Fabian Escalante (JFK: The Cuba Files, the Untold Story of the Plot to Kill Kennedy)

[John Simkin]

During his investigation, Fabian Escalante came across a Cuban intelligence source report in April 1963. It seems that G-2 had someone spying on the Friends of Democratic Cuba in New Orleans. It seems that some interesting characters were associating with each other during this period. This included Guy Banister, David Ferrie, Orlando Bosch, Luis Posada, Sergio Arcacha, Antonio Cuesta, Eladio del Valle, Frank Bartes, Carlos Bringuier, Manuel Salvat and Manuel Villafana.

Between May and September, Cuban agents in the United States reported meetings between CIA officers and anti-Castro terrorists. This included Howard Hunt, Frank Sturgis, Orlando Piedra, Orlando Bosch, Luis Posada, Antonio Cuesta, Eladio del Valle, Antonio Veciana, Joaquin Sanjenis and the Novo Sampol brothers.

Another informant identified Lee Harvey Oswald as staying at a CIA safe-house on the outskirts of Miami during the summer of 1963. While there he met Orlando Bosch, Luis Posada and Antonio Cuesta.

The final report of interest concerns a Cuban agent who identified Eladio del Valle and Herminio Diaz in Dallas on 20th November, 1963. The agent also reported that the two men “handled large sums of money after the crime.”

[Ashton Gray]

During his investigation, Fabian Escalante came across a Cuban intelligence source report in April 1963. It seems that G-2 had someone spying on the Friends of Democratic Cuba in New Orleans. It seems that some interesting characters were associating with each other during this period. This included Guy Banister, David Ferrie, Orlando Bosch, Luis Posada, Sergio Arcacha, Antonio Cuesta, Eladio del Valle, Frank Bartes, Carlos Bringuier, Manuel Salvat and Manuel Villafana.

I won't stop pleading for dates, however much such pleas go ignored. It is impossible even to guess a useful date from the sentence "Escalante came across a Cuban intelligence source report in April 1963" since it only gives April, in such wording, as a month during which "Escalante came across...a report," saying nothing about the date of the report itself, which could be 1886 for all I can tell. Are there any specific dates for this incident—either the discovery of the report or the date of the report itself?

The precise sequence of events in the month of April 1963 is absolutely crucial to an understanding of this case. One entry alone ought to be enough to convince a stump:

• Wednesday, 24 April 1963
  The Dallas Times Herald is headlined: "LBJ sees Kennedy Dallas Visit—One Day Texas Tour Eyed." On the same day, Ruth Hyde Paine "happens" to arrive at the Oswald home at around 10:00 a.m. and discovers that Lee is fully packed to go to New Orleans. He purportedly asks Ruth to drive his "bags and duffel bags, suitcases, to the bus station for him where he would buy a ticket to go to New Orleans." According to Paine, it is a "complete surprise" to her. [NOTE: Of course it's handy that she just happened to be around to drive him, since he has no driver's license.]
  

Other events in April leading up to this public headline, and the simultaneous sudden compulsion on the part of Lee Harvey Oswald to bolt off to New Orleans, demonstrate that the fix for the Kennedy trip to Dallas already was in the works, and that Oswald had foreknowledge because he clearly was cutting himself loose from Dallas ties to be able to make the trip.

Another informant identified Lee Harvey Oswald as staying at a CIA safe-house on the outskirts of Miami during the summer of 1963. While there he met Orlando Bosch, Luis Posada and Antonio Cuesta.

There is one glaring period "during the summer of 1963" that I can see being completely explained by such an event.

That period comprises the approximate week beginning on or around Thursday or Friday, 1 or 2 August 1963, going through Thursday, 8 August 1963

In the first few days of that time period are the hotly controversial and cloudly claims of Lee Harvey Oswald being in Clinton, Louisiana and surrounds, along with two other men variously claimed possibly to be David Ferrie and Clay Shaw. The entire incident is so conflicted and counterclaimed and argued that it always has stunk mightily of a CIA op to cover Oswald's actual whereabouts using a ringer. That as an isolated event couldn't possibly ever be evaluated, though.

However: the very Monday following "the Clinton incident," 5 August 1963, Bringuier provides an alibi for the whereabouts of Lee Harvey Oswald, claiming (with "corroboration" <SPIT!>) that Oswald was in his store that day, and that Oswald came back the following day, Wednesday, 6 August 1963 and left his Guidebook for Marines, which Bringuier later waved around as "proof" <SPIT!> of Oswald having been there.

