ONI and differences between Dallas and N.O. FBI perceptions of Oswald?

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

1. John Newman in Oswald and the CIA, claims that Hosty at Dallas FBI did not have the correct address of

Oswald after he moved to New Orleans in April, 1962 for about four months. Newman states this was the

exact time period when Lee was using the Hidell name in New Orleans?

But Newman also states that other FBI offices did have Oswalds new New Orleans address, and shows that

it would have been very easy for Hosty to get it, had he simply checked with previously utilized FBI contacts

at the Dallas Post Office.

Do you agree with Newman's belief that Hosty was deliberately being left in the dark regarding Oswald's

David Atlee Phillips connected machinations with the fake FPCC in New Orleans?

If so, what is the purpose of this obfuscation? Was it so the Dallas FBI would not have to inform the Secret

Service of "local kooky individuals" -- in this case Oswald's persona as a pro Castro activist-- prior to the

JFK trip to Dallas a year later? Am I getting too far ahead of myself chronologically, here? If this is not the

reason, what was?

2. Newman (p.209, 210 Oswald and the CIA) writes "the FBI was bifurcating its oswald material at the Bureau

and in Dallas int two compartment at each locations. The material collected under the catiion "Funds

Transmitted to Russia" went into the 100 file at the Bureau and into the 105 file at Dallas; the rest of the

Oswald material went into the 105 file at the Bureau and into the 100 file at Dallas. Is is important

to keep this detail in mind because this patern, begun in 1960, persisted into 1961."

My question: do you think there a correlation between this "bifurcation" of Dallas FBI files and a

similar "bifurcation" of Oswald's CIA files, in particular use of 201 permanent files, 201 "soft file"

and 100 file?

Might this in some way be related to differences in access to FBI records on Oswald between Win Scott in

Mexico City, on the one hand, and Angleton, Helms, Karamessines in Langley on the other? (?)

This question is probably quite bovine, but its not easy studiing Oswalds files with ADD

So please explain your alternative interpretation of the above facts, so that I can make head or

tail of things.

Oh crap. I would like to edit the title of this thread, as I was initially going to include stuff about ONI but ended up taking it out.

The new title of this thread should read

The Bifuracation of Dallas FBI files: Was this Coordinated with the CIA's use of 201 and 100 files to send mixed

signals?

If any editor on high could do this i'll send them a quarter.

Edited July 29, 2006 by Nathaniel Heidenheimer

[Robert Howard]

1. John Newman in Oswald and the CIA, claims that Hosty at Dallas FBI did not have the correct address of

Oswald after he moved to New Orleans in April, 1962 for about four months. Newman states this was the

exact time period when Lee was using the Hidell name in New Orleans?

But Newman also states that other FBI offices did have Oswalds new New Orleans address, and shows that

it would have been very easy for Hosty to get it, had he simply checked with previously utilized FBI contacts

at the Dallas Post Office.

Do you agree with Newman's belief that Hosty was deliberately being left in the dark regarding Oswald's

David Atlee Phillips connected machinations with the fake FPCC in New Orleans?

If so, what is the purpose of this obfuscation? Was it so the Dallas FBI would not have to inform the Secret

Service of "local kooky individuals" -- in this case Oswald's persona as a pro Castro activist-- prior to the

JFK trip to Dallas a year later? Am I getting too far ahead of myself chronologically, here? If this is not the

reason, what was?

2. Newman (p.209, 210 Oswald and the CIA) writes "the FBI was bifurcating its oswald material at the Bureau

and in Dallas int two compartment at each locations. The material collected under the catiion "Funds

Transmitted to Russia" went into the 100 file at the Bureau and into the 105 file at Dallas; the rest of the

Oswald material went into the 105 file at the Bureau and into the 100 file at Dallas. Is is important

to keep this detail in mind because this patern, begun in 1960, persisted into 1961."

My question: do you think there a correlation between this "bifurcation" of Dallas FBI files and a

similar "bifurcation" of Oswald's CIA files, in particular use of 201 permanent files, 201 "soft file"

and 100 file?

Might this in some way be related to differences in access to FBI records on Oswald between Win Scott in

Mexico City, on the one hand, and Angleton, Helms, Karamessines in Langley on the other? (?)

This question is probably quite bovine, but its not easy studiing Oswalds files with ADD

So please explain your alternative interpretation of the above facts, so that I can make head or

tail of things.

Oh crap. I would like to edit the title of this thread, as I was initially going to include stuff about ONI but ended up taking it out.

