Jump to content

J. Walton Moore comparison


Recommended Posts

After some truly spectacular researching and legwork, Lee Forman was able to secure some photos of J. Walton Moore from the early 1940's to the early 1970's.

There was a forum discussion some time back (unable to find the thread) where it was suggested that Moore might have been a candidate for the Maurice Bishop character. Anyway, here is a comparison below.

Once again, brilliant work, Lee.

James

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 36
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

There was a forum discussion some time back (unable to find the thread) where it was suggested that Moore might have been a candidate for the Maurice Bishop character. Anyway, here is a comparison below.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but to my tired eyes Moore is a better match for the "Bishop" sketch than David Phillips ever was

Once again, brilliant work, Lee.

James

Yes, thank you both.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a forum discussion some time back (unable to find the thread) where it was suggested that Moore might have been a candidate for the Maurice Bishop character. Anyway, here is a comparison below.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but to my tired eyes Moore is a better match for the "Bishop" sketch than David Phillips ever was

Once again, brilliant work, Lee.

James

Yes, thank you both.

Comparing the sketch to photos of different people is one way to confuse things, when in fact, the sketch as described by Antonio Vecina was accompanied by a very detailed description of the actions of this person, actions that took place over decades in different countries.

David Atlee Phillips career, as outlined in his own autobiography Nightwatch, matches the details of the "Maurice Bishop" in over a dozen very specific circumstances.

"Maurice Bishop" was a covert operative and case officer who specialized in black propaganda, while Moore was an officer in the Domestic Contacts Division, which didn't handle oversees covert operations.

While others have suggested that more than one CIA officer may have used the alias "Maurice Bishop," and Gordon Campbell is also mentioned, the number of exact matches make it improbable that anyone other than David Atlee Phillips was the individual being described by Antonio Vecina.

Those who want to speculate over facial similarities are free to do so, but the career matches are what makes the determination a believable fact and not speculaton.

It's nice to see a head shot of Moore though, thanks Lee & James.

BK

Edited by William Kelly
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a forum discussion some time back (unable to find the thread) where it was suggested that Moore might have been a candidate for the Maurice Bishop character. Anyway, here is a comparison below.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but to my tired eyes Moore is a better match for the "Bishop" sketch than David Phillips ever was

Once again, brilliant work, Lee.

James

Yes, thank you both.

Comparing the sketch to photos of different people is one way to confuse things, when in fact, the sketch as described by Antonio Vechina was accompanied by a very detailed description of the actions of this person, actions that took place over decades in different countries.

David Atlee Phillips career, as outlined in his own autobiography Nightwatch, matches the details of the "Maurice Bishop" in over a dozen very specific circumstances.

"Maurice Bishop" was a covert operative and case officer who specialized in black propaganda, while Moore was an officer in the Domestic Contacts Division, which didn't handle oversees covert operations.

While others have suggested that more than one CIA officer may have used the alias "Maurice Bishop," and Gordon Campbell is also mentioned, the number of exact matches make it improbable that anyone other than David Atlee Phillips was the individual being described by Antonio Vechina.

Those who want to speculate over facial similarities are free to do so, but the career matches are what makes the determination a believable fact and not speculaton.

BK

I had discovered there was a CIA agent in Dallas named J. Walton Moore. He had been there since the time of the Kennedy assassination and, in fact, was listed in the telephone book down through the years -- except during the period of the Jim Garrison investigation. On the chance that Moore might be Maurice Bishop, I asked a friend of mine, a reporter on a Dallas television station, to have a surreptitious photograph of Moore taken so I could show it to Veciana. (Moore, it turned out, did not look like Bishop.

The Last Investigation pt2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comparing the sketch to photos of different people is one way to confuse things, when in fact, the sketch as described by Antonio Vecina was accompanied by a very detailed description of the actions of this person, actions that took place over decades in different countries.

the number of exact matches make it improbable that anyone other than David Atlee Phillips was the individual being described by Antonio Vecina.

Those who want to speculate over facial similarities are free to do so, but the career matches are what makes the determination a believable fact and not speculaton.

BK

My recollection is that Veciana dropped tantalizing clues hinting that David Phillips was "Maurice Bishop", then specifically testified that Phillips was NOT Bishop. If I am remembering that accurately, then no one will EVER be able to cite Veciana's testimony as evidence that Phillips was Bishop.

