Okay, we’ll go with the benign, not sinister, proposition—the CIA is covering up their dysfunction and incompetence. Why in Hell do we spend billions upon billions on “black” projects like the CIA and NSA then? They weren’t sharp enough to pick up the collapse of Vietnam, USSR. They were closely watching LHO and had no idea he was an assassin. Take their money away.
^^^^^^ This is only part 1 of a six part series. Jeff carefully refers to Oswald as "assassin/patsy" in this newsletter update for a very good reason, amplified by noting Oswald denied any responsibility.
If you are trying to assemble a murder case against him, you need to at least link him to that old unreliable rifle (which conveniently shared a serial # with other Mannlichers, btw) and place him on the sixth floor of the TSBD when shots were allegedly fired from there.
It's much worse than that, but at least start with this six-part series making the case Oswald didn't shoot anyone at all on Nov. 22, 1963.
can you point me to a source where i can learn more about the serial number duplication? i have never heard that particular detail before (getting shades of oswald's/michael paine's minox camera/light meter serial number)
The same model was produced in different Italian factories, so they sometimes had the same serial #. Convenient if you are ordering a rifle through the mail (makes no sense, Oswald could have bought one "no questions aaske and no i.d." in Texas) ready for planting.
There’s no reason to cover up incompetence for 60 years — that one should be taken off the table.
It’s important to note that neither the Report of the Warren Commission nor the Report of the HSCA addressed the question of whether Oswald may have been set up as a fall guy — even though the only two irrefutable facts in the case, being 1) that JFK was shot dead and 2) that the man accused of this crime was himself two days later also shot dead, argue overwhelmingly to take the case in that direction.
We seek full disclosure not to expose Agency “incompetence” nor to expose evidence of a “second gunman” nor to expose evidence that Oswald may have “had accomplices” but rather to expose evidence that Oswald may have been framed (perhaps by the Agency) to wrongly take the blame for the assassination.
Hear! Hear! We now know thanks to the tireless work of Dutch/British researcher, Bart Kamp, who found Hosty's BOMBSHELL first day HANDWRITTEN Oswald interrogation notes in 2019, while organizing the Malcolm Blunt* Archives, that Hosty perjured himself before the HSCA in his sworn testimony - to essentially destroy Oswald's alibi that he was on the steps at the time of the shots - drinking his Coke (and eating his cheese sandwich). We now know that he was the previously unknown character standing in the shadowy west corner of the TSBD steps - right next to Buell Frazier (!) - both were turned toward each other in the Darnell Film immediately after the shots - likely asking each other "Did you hear that? Were those shots? Or some such obvious thing. (Prayer Man is NOT to be confused with Billy Lovelady who was "Doorway Man." in Altgens 6).
Hosty, testified that he destroyed those notes after they were typed up - per FBI protocol. The handwritten notes shockingly said Lee went up to the 2nd floor to get a Coke to have with his lunch on the 1st floor "then went outside to watch the P.Parade."! So, Hosty perjured himself to destroy Oswald's stunning alibi and FRAME an innocent man (innocent, at least, of shooting JFK from the 6th flr window - whether he was involved in the coup in some way - OR infiltrating it - I can't say; but he deserved the benefit of innocence until proven guilty - especially now that we know the lengths the FBI went to to FRAME him!). We finally have corroboration that he was framed, just as he loudly protested to the Press in the DPD hallway. "I'm just a PATSY!" and "I don't know what this is all about!" Hosty's handwritten notes were completely different from his typed notes, as were his and Bookhout's joint typed notes - which were the only interrogation notes to be entered into the official record.
Hosty's ACTUAL handwritten notes were deep-sixed for 56 years - and had it not been for Bart stumbling across them while going through thousands of previously unseen files copied by Malcolm Blunt at NARA and brought back to England, we would STILL not know about them! (IKYDK, Malcolm Blunt is a British physician, JFK researcher & author, of "The Devil is in the Details: Alan Dale with Malcolm Blunt on the assassination of President Kennedy".)