The new title of this thread should read

The Bifuracation of Dallas FBI files: Was this Coordinated with the CIA's use of 201 and 100 files to send mixed

signals?

If any editor on high could do this i'll send them a quarter.

I've never seen this thread, but since it is an interesting question, I will take a shot.

In my opinion, it is a slippery slope, in deducing unequivocally. The intense dislike of J Edgar Hoover towards the CIA is not a myth. So it is hard to

really swallow some form of a big pow-wow to coordinate something like what you're driving at.

But could Hoover have handed the task off to Sam Papich?

I shudder when I write this, because I recognize that while on the Forum to suggest such a thing is totally in keeping with speculative questions, in the

media driven age of a sanctioned Mockingbird era, somebody can get a hold on such a thing and the next thing you know

you might as well be saying Caesar killed Brutus, if you catch my drift......

Remember that when the Central Intelligence Group, the forerunner of CIA

was formed, in that approximate time frame Hoover is "alleged," some might say it is a proven fact, that he destroyed all the FBI files on Latin American FBI operations

rather than share them with the agency, and if you have read the voluminous material about J Edgar Hoover circa 1962-63, it would be a safe assumption that facet of

Hoover's method of operation didn't mellow with age.

But besides being an interesting question, before Papich was liason, he served with the FBI in Latin America, it is factually recorded in his obit.

See

http://www.northwest.../inmemoriam.htm

In one of my many posts, I mentioned how the list of agency people, who previously were in the FBI was more than interesting, if you think about it

William Harvey, for one.....Henry Wade was involved in FBI affairs in the World War II era in Latin America

On another topic, the FBI's William Sullivan, stated in his biography that Deke DeLoach was at one time the FBI's liason with the CIA, but I am not sure if that

was at the time of the assassination, or afterwards, Courtney Evan's allegedly was, after the assassination replaced by Deke DeLoach.

But your question is a very integral part of peeling back the onion....

Also, the agency made a comment about this phenomena of ex-FBI agents in the IG Report......

see ...

(Comment: Although we see nothing sinister in it, we are struck by the fact that so many names of the persons whose names appear in this

account once worked for the FBI. We have already named Cunningham and Maheu. Later to appear are William Harvey, James O’Connell

and Edward Morgan). Maheu acknowledged that he had a contact who might furnish access to the criminal underworld, but Maheu was most

reluctant to allow himself to be involved in such an assignment. He agreed to participate only after being pressed by Edwards to do so.

Maheu identified his contact as one Johnny Rosselli.

.....from pages 23 and 24; 1967 IG REPORT (UNSANITIZED).

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=55405&relPageId=23

Edited September 25, 2010 by Robert Howard

[Robert Howard]

1. John Newman in Oswald and the CIA, claims that Hosty at Dallas FBI did not have the correct address of

Oswald after he moved to New Orleans in April, 1962 for about four months. Newman states this was the

exact time period when Lee was using the Hidell name in New Orleans?

But Newman also states that other FBI offices did have Oswalds new New Orleans address, and shows that

it would have been very easy for Hosty to get it, had he simply checked with previously utilized FBI contacts

at the Dallas Post Office.

Do you agree with Newman's belief that Hosty was deliberately being left in the dark regarding Oswald's

David Atlee Phillips connected machinations with the fake FPCC in New Orleans?

If so, what is the purpose of this obfuscation? Was it so the Dallas FBI would not have to inform the Secret

Service of "local kooky individuals" -- in this case Oswald's persona as a pro Castro activist-- prior to the

JFK trip to Dallas a year later? Am I getting too far ahead of myself chronologically, here? If this is not the

reason, what was?

2. Newman (p.209, 210 Oswald and the CIA) writes "the FBI was bifurcating its oswald material at the Bureau

and in Dallas int two compartment at each locations. The material collected under the catiion "Funds

Transmitted to Russia" went into the 100 file at the Bureau and into the 105 file at Dallas; the rest of the

Oswald material went into the 105 file at the Bureau and into the 100 file at Dallas. Is is important

to keep this detail in mind because this patern, begun in 1960, persisted into 1961."

My question: do you think there a correlation between this "bifurcation" of Dallas FBI files and a

similar "bifurcation" of Oswald's CIA files, in particular use of 201 permanent files, 201 "soft file"

and 100 file?

Might this in some way be related to differences in access to FBI records on Oswald between Win Scott in

Mexico City, on the one hand, and Angleton, Helms, Karamessines in Langley on the other? (?)