And what is the next certain location of Lee Harvey Oswald? It is Friday, 9 August 1963, when in a clearly staged dog-and-pony with this same Carlos Bringuier and cruds, Oswald is arrested—providing "proof positive" that he was right there in New Orleans. Dontcha' know. Can I get a witness? Sing "Hallelujah."

It should be mentioned that it just so happens that during this exact same period, the big raids take place across the Pontchartrain on the "training camps" (all CIA, all the time), with Fernando Fernandez being trotted out later as the purported snake in the grass.

Such incidents in isolation (which is all the timelineless have, feeling around in the dark saying, "Ooooo, this feels sooooo interesting!") are useless for evaluation. But taken together in the correct sequence and order, the Clinton-Bringuier ops stand out naked and blinking in klieg lights as cover-ups for the actual whereabouts of Lee Harvey Oswald.

I said months ago that the Bringuier story stunk, and I have suspected that Oswald might well have been in Miami at the time. This is the first reference I've seen that tends to confirm just such speculation, and in concert with the Clinton op, and the subsequent "arrest," I believe that for the first time there is a straight line beginning to be drawn.

The final report of interest concerns a Cuban agent who identified Eladio del Valle and Herminio Diaz in Dallas on 20th November, 1963. The agent also reported that the two men “handled large sums of money after the crime.”

Oh my God! An actual date? I feel faint and can't type any more.

Ashton

[John Simkin]

I won't stop pleading for dates, however much such pleas go ignored. It is impossible even to guess a useful date from the sentence "Escalante came across a Cuban intelligence source report in April 1963" since it only gives April, in such wording, as a month during which "Escalante came across...a report," saying nothing about the date of the report itself, which could be 1886 for all I can tell. Are there any specific dates for this incident—either the discovery of the report or the date of the report itself?

Escalante says the report was discovered during an 1979 investigation.

The final report of interest concerns a Cuban agent who identified Eladio del Valle and Herminio Diaz in Dallas on 20th November, 1963. The agent also reported that the two men “handled large sums of money after the crime.”

Oh my God! An actual date? I feel faint and can't type any more.

Why do you have to be so unpleasant. I am doing all I can to help you with your research.

[Ashton Gray]

I won't stop pleading for dates, however much such pleas go ignored. It is impossible even to guess a useful date from the sentence "Escalante came across a Cuban intelligence source report in April 1963" since it only gives April, in such wording, as a month during which "Escalante came across...a report," saying nothing about the date of the report itself, which could be 1886 for all I can tell. Are there any specific dates for this incident—either the discovery of the report or the date of the report itself?

Escalante says the report was discovered during an 1979 investigation.

Thanks. I'll put the date of the report itself at 15 c. April 1963 and hope one day to get it further narrowed down, or find that other events around it tend to move it in time in one direction or another.

The final report of interest concerns a Cuban agent who identified Eladio del Valle and Herminio Diaz in Dallas on 20th November, 1963. The agent also reported that the two men “handled large sums of money after the crime.”

Oh my God! An actual date? I feel faint and can't type any more.

Why do you have to be so unpleasant. I am doing all I can to help you with your research.

It was a joke, John, and of course I appreciate your help. You deleted the that followed it. It may have been the most pleasant thing I said in the post, dealing, as I was, with inherently unpleasant subject matter.

Wouldn't you agree that more could be taken from my post for address, with greater profit?

My plea for more attention to dates is general, and will continue, and is not a personal assault on you.

If and when the zapata fits, though...

Ashton

Edited December 15, 2006 by Ashton Gray

[Michael Hogan]

I said months ago that the Bringuier story stunk, and I have suspected that Oswald might well have been in Miami at the time.

Most of what follows below is common knowledge, but I thought I would post a few references to Bringuier that John Armstrong makes in his book, Harvey & Lee.

1) Carlos Quiroga was a close associate of Arcacha Smith and Carlos Bringuier. (New Orleans delegate of the Cuban Student Directorate). Both men spent a lot of time at Banister's office in the summer of 1963. Quiroga, at the request of Bringuier, went to Lee Harvey Oswald's apartment on Magazine Street with Richard Davis in August 1963, in an alleged attempt to infiltrate Oswald's Fair Play for Cuba Committee.