I think Mr. Veciana was dispatched to send investigators on a wild goose chase.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I can recollect, when Veciana was interviewed by Fonzi the last time, he gave him small hints that Bishop was in fact Phillips, even if he didn’t say it out loud. I’ve read it somewhere but I am, at the moment, unable to find the source.

I think the shoot in his head was a major cause to why he didn’t reveal the identity.

Johansson

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What I can recollect, when Veciana was interviewed by Fonzi the last time, he gave him small hints that Bishop was in fact Phillips, even if he didn’t say it out loud. I’ve read it somewhere but I am, at the moment, unable to find the source.

I think the shoot in his head was a major cause to why he didn’t reveal the identity.

Johansson

At the end of The Last Investigation, Phillips is dead and Fonzi goes back to Veciana one last time to get closure. Veciana tells him it was Phillips without ever saying the words. The key to remember is that Veciana was, and apparently still is, part of the anti-Castro movement. He was hoping to get renewed CIA support when he spoke to the HSCA. He really didn't care who killed Kennedy, and may have been involved somehow himself. I suspect somehow someday someone will discover something along the lines of Morley's discovery of Joannides--that Alpha 66 regained funding through a mysterious source just around the time Veciana said he couldn't identify Phillips. Call it a sneakin' suspicion.

That said, the Moore photo is a decent match. The eyes are off but the nose and mouth are quite similar, IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had discovered there was a CIA agent in Dallas named J. Walton Moore. He had been there since the time of the Kennedy assassination and, in fact, was listed in the telephone book down through the years -- except during the period of the Jim Garrison investigation. On the chance that Moore might be Maurice Bishop, I asked a friend of mine, a reporter on a Dallas television station, to have a surreptitious photograph of Moore taken so I could show it to Veciana. (Moore, it turned out, did not look like Bishop.

The Last Investigation pt2

The eyes are not a perfect match - neither is the hair in the way it is brushed back - however, this doesn't mean that the hair could have been changed. The remainder of the sketch is quite interesting. Something like a 50% overlay - I cut out the eyes.

post-675-1177635284_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Mr. Veciana was dispatched to send investigators on a wild goose chase.

And were Phillips' brother, niece and nephew also similarly dispatched?

The guy was fingered as Bishop by his own family, for crissakes.

Edited by Cliff Varnell
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Mr. Veciana was dispatched to send investigators on a wild goose chase.

And were Phillips' brother, niece and nephew also similarly dispatched?

The guy was fingered as Bishop by his own family

did any of his family say they saw him talking to Lee Oswald in Dallas?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Mr. Veciana was dispatched to send investigators on a wild goose chase.

And were Phillips' brother, niece and nephew also similarly dispatched?

The guy was fingered as Bishop by his own family

did any of his family say they saw him talking to Lee Oswald in Dallas?

Veciana saw Maurice Bishop with Oswald.

Veciana's composite sketch of Bishop was identified by Phillips' family as Phillips.

To sow confusion, no doubt...(snerk)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had discovered there was a CIA agent in Dallas named J. Walton Moore. He had been there since the time of the Kennedy assassination and, in fact, was listed in the telephone book down through the years -- except during the period of the Jim Garrison investigation. On the chance that Moore might be Maurice Bishop, I asked a friend of mine, a reporter on a Dallas television station, to have a surreptitious photograph of Moore taken so I could show it to Veciana. (Moore, it turned out, did not look like Bishop.

The Last Investigation pt2

The eyes are not a perfect match - neither is the hair in the way it is brushed back - however, this doesn't mean that the hair could have been changed. The remainder of the sketch is quite interesting. Something like a 50% overlay - I cut out the eyes.

_____________________________

I (still) assert that Phillips was the man who was represented in the sketch. I base my conclusion not only on the strong facial and hair similarities between the two, but as well on fact that there are visible in the photo of Phillips several blotches and/or moles, on the left side of his face which are also shown in the sketch. Hmm.... How interesting....! Obviously, the blotches or moles or whatever they were must have been very obvious and visible to Veciana, otherwise why would he have directed the artist to put them there?

I mentioned this on another thread a some time ago, where a larger, lighter, more-detailed "sketch" was posted, but no one addressed this particular issue of blotches and/or moles.... Why? Because it doesn't fit in with your particular paradigm?? Hmmm?...........