This question is probably quite bovine, but its not easy studiing Oswalds files with ADD

So please explain your alternative interpretation of the above facts, so that I can make head or

tail of things.

Oh crap. I would like to edit the title of this thread, as I was initially going to include stuff about ONI but ended up taking it out.

The new title of this thread should read

The Bifuracation of Dallas FBI files: Was this Coordinated with the CIA's use of 201 and 100 files to send mixed

signals?

If any editor on high could do this i'll send them a quarter.

I've never seen this thread, but since it is an interesting question, I will take a shot.

In my opinion, it is a slippery slope, in deducing unequivocally. The intense dislike of J Edgar Hoover towards the CIA is not a myth. So it is hard to

really swallow some form of a big pow-wow to coordinate something like what you're driving at.

But could Hoover have handed the task off to Sam Papich?

I shudder when I write this, because I recognize that while on the Forum to suggest such a thing is totally in keeping with speculative questions, in the

media driven age of a sanctioned Mockingbird era, somebody can get a hold on such a thing and the next thing you know

you might as well be saying Caesar killed Brutus, if you catch my drift......

Remember that when the Central Intelligence Group, the forerunner of CIA

was formed, in that approximate time frame Hoover is "alleged," some might say it is a proven fact, that he destroyed all the FBI files on Latin American FBI operations

rather than share them with the agency, and if you have read the voluminous material about J Edgar Hoover circa 1962-63, it would be a safe assumption that facet of

Hoover's method of operation didn't mellow with age.

But besides being an interesting question, before Papich was liason, he served with the FBI in Latin America, it is factually recorded in his obit.

See

http://www.northwest.../inmemoriam.htm

In one of my many posts, I mentioned how the list of agency people, who previously were in the FBI was more than interesting, if you think about it

William Harvey, for one.....Henry Wade was involved in FBI affairs in the World War II era in Latin America

On another topic, the FBI's William Sullivan, stated in his biography that Deke DeLoach was at one time the FBI's liason with the CIA, but I am not sure if that

was at the time of the assassination, or afterwards, Courtney Evan's allegedly was, after the assassination replaced by Deke DeLoach.

But your question is a very integral part of peeling back the onion....

Also, the agency made a comment about this phenomena of ex-FBI agents in the IG Report......

see ...

(Comment: Although we see nothing sinister in it, we are struck by the fact that so many names of the persons whose names appear in this

account once worked for the FBI. We have already named Cunningham and Maheu. Later to appear are William Harvey, James O’Connell

and Edward Morgan). Maheu acknowledged that he had a contact who might furnish access to the criminal underworld, but Maheu was most

reluctant to allow himself to be involved in such an assignment. He agreed to participate only after being pressed by Edwards to do so.

Maheu identified his contact as one Johnny Rosselli.

.....from pages 23 and 24; 1967 IG REPORT (UNSANITIZED).

http://www.maryferre...05&relPageId=23

Pondering the Hosty Note.

I am in complete agreement regarding Mary Ferrell’s analysis of a possible chronology regarding the Hosty note.

See page 233 Oswald Talked

This is her analysis.

Oswald was first contacted by Hosty sometime in October, probably in the latter of the month. The contact was likely no more than a phone call, the point of which was

to set up a later meeting. Oswald wrote down October initially, not because he made a silly mistake eight or nine days ago into November, but either because he first started

to write the date the call occurred, or because he assumed the proposed meeting would take place that same month. In any case, he scratched out the Oct he had begun to write and substituted Nov 1, 1963, the Friday for which the meeting was actually set (and, on which, in fact, Hosty showed up at the house supposedly looking for him).

END

Robert Oswald’s testimony, also contradicts Marina’s testimony that Oswald had never seen or met Hosty.

Robert Oswald: “She had an aversion to speaking to him [Hosty] because she was of the opinion that he had harrassed Lee in his interviews,” note the plural use of “interviews,”

as in more than one, a proponent of the lone nut theory, would probably state that Robert Oswald was referring to the post-assassination interviews of Oswald . But Hosty did not conduct those interviews, he was only a participant.

Another early file, a memo to Lee Rankin by J Edgar Hoover states the FBI’s sequence of interviews of Lee Harvey Oswald

June 26, 1962 at Fort Worth, Texas by John W. Fain and B. Tom Carter

August 16, 1962 at Fort Worth, Texas by John W. Fain and Arnold J Brown

August 10, 1963 in New Orleans by SA Quigley in a report filed by Milton R. Kaack dated October 31, 1963.