2) Tony Varona told the HSCA about discussions between himself and Carlos Bringuier concerning Oswald's visits to Mexico and Cuba. Varona said, "He (Oswald) had traveled to Mexico and from Mexico he went to Cuba and came back to Mexico." When asked if Oswald's trip to Cuba was in 1961, Varona said, "I don't know the date, but it must have been during that period."

3) Efforts to eliminate Castro were not limited to the camps at Lake Ponchartrain. In late summer the DRE (Cuban Student Directorate) took out an advertisement in "See," a national tabloid, and offered a ten million dollar reward to anyone helping to assassinate Fidel Catro. DRE delegate Carlos Bringuier was interviewed by the Warren Commission but never mentioned, nor was he asked, about the advertisement or the source of the ten million dollar reward (undoubtedly from the CIA).

4) Later in the day (8/5/63) Oswald visited the Casa Roca Clothing store at 107 Decatur (close to the Habana Bar at 117 Decatur) and spoke with storeowner Carlos Bringuier. Bringuier was a former lawyer in Batista's Cuba who was living in exile in New Orleans. He was the local delegate to the DRE, having been appointed to that position by Jose Antonio Lanuza of Miami.

Note: The DRE received funding, supervison, and logistical support from CIA agent David Atlee Phillips. Carlos Bringuier reported DRE activities to the local CIA office in New Orleans.

Oswald bragged to Bringuier and two teenage boys, Philip Geraci and Vance Blalock that his Marine Corps training made him proficient in guerilla warfare. Oswald claimed to be violently anti-Castro and volunteered to help the Cubans train in their fight against Castro.

Bringuier's DRE group had recently had a confrontation with the "New Orleans Council for Peaceful Alternatives" and were on guard against possible infiltrators. He wondered how Oswald had located him, because his group's activities were not publicized. Bringuier suspected that Oswald might be an agent provocateur and was very skeptical of Oswald. Less than a week earlier, the FBI had raided and shut down one of the anti-Castro training camps at Lake Ponchartrain (McClaney camp) with which Bringuier had been associated. Bringuier said, "I thought he might be an agent from the FBI or CIA, trying to find out what we might be up to."

The suspicious Bringuier told Oswald that he didn't need his help, and politely turned him away. Bringuier later contacted his close friend Chilo Borja, military leader of the DRE in Miami, and told him about Oswald's visit and asked for direction. Borja said, "Face him down....go out there and contest him. Talk to the press, uncover this guy." Later that day Oswald checked out "The Expert Dreamers," by Fredrix Pohl, from the New Orleans public library.

The following day (Tuesday, August 6) Oswald returned to the Casa Roca Clothing store and left his Marine Corps training manual with Bringuier's brother-in-law, Rolando Perez. He then walked to the Balter building at 404 St. Charles Avenue, where Guy Banister and the Friends of Democratic Cuba, Inc. used to office, and applied for a job with Cosmos Shipping Company.

Oswald wrote a letter to V.T. Lee of the FPCC in New York and described his meeting with Bringuier. "I infiltrated (sic) the Cuban Student directorite (sic) and than (sic) harresed (sic) them with information I gained including having the N.O. city atterny (sic) call them in an put a retraining (sic) order pending a hearing on some so-called bonds for invasion they were selling in the New Orleans area."

Question: After one meeting with Bringuier, how would Oswald know the DRE was having trouble selling "bonds" without inside information?

5) On August 9, Lee Harvey Oswald began handing out Fair Play for Cuba leaflets in the 700 block of Canal Street, unaware that he was in the process of being set up as a "patsy."

CIA Agent William Gaudet watched Oswald as he passed out the FPCC leaflets from his office in the International Trade Mart, while FBI informant Orville Aucoin took films of Oswald (later shown on national teleivison). FBI photographers filmed the event with a 35mm camera from across the street, while FBI informant Orest Pena watched....

After Cuban exile Celso Macario Hernandez saw Oswald, he ran to the Casa Roca Clothing store and told Carlos Bringuier there was an American on Canal Street handing out pro-Castro leaflets and holding a sign that read, "Viva Fidel. Hands off Cuba." The two men left the store, picked up 19-year old Miguel Mariano Cruz, and appeared to be astonished when they learned the man was Lee Harvey Oswald, the man who had been to Bringuier's store the day before....