We owe a great thanks to Bart Kamp for finding this explosive document - and for his paradigm shifting book, "Prayer Man: More Than a Fuzzy Picture" (Oct 2023), and to his meticulous website Prayer-Man.com. See His Hosty page with the aforementioned notes highlighted in green (scroll down for those): http://www.prayer-man.com/fbi-ss/james-hosty/
Bart Kamp released the first draft of his paper “Anatomy Of The Second Floor Lunch Room Encounter" in Sept. 2016 - a precursor to his Oct 2023 book, Prayerman: More Than A Fuzzy Picture"). In Nov. that year he was awarded the JFK Lancer & Mary Ferrell Pioneer Award. Followed up, in April 2017, with the Excellence Award by the Dealey Plaza UK board. In Nov 2023 he presented the findings of his book at the Lancer Conference. I highly recommend watching his 2023 Lancer Prayer Man presentation: "JFK Assassination - Bart Kamp - Prayer Man - Lancer Conference Nov 19 2023" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nd2lJ4Yef40
(Full disclosure: He cites me in his book and video for the identification work I did for him of the TSBD ladies in front of, and on, the steps.)
I previously attempted to respond to your inquiry regarding my mention of Hosty. I think somewhere along the line that the old rhetorical observation, how many angels can fit on the point of a pin, can be applied to the assassination. How many conspirators and cover-uppers can fit on the edge of a pin. Hosty may haver fulfilled his professional responsibilities regarding Oswald. Had the note left in the field office been as threatening as the secretary insinuated, I tend to feel Hosty and others would have begun on a serious investigation.
At this point in my viewpoint. the coverup of the assassination seems certain. The government insulates itself from criticism at the expense of truth. All governments probably always have and always will. I have backtracked in my accusations of rogue government agencies being responsible for the assassination and now feel other entities may likely be as responsible. But I absolve no one.
A lingering question to me is Ruth Paine's involvement because I do believe she had intelligence credentials. Was the site of the assassination (TSBD) selected before Oswald gained employment there or after? Paine could have been assisting the Oswald family but I've read that better employment offers were made for Oswald via Paine's phone but that Oswald was not alerted. I have assumed that Paine was more an observer of Oswald than a manipulator. She and her husband reportedly were recorded on the phone saying something to the effect "We both know who is behind it." I think Paine is more important than Hosty was.
I have attempted to reply to your Thanksgiving post from a half hour ago. Did it twice. I think there is a problem with the site. I can't tell if it went through but I doubt it.
There is the possibility that all you have pointed out again is 100% true. There is also a possibility it may be partially true but your work should be in the back of everyone's mind who is interested in the truth. Hosty may not be as complicit in anything as some students suggest.
Great work, but I still do not believe Oswald was in Mexico City. Where are the photos and audio proof? Maybe he was being framed? I don't know, but until I see real evidence, I am not buying it.
One possibility is in Jeff's recent article on the whistleblower. There were at least 2 CIA officers who stated they had seen 2 pictures of LHO coming/going to the Soviet Embassy. Additional officials suspected they were kept in Win Scott's safe, which was confiscated by Angleton right after Scott's death. After Angleton's death, George Kalaris ordered 99% of Angleton's files destroyed. So the photos and tapes may have been destroyed. But the presence of surveillance during his visits is provable. Also, see Jeff's article on Andres Goyachenka (sp?) whose mother ran one of the Soviet surveillance cameras.
Something I never understood about Morley’s position on Goyachenka is that it presumes Goyachenka knew that the person she photographed was affirmatively Oswald. What if Goyachenka believed she photographed Oswald but in fact photographed someone else? And time had fuzzied her memory on what the person photographed looked like? So when she is saying she remembered photographing Oswald really just means she remembered photographing someone she believed was Oswald. Maybe I’m overestimating the potential for that, but I never found Goyachenka’s statement that she photographed Oswald as strong evidence that the person photographed was indeed Oswald.
If it were, then the reason for covering that up is either (a) fear that association between Oswald and the USSR about two months before assassination would heighten tensions between USA and USSR to dangerous levels (the innocuous explanation); (b) fear it would expose the CIA as failing to act on intelligence, undermining their ability to justify a big part of the entire reason the CIA exists; or (c) exposure of counterespionage operation.