J Edgar Hoover had his own contribution to make to the issue, besides his censuring and transfer of FBI agents, of whom Hosty was

the chief victim, Hoover wrote the passage below.

In regard to the data in “The Nation” article which alleges that Oswald had agent Hosty’s home phone and office phone numbers

and car license in his possession, you are advised that Special Agent James W Hosty’s name, office telephone number, and license number,

one digit off, appeared in Oswald’s address book. For your information, Special Agent Hosty furnished his name and office telephone number

to Mrs. Ruth Paine when Agent Hosty interviewed her concerning Lee Harvey Oswald’s whereabouts on Nov. 1 and 5, 1963

Agent Hosty did not give Mrs. Paine the license number of his automobile, and presumably Mrs. Paine may have jotted such number down

on her own initiative unknown to Agent Hosty.

November 1963?

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=57758&relPageId=89

[William Kelly]

1. John Newman in Oswald and the CIA, claims that Hosty at Dallas FBI did not have the correct address of

Oswald after he moved to New Orleans in April, 1962 for about four months. Newman states this was the

exact time period when Lee was using the Hidell name in New Orleans?

But Newman also states that other FBI offices did have Oswalds new New Orleans address, and shows that

it would have been very easy for Hosty to get it, had he simply checked with previously utilized FBI contacts

at the Dallas Post Office.

Do you agree with Newman's belief that Hosty was deliberately being left in the dark regarding Oswald's

David Atlee Phillips connected machinations with the fake FPCC in New Orleans?

If so, what is the purpose of this obfuscation? Was it so the Dallas FBI would not have to inform the Secret

Service of "local kooky individuals" -- in this case Oswald's persona as a pro Castro activist-- prior to the

JFK trip to Dallas a year later? Am I getting too far ahead of myself chronologically, here? If this is not the

reason, what was?

2. Newman (p.209, 210 Oswald and the CIA) writes "the FBI was bifurcating its oswald material at the Bureau

and in Dallas int two compartment at each locations. The material collected under the catiion "Funds

Transmitted to Russia" went into the 100 file at the Bureau and into the 105 file at Dallas; the rest of the

Oswald material went into the 105 file at the Bureau and into the 100 file at Dallas. Is is important

to keep this detail in mind because this patern, begun in 1960, persisted into 1961."

My question: do you think there a correlation between this "bifurcation" of Dallas FBI files and a

similar "bifurcation" of Oswald's CIA files, in particular use of 201 permanent files, 201 "soft file"

and 100 file?

Might this in some way be related to differences in access to FBI records on Oswald between Win Scott in

Mexico City, on the one hand, and Angleton, Helms, Karamessines in Langley on the other? (?)

This question is probably quite bovine, but its not easy studiing Oswalds files with ADD

So please explain your alternative interpretation of the above facts, so that I can make head or

tail of things.

Oh crap. I would like to edit the title of this thread, as I was initially going to include stuff about ONI but ended up taking it out.

The new title of this thread should read

The Bifuracation of Dallas FBI files: Was this Coordinated with the CIA's use of 201 and 100 files to send mixed

signals?

If any editor on high could do this i'll send them a quarter.

I've never seen this thread, but since it is an interesting question, I will take a shot.

In my opinion, it is a slippery slope, in deducing unequivocally. The intense dislike of J Edgar Hoover towards the CIA is not a myth. So it is hard to

really swallow some form of a big pow-wow to coordinate something like what you're driving at.

But could Hoover have handed the task off to Sam Papich?

I shudder when I write this, because I recognize that while on the Forum to suggest such a thing is totally in keeping with speculative questions, in the

media driven age of a sanctioned Mockingbird era, somebody can get a hold on such a thing and the next thing you know

you might as well be saying Caesar killed Brutus, if you catch my drift......

Remember that when the Central Intelligence Group, the forerunner of CIA

was formed, in that approximate time frame Hoover is "alleged," some might say it is a proven fact, that he destroyed all the FBI files on Latin American FBI operations

rather than share them with the agency, and if you have read the voluminous material about J Edgar Hoover circa 1962-63, it would be a safe assumption that facet of

Hoover's method of operation didn't mellow with age.

But besides being an interesting question, before Papich was liason, he served with the FBI in Latin America, it is factually recorded in his obit.