Hernandez grabbed the FPCC leaflets from Oswald and tossed them into the air while Miguel Cruz watched. Bringuier confronted Oswald and called him a traitor. Oswald placed his hands behind his back and said, "Ok, Carlos, if you want to hit me, hit me." Bringuier refused to hit Oswald and and 4:45pm New Orleans police officers W. Gaillot, Patrolman F. Hayward, and Patolman F. Wilson arrived at the scene.

After talking with Oswald and the Cubans the arresting officer thought the leafleting incident was a staged event, designed to draw attention. The officer was correct but was unaware that two of the Cubans, Carlos Bringuier and Miguel Cruz, were FBI informants and the third, Celso Hernandez, was a CIA contact.

Note: Carlos Bringuier was an FBI informant recruited by SA Warren DeBrueys. Miguel Mariano Cruz was an FBI confidential informant identified in FBI file# 97-4196-33-11 as "T-2." Celso Hernandez was the man arrested with Lee Oswald on the New Orleans waterfront by Charles Noto in the fall of 1961, while Harvey Oswald was still in Russia.

At the first district police station, Harvey Oswald was interviewed by Sergeant Horace J. Austin.....

Sergeant Austin wrote in his report, "It appeared as though he is being used by these people and is very uninformed and knows very little about the organization that he belongs to and its ultimate purpose and goal."

What soon followed were appearances by Oswald on WDSU radio and WDSU televison. Armstong describes the events in great detail, this is just a couple of paragraphs I culled:

"Conversation Carte Blanche" (WDSU radio) began with a discussion of Oswald's Fair Play for Cuba Committee activities in New Orleans. Bringuier spoke up and said, "I would like to know if it is the Fair Play for Cuba Committee or Fair Play for Russia Committee." Ed Butler chimed in and put Oswald on the defensive by asking him questions about his background and defection to Russia. Oswald responded by saying, "I was under the protection of the -- that is to say I was not under the protection of the American government, but as I was at all times considered an American citizen I did not lose my citizenship.....At no time, as I say, did I renounce my citizenship or attempt to renounce my citizenship, and at no time was I out of contact with the American Embassy."

The last time Carlos Bringuier saw Lee Harvey Oswald was at the end of their 25-minute radio debate on "Conversation Carte Blanche" (Wednesday, August 21). Bringuier soon drafted a press release that called on the US Congress to investigate Oswald and denounce the FPCC.....

There was one person who knew Lee Harvey Oswald well and was not fooled when the media tried to portray Lee Harvey Oswald as a communist -- Oswald's older half-brother, John Pic. Warren Commissioner attorney Albert Jenner questioned Pic and showed him a photograph of Oswald handing out FPCC literature:

Jenner: "There is a picture of a young man handing out a leaflet, and another man to the left of him who is reaching out for it. Do you recognize the young man handing out the leaflets?"

John Pic: No sir, I would be unable to recognize him."

Jenner: As to whether he was your brother?"

John Pic: "That is correct."

(Armstong's work is always characterized by copious footnotes and references. Of course I omitted those and some of the above was quoted out of full context)

Edited December 15, 2006 by Michael Hogan

[Ashton Gray]

Armstong's work is always characterized by copious footnotes and references. Of course I omitted those and some of the above was quoted out of full context.

Thanks for posting that version of Bringuier related events, Michael, but I believe it is precisely "the Official Story." The "copious footnotes and references" unfortunately rely almost entirely on anecdotal accounts, bolstered by little "Oswald tracks" (library book checkout, application) that so easily could have been faked by someone acting in Oswald's stead that they practically flash.

The entire track of that week of 2 August to 9 August 1963, starting with the purported "Clinton Sightings" and running through the Bringuier op, absolutely reeks, to me, of the exact kind of CIA-created alibi op that the phony Watergate "first break-in" of Memorial Day weekend 1972 was. It's a carbon copy, down to using CIA-payroll Cubans to provide the alibi. By 1972 the CIA had perfected it more and created a much more sophisticated, elaborate, and long-running hoax, but the M.O. is like a fingerprint.

Anyone who hasn't studied in depth the article I've linked to in the paragraph above and all the related articles linked to within it will have no clue what I'm talking about. I consider that its own reward.