I would say “disclosure of CIA covert op” as a fourth reason but the photo surveillance has been known for awhile now so it’s no longer a viable explanation. (a) is a shaky explanation because everything else we’ve done since shows deliberate intent to vilify USSR so Oswald’s connection therewith would support that vilifying objective. At this point (b) seems weak because we already know of many other CIA failures, although admittedly none as inflammatory as a failure leading to a U.S. president’s death. I’m enrolling in the class very interested in this. The main point I feel is regardless of the explanation we are so far removed at this point no explanation justifies continued secrecy.
Your analysis is similar to my own. I think there is more reason to think that Oswald wasn't there than he was. I would love to see Mr. Morley defend his acceptance of the Mexico trip. Perhaps he has done so already but I haven't been able to find that article.
Really, I thought that was audio only. But even then that demonstrates something that is confirmed by other evidence, that SOMEONE was impersonating Oswald in multiple places at multiple times. ONLY an intelligence agency could or would do that.
Bottomline: I don't see much reason to believe Oswald was in Mexico. Indeed, I see more reasons to think he was not.
Its interesting to consider what's said in the last paragraph of this posting. Namely that the defenders of the Warren Report always have fallback positions when it comes to hard evidence that questions the official story. Its usually dismissed as incomplete, or misinterpreted, or just plain simple incompetence.
In other words, the Institution is given the benefit of the doubt, and their intentions are always considered honorable and benevolent.
This is not to say that there may have been incompetence or miscommunication regarding Oswald, but had this been the sole case, the Agency would have fessed up to it a long time ago. Indeed, the Intelligence establishment has in the past been quite forthcoming in revealing errors made during its history, some of which were quite embarrassing.
For example, the fake porn film mentioned in the article likely refers to a mid 1950s operation meant to incriminate visiting Indonesian President Sukarno, who himself had openly desired to meet and go to bed with Hollywood actress Marilyn Monroe. According to Bill Moyers in his 1980s documentary "The Secret Government", the Agency made a fake porn film with a Marilyn look alike and a male model made up to look like Sukarno. However, the quality of the film was amateurish and did not pass muster with the folks at CIA, so the project was shelved.
This is but one example of the numerous boo-boos that the Agency has made time and again, so much that my late Mother once said that CIA stands for "Clumsy Intelligence Agency". That said, while the Suits may be open about their mistakes, they will only rarely reveal their successes. Perhaps because the results are still with us today.
one would assume that all of the most incriminating details of the event would have long since been destroyed (or at least "destroyed"), assuming such details were ever put to paper.
-I’m struck how LHO is watched by both the CIA and the FBI. It leads me to wonder is there significant differences in the nature of surveillance, in each case, it feels like the CIAis is not sharing their direct surveillance but using the FBI like a babysitter role??
-this could be nothing but the police report in New Orleans does not note the I’d card related LHO and Defense industries but when arrested in Dallas he has it on him. What really is it, did this get him into places to be briefed by a handler or pick up messages. ?? Or work when he needs it. How does a Marxist , defector, pro Cuba kind of kid get one!,
On this day, 61 years later, my reflection turns to the class and the file.in my notes I refer to it as the active file and the”active kid”; there is in my mind no avoiding the overwhelming facts of serious CIA interest in LHO. This is no ordinary file, when I did regulatory oversite of major Canadian banks we watched for file like this to trace how far up the entities food chain went the interest. Here I’m very comfortable saying to the top echelons, right up to nov! The graph tells a lot combined with the numbers. A thought: for John, Margot, and Craig, (sorry if I missed anyone), have you thought of transactional analysis leading to a bubble chart. The many folks who signed for the file, each become a dot including who they report to, this can lead to a bubble, where’s the biggest bubble! JJ or—- I think there’s software that now does this
The file and class reminded me , we are still dealing with a twentyish old young man. He’s bright, he maybe on the edge of the spectrum, or it’s the dyslexic factor, but he’s capable of being in and out of the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War. Remarkable really. Learned fluent Russian, got into the Marines, read heavy books, it leads me to all that action around this file is how to use him effectively,he’s got a great trail to eventually infiltrate whatever, or become a patsy? He’s still a kid and proves it, all in the file-
Hints of a double life pros never make-
1.moscow embassy hints of deadheading combined with govt must get me out.
