformation.  It’s all in the details, though, which this sort of list can’t cover. Can you give me any specific suggestions?
 

Jim - Sorry I was pressed for time when you asked.  Go to BlackOp Radio 8-8-2019 and in Jim DiEugenio's interview, Jim discusses how Malcolm Blunt got Tennant Bagley of CIA to say that the peculiar routing record of Oswald's 201 file showed purposeful protection of Oswald as a defector by Angleton.  John Newman discusses this in a lecture loaded to YouTube, but I forget which one and can't find it readily on YT.

http://blackopradio.com/archives2019.html

Edited August 18, 2019 by David Andrews