Ashton

[Michael Hogan]

Thanks for posting that version of Bringuier related events, Michael, but I believe it is precisely "the Official Story." The "copious footnotes and references" unfortunately rely almost entirely on anecdotal accounts, bolstered by little "Oswald tracks" (library book checkout, application) that so easily could have been faked by someone acting in Oswald's stead that they practically flash.

That's the trouble of posting snippets of an author's research like I did. In retrospect, I think I lost Armstrong's point that there was more than one "Oswald" (John Pic's refusal to identify).

Armstrong's other main point that I probably lost was that during that entire incredible series of episodes...well, let me quote him one more time:

It is worth remembering and repeating that everyone associated with the Fair Play for Cuba leafleting incident on August 9th and 16th, and Oswald's radio interviews of August 17th and 21st, were connected to intelligence agencies--

everyone, including Oswald.

Well, two more times

Pic told the Warren Commission that the man handing out the FPCC literature

was not his brother

, but neither Jenner nor anyone else on the Commission were listening....

or were they?

John Armstrong's work, when viewed as a whole, is about as far from the "official story" as one can get. I sort of did his research a disservice by quoting so much out of context like I did,

[Ashton Gray]

Thanks for posting that version of Bringuier related events, Michael, but I believe it is precisely "the Official Story." The "copious footnotes and references" unfortunately rely almost entirely on anecdotal accounts, bolstered by little "Oswald tracks" (library book checkout, application) that so easily could have been faked by someone acting in Oswald's stead that they practically flash.

That's the trouble of posting snippets of an author's research like I did. In retrospect, I think I lost Armstrong's point that there was more than one "Oswald" (John Pic's refusal to identify). ...John Armstrong's work, when viewed as a whole, is about as far from the "official story" as one can get. I sort of did his research a disservice by quoting so much out of context like I did.

And please allow me to cross-correct any wrong impression I might have made in reply: I wasn't meaning to imply at all that either you or Armstrong were disciples of "the Official Story." I just meant that given way that excerpt read, anybody coming along this way new to the subject and not familiar with Armstrong's work would be reading exactly "the Official Story" stated as matters of "fact" concerning incidents that only have been asserted.

Armstrong's other main point that I probably lost was that during that entire incredible series of episodes...well, let me quote him one more time:

It is worth remembering and repeating that everyone associated with the Fair Play for Cuba leafleting incident on August 9th and 16th, and Oswald's radio interviews of August 17th and 21st, were connected to intelligence agencies--

everyone, including Oswald.

Amen, Brother Armstrong and Brother Hogan.

Well, two more times

Pic told the Warren Commission that the man handing out the FPCC literature

was not his brother

, but neither Jenner nor anyone else on the Commission were listening....

or were they?

Wellllllll...

Pic is a whole other story. His story is starting to take a pretty distored shape in timelining it. I've only seen some of it. It's off-topic for this thread, really, and I'll try to start a separate one on this at some point. But the story of his cousin, Marilyn Murret, arriving in Japan and telling him about Oswald being in Europe the day the story of Oswald's defection broke (but before it broke), coupled with other bizarre coincidences (particularly around the Thanksgiving 1962 encounter), make him quite a person of interest.

Thanks for the clarifications.

Ashton

Edited December 15, 2006 by Ashton Gray

[John Dolva]

The transparency of the conspiracy means the letters were to implicate anti-castroites. They certainly indicate a conspiracy. But what type of conspiracy?

The letters focus on those who were NOT behind the assassination. Had the true room beyond the room full of mirrors and smoke been opened, the US would have descended into Civil War. They had a hard enough time trying to contain it during the coming decade of long hot chicago style summers.

And what do beleaguered Governments do? They declare martial law. The contradictions that were tearing the US apart would surface and the SWP and CPUSA would move to war footing. Preemptive first strike on the Soviet Union would follow and 40 million US citicans would die.

That is what the WC was all about

The letters were clearly not very professional. Escalante argues that an analysis of the “Jorge” letter suggests that it was written by someone who did not have Spanish as a first language.