2.Nwe Orleans arrest- request for FBI, again hints of govt protection
3.no Markist wanting to impress whoever would have their pic taken in the back yard with The Daily Worker and socialist worker’s party magazine together! Ever! Oops
4.His behaviours re Marina combined with a Sal edgy nous would lead to how to get the most out of him without ever allowing him to fully join them.
I wonder why the CIA would be so resolute in hiding their incompetence on this matter, but so forthcoming about crimes and incompetence during the Church hearings?
Once again, great work, Jeff, and to your intrepid students in the Oswald File class! I think the evident interest and/or monitoring of Oswald also
brings into relief my own recent research, which concerned the CIA connections of the men the Warren Commission contracted to work on both Oswald and Ruby's WC biographies. The latter speaks to the extent the CIA was involving itself (in a manner of speaking) in the official government response to the JFK assassination.
Your "What Jane Roman Said" colleague, John M. Newman (author of the 1995/2008 book "Oswald and the CIA"), has written in his 2022 book, "Uncovering Popov's Mole," that probable KGB "mole" Bruce Leonard Solie in the CIA's mole-hunting Office of Security not only sent (or duped his confidant, protégé, and mole-hunting subordinate, James Angleton, into sending) Oswald to Moscow in 1959 as an ostensible "dangle" in a planned-to-fail hunt for "Popov's Mole" (Solie) in the wrong part of the CIA, but arranged in advance for all incoming non-CIA cables on Oswald's defection to be routed to his office (the Security Research Staff -- where he was Deputy Chief) rather than to where they would normally go -- the Soviet Russia Division. Newman says Solie made those documents disappear into a "black hole" for at least six weeks (and some for years).
Newman's colleague, researcher Malcolm Blunt, says Solie tried to talk W. David Slawson into letting Yuri "The KGB Had Nothing To Do With Oswald In The USSR" Nosenko testify to the Warren Commission in April of 1964, just two months after the CIA had begun to seriously interrogate him, and that in the late 1970s Solie hid Office of Security files on Oswald from the Church Committee and the HSCA.
I think it's fascinating that you don't mention Solie in your article.
Why is that?
-- Tom
PS I forgot to mention that in a 10 September 2021 YouTube interview on the subject of "Yuri Nosenko and the JFK assassination," Blunt says Solie was "all over The Kennedy Investigation" and "all over Clay Shaw for Jim Garrison."
PPS I almost forgot -- Newman agrees with Tennent H. Bagley (who was Nosenko's primary case officer for five years and to whom Newman dedicated his book) that Solie "cleared" Nosenko in 1968 by giving him a bogus polygraph exam and writing a specious report.
Outstanding job Jeff. These are incredibly interesting times. The potential for getting at the truth in the near future is at least a possibility. The angle of covering up deep state incompetence is laughable. Sounds like a new misinformation/distraction effort. The exposure of such massive high level intelligence interest in LHO is stunning. Just how many citizens receive such attention? Just the chosen patsy? I believe Marina has backed away from the case after so long, but I wonder what she makes of the current situation and if anyone in the community has reached out to her. Or to Ruth Paine?
Okay, we’ll go with the benign, not sinister, proposition—the CIA is covering up their dysfunction and incompetence. Why in Hell do we spend billions upon billions on “black” projects like the CIA and NSA then? They weren’t sharp enough to pick up the collapse of Vietnam, USSR. They were closely watching LHO and had no idea he was an assassin. Take their money away.
https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/part-1-of-6-no-motive-plus-the-silenced-witnesses
^^^^^^ This is only part 1 of a six part series. Jeff carefully refers to Oswald as "assassin/patsy" in this newsletter update for a very good reason, amplified by noting Oswald denied any responsibility.
If you are trying to assemble a murder case against him, you need to at least link him to that old unreliable rifle (which conveniently shared a serial # with other Mannlichers, btw) and place him on the sixth floor of the TSBD when shots were allegedly fired from there.
It's much worse than that, but at least start with this six-part series making the case Oswald didn't shoot anyone at all on Nov. 22, 1963.
can you point me to a source where i can learn more about the serial number duplication? i have never heard that particular detail before (getting shades of oswald's/michael paine's minox camera/light meter serial number)
The same model was produced in different Italian factories, so they sometimes had the same serial #. Convenient if you are ordering a rifle through the mail (makes no sense, Oswald could have bought one "no questions aaske and no i.d." in Texas) ready for planting.
I just did, it's referenced there in the six-parts, I believe in #5, see also:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carcano
And:
https://www.kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/will-the-real-wikipedia-please-stand-up
^^^^ Deconstructs the nonsense purveyed by Wikipedia about the JFK assassination and how it remains up there.
There’s no reason to cover up incompetence for 60 years — that one should be taken off the table.
It’s important to note that neither the Report of the Warren Commission nor the Report of the HSCA addressed the question of whether Oswald may have been set up as a fall guy — even though the only two irrefutable facts in the case, being 1) that JFK was shot dead and 2) that the man accused of this crime was himself two days later also shot dead, argue overwhelmingly to take the case in that direction.
We seek full disclosure not to expose Agency “incompetence” nor to expose evidence of a “second gunman” nor to expose evidence that Oswald may have “had accomplices” but rather to expose evidence that Oswald may have been framed (perhaps by the Agency) to wrongly take the blame for the assassination.
Hear! Hear! We now know thanks to the tireless work of Dutch/British researcher, Bart Kamp, who found Hosty's BOMBSHELL first day HANDWRITTEN Oswald interrogation notes in 2019, while organizing the Malcolm Blunt* Archives, that Hosty perjured himself before the HSCA in his sworn testimony - to essentially destroy Oswald's alibi that he was on the steps at the time of the shots - drinking his Coke (and eating his cheese sandwich). We now know that he was the previously unknown character standing in the shadowy west corner of the TSBD steps - right next to Buell Frazier (!) - both were turned toward each other in the Darnell Film immediately after the shots - likely asking each other "Did you hear that? Were those shots? Or some such obvious thing. (Prayer Man is NOT to be confused with Billy Lovelady who was "Doorway Man." in Altgens 6).
Hosty, testified that he destroyed those notes after they were typed up - per FBI protocol. The handwritten notes shockingly said Lee went up to the 2nd floor to get a Coke to have with his lunch on the 1st floor "then went outside to watch the P.Parade."! So, Hosty perjured himself to destroy Oswald's stunning alibi and FRAME an innocent man (innocent, at least, of shooting JFK from the 6th flr window - whether he was involved in the coup in some way - OR infiltrating it - I can't say; but he deserved the benefit of innocence until proven guilty - especially now that we know the lengths the FBI went to to FRAME him!). We finally have corroboration that he was framed, just as he loudly protested to the Press in the DPD hallway. "I'm just a PATSY!" and "I don't know what this is all about!" Hosty's handwritten notes were completely different from his typed notes, as were his and Bookhout's joint typed notes - which were the only interrogation notes to be entered into the official record.
Hosty's ACTUAL handwritten notes were deep-sixed for 56 years - and had it not been for Bart stumbling across them while going through thousands of previously unseen files copied by Malcolm Blunt at NARA and brought back to England, we would STILL not know about them! (IKYDK, Malcolm Blunt is a British physician, JFK researcher & author, of "The Devil is in the Details: Alan Dale with Malcolm Blunt on the assassination of President Kennedy".)
We owe a great thanks to Bart Kamp for finding this explosive document - and for his paradigm shifting book, "Prayer Man: More Than a Fuzzy Picture" (Oct 2023), and to his meticulous website Prayer-Man.com. See His Hosty page with the aforementioned notes highlighted in green (scroll down for those): http://www.prayer-man.com/fbi-ss/james-hosty/
Bart Kamp released the first draft of his paper “Anatomy Of The Second Floor Lunch Room Encounter" in Sept. 2016 - a precursor to his Oct 2023 book, Prayerman: More Than A Fuzzy Picture"). In Nov. that year he was awarded the JFK Lancer & Mary Ferrell Pioneer Award. Followed up, in