Interesting,

--Thomas ("Thread Killer") Graves

_____________________________

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had discovered there was a CIA agent in Dallas named J. Walton Moore. He had been there since the time of the Kennedy assassination and, in fact, was listed in the telephone book down through the years -- except during the period of the Jim Garrison investigation. On the chance that Moore might be Maurice Bishop, I asked a friend of mine, a reporter on a Dallas television station, to have a surreptitious photograph of Moore taken so I could show it to Veciana. (Moore, it turned out, did not look like Bishop.

The Last Investigation pt2

The eyes are not a perfect match - neither is the hair in the way it is brushed back - however, this doesn't mean that the hair could have been changed. The remainder of the sketch is quite interesting. Something like a 50% overlay - I cut out the eyes.

_____________________________

I (still) assert that Phillips was the man who was represented in the sketch. I base my conclusion not only on the strong facial and hair similarities between the two, but as well on fact that there are visible in the photo of Phillips several blotches and/or moles, on the left side of his face which are also shown in the sketch. Hmm.... How interesting! Obviously, the blotches or moles or whatever they were must have been very obvious and visible to Veciana, otherwise why would he have directed the artist to put them there?

I mentioned this on another thread some time ago, where a larger, lighter and more-detailed "sketch" was posted, but no one addressed this particular issue of blotches and/or moles which I raised.... Why? Because it doesn't fit in with your particular paradigm?? LOL If that's the case, then how can you call yourself a "Researcher" with a capital "R?" Hmmm?...........

Interesting,

--Thomas ("Thread Killer") Graves

_____________________________

P.S. I'm a-bumpin' it now and I'm a-gonna keep on a-bumpin' it 'till I get a rational. research-oriented response...

James, Robin, Lee...?

_____________________________

Edited by Thomas Graves
Link to comment
Share on other sites

P.S. I'm a-bumpin' it now and I'm a-gonna keep on a-bumpin' it 'till I get a rational. research-oriented response...

James, Robin, Lee...? (Thomas Graves)

Thomas,

I'm not sure I can offer a rational, research-oriented response but I guess the thing here is that the whole Bishop scenario is likely more complicated than first thought.

Even if Phillips was the Bishop that Veciana saw and I think this is highly likely, Moore is one individual who has escaped major scrutiny and given his connections to de Mohrenschildt and by association to Bush and Devine, some obvious questions come to mind.

Given that Hal Feeney also used the Bishop handle adds color especially since he was possible Dallas participant Tony Izquierdo's case officer, and throw in Gordon Campbell as another using the name and one is left wondering what it all means.

So, who was running who here? I fear there is too many preconceived notions regarding this while the subtleties of relevant information remain buried deep within skilfull trade craft.

Onward!

James

Edited by James Richards
Link to comment
Share on other sites

P.S. I'm a-bumpin' it now and I'm a-gonna keep on a-bumpin' it 'till I get a rational. research-oriented response...

James, Robin, Lee...? (Thomas Graves)

Thomas,

I'm not sure I can offer a rational, research-oriented response but I guess the thing here is that the whole Bishop scenario is likely more complicated than first thought.

Even if Phillips was the Bishop that Veciana saw and I think this is highly likely, Moore is one individual who has escaped major scrutiny and given his connections to de Mohrenschildt and by association to Bush and Devine, some obvious questions come to mind.

Given that Hal Feeney also used the Bishop handle adds color especially since he was possible Dallas participant Tony Izquierdo's case officer, and throw in Gordon Campbell as another using the name and one is left wondering what it all means.

So, who was running who here? I fear there is too many preconceived notions regarding this while the subtleties of relevant information remain buried deep within skilfull trade craft.

Onward!

James

_________________________

Thanks James,

As you know, I value quite highly your observations, theories, and ruminations. I understand the importance of the name "Bishop" in the context of the assassination, and the fact that it was apparently used by several different operatives....

Regardless, in comparing "The Sketch" to the photos of all the possible CIA dudes who might have been LHO's controller, I think the definitive answer lies in the details. The details I'm referring to are the representations in the sketch of warts, wens, moles, splotches, freckles, and/or birthmarks which are clearly visible on the left side of the man's face in the sketch and which are also clearly visible in the photo of one David Atlee Phillips.

So far, no one on The Forum has addressed this minor observation on my part (regarding the warts, wens, moles, freckles, and/or birthmarks)...

Of all the candidates I've seen so far (including Moore), the only one who has similar marks on the left side of his face is David Atlee Phillips....

Onward Ho!

--Thomas

__________________________

Edited by Thomas Graves
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...