However, the fact that the letters were written before the assassination suggests that the person who wrote the letter knew about the conspiracy to kill JFK. According to your argument, these people were against the anti-Castrolites - in other words, pro-Castro. Therefore, the people behind the assassination were pro-Castro who wanted to blame it on the anti-Castro community. However, they did not do this directly and for the plan to succeed, they had to rely on the FBI to work out that the letters were forgeries. How could they guarantee that all this would happen?

A more logical explanation is that the people who set up Oswald were fairly incompetent but knew that the FBI and the CIA would take the necessary steps to cover-up for them.

Another possibility is that the assassination was planned by highly competent members of the CIA. However, they set up several groups of people: pro-Castro, anti-Castro, LBJ, the communists, the far-right (Bernard Weissman), the Texas oil millionaires, etc. It was then left up to the FBI to decide who to blame. It did not matter who it was as long as it was not the CIA. If this was the strategy, it worked as all the false trials has kept researchers busy and confused for over 40 years.

No, John, I'm not saying that at all. The conspirators were happy to have anyone but themselves implicated. Logically 'Castro did it' was recognised as a shaky notion. Let the anti Castroites who were basically spics bear the brunt. They can take it and as there is no evidence to support the notion they'll pull through. Look how well people like Bosch have fared. No probs there.

"Kill the 'niggerlovin'-catholic-pinko' president, have it done by a 'communist', have him done away by a 'kike' mobster, and blame it on the 'spics'."<< This is very much the nature of Hate Crimes. There doesn't have to be a sophisticated political understanding as far as the actual killers go. Lumpen elements such as KKK, White Supremacists, and so on, do it for basic reasons, their social 'superiors' in Civic life (Citizens Coulcils etc) such as the 'Good 'ole Boys' represented by Walker and his ilk, can do the organising.

Putting things mildly, there are groupings that do not have to be Pro (or Anti) Castro in order to benefit from people focusing on the struggles between left and right.

One is the old status quo in the Southern states that Kennedy, with his proven, firm, stand on equality and Civil Rights, was threatening to legislate out of existence.

I think most people instinctively identifie them as behind the assassination and strangely enough no investigation has exhaustively explored that.

On the contrary, today, very few even begin to consider it because the usual subjects unofficially AND officially given prominence are the Cuba centric theories.

[John Simkin]

Fabian Escalante definitely has an agenda. He seems very keen to link Orlando Bosch and Luis Posada to the assassination. There are obvious political reasons for this and is probably an attempt to hurt the Bush family. However, that in itself does not make him wrong.

[Ashton Gray]

Fabian Escalante definitely has an agenda. He seems very keen to link Orlando Bosch and Luis Posada to the assassination. There are obvious political reasons for this and is probably an attempt to hurt the Bush family. However, that in itself does not make him wrong.

I agree with you, and I genuinely am not trying to work against you in my attempts to nail down specifics, and genuinely do appreciate the incredible amount of work you obviously invest in tracking down information.

On the other hand, it's been my experience that when doors start to open a crack leading to CIA sub-basements where the bodies really are buried, they have a ready arsenal of rhetorical and disinformational stun grenades to launch, and almost overnight can generate more red herrings per cubic researcher than could be counted in three human lifetimes.

Timelining is one relatively quick and sure proof against a majority of falsehoods. It isn't some personal hobby horse. It's an important tool that works every bit as much in your interests as in mine.

Ashton

[William Kelly]

I just got Fabian Escalante's "Executive Action - 634 Ways To Kill Fidel Castro."

I thought there was a thread on this book, but I can't find it.

Anyway, I'll get back after I read it.

BK

[Nathaniel Heidenheimer]

I found these paragraphs very interesting about a possible relationship between David Sanchez Morales and AM/Lash:

------------

It was really very strange, as apparently Sanchez Morales had nothing to do with CUbela's case, and according to our information, was involved at that time in a conspiracy organized from Miami in conjunction with the capo John Rosselli to assassinate Fidel Castro

Sanchez Morales' connection with the AM/LASH case introduced a new element, suggesting the possibility he might have been manipulating it on the margins of the plan drawn up by headquarters, It is worth recalling here the existing differences between CIA counterintelligence and the SAS responsible for going ahead on the AM/LASH operation. If the CIA suspected that Cubela was a double agent, it is possible that other agents, such as Sanchez Morales, sidelined from it, attempted to utilize Cubela for their own projects (p. 70)

-----------

Are there any other signs that Morales may have been "manipulating AM/LASH on the margins"?