See

http://www.northwest.../inmemoriam.htm

In one of my many posts, I mentioned how the list of agency people, who previously were in the FBI was more than interesting, if you think about it

William Harvey, for one.....Henry Wade was involved in FBI affairs in the World War II era in Latin America

On another topic, the FBI's William Sullivan, stated in his biography that Deke DeLoach was at one time the FBI's liason with the CIA, but I am not sure if that

was at the time of the assassination, or afterwards, Courtney Evan's allegedly was, after the assassination replaced by Deke DeLoach.

But your question is a very integral part of peeling back the onion....

Also, the agency made a comment about this phenomena of ex-FBI agents in the IG Report......

see ...

(Comment: Although we see nothing sinister in it, we are struck by the fact that so many names of the persons whose names appear in this

account once worked for the FBI. We have already named Cunningham and Maheu. Later to appear are William Harvey, James O'Connell

and Edward Morgan). Maheu acknowledged that he had a contact who might furnish access to the criminal underworld, but Maheu was most

reluctant to allow himself to be involved in such an assignment. He agreed to participate only after being pressed by Edwards to do so.

Maheu identified his contact as one Johnny Rosselli.

.....from pages 23 and 24; 1967 IG REPORT (UNSANITIZED).

http://www.maryferre...05&relPageId=23

Pondering the Hosty Note.

I am in complete agreement regarding Mary Ferrell's analysis of a possible chronology regarding the Hosty note.

See page 233 Oswald Talked

This is her analysis.

Oswald was first contacted by Hosty sometime in October, probably in the latter of the month. The contact was likely no more than a phone call, the point of which was

to set up a later meeting. Oswald wrote down October initially, not because he made a silly mistake eight or nine days ago into November, but either because he first started

to write the date the call occurred, or because he assumed the proposed meeting would take place that same month. In any case, he scratched out the Oct he had begun to write and substituted Nov 1, 1963, the Friday for which the meeting was actually set (and, on which, in fact, Hosty showed up at the house supposedly looking for him).

END

Robert Oswald's testimony, also contradicts Marina's testimony that Oswald had never seen or met Hosty.

Robert Oswald: "She had an aversion to speaking to him [Hosty] because she was of the opinion that he had harrassed Lee in his interviews," note the plural use of "interviews,"

as in more than one, a proponent of the lone nut theory, would probably state that Robert Oswald was referring to the post-assassination interviews of Oswald . But Hosty did not conduct those interviews, he was only a participant.

Another early file, a memo to Lee Rankin by J Edgar Hoover states the FBI's sequence of interviews of Lee Harvey Oswald

June 26, 1962 at Fort Worth, Texas by John W. Fain and B. Tom Carter

August 16, 1962 at Fort Worth, Texas by John W. Fain and Arnold J Brown

August 10, 1963 in New Orleans by SA Quigley in a report filed by Milton R. Kaack dated October 31, 1963.

J Edgar Hoover had his own contribution to make to the issue, besides his censuring and transfer of FBI agents, of whom Hosty was

the chief victim, Hoover wrote the passage below.

In regard to the data in "The Nation" article which alleges that Oswald had agent Hosty's home phone and office phone numbers

and car license in his possession, you are advised that Special Agent James W Hosty's name, office telephone number, and license number,

one digit off, appeared in Oswald's address book. For your information, Special Agent Hosty furnished his name and office telephone number

to Mrs. Ruth Paine when Agent Hosty interviewed her concerning Lee Harvey Oswald's whereabouts on Nov. 1 and 5, 1963

Agent Hosty did not give Mrs. Paine the license number of his automobile, and presumably Mrs. Paine may have jotted such number down

on her own initiative unknown to Agent Hosty.

November 1963?

http://www.maryferre...58&relPageId=89

Robert and Jim and anyone else who is interested in this subject, I call your attention to some new material posted at Mary Ferrell -

FBI Dallas Field Office Cross Reference Files -

I opened the first one and it is a list of documents in the possession of or moved through the Dallas field office, and the very first one is an ONI

file dated 1962.

There are also numerous referencs to Hosty files - and while I didn't look the Hosty document that Jim Root has been looking for should be listed,

and that would constitute a factual reference to it.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/docset/getList.do?docSetId=1943

[John Dolva]

ONI has a particular interest to me since anonymously and unconfirmed a statement was made that Harry was ONI.

Since then anything to do with ONI switches the bulb on. Anyway, back at the ranch, or mine anyway, well, actually it's a half acre bushblock surrounded by farms, this is also interesting as a careful (reread : careful) read of Katzenbachs memo might be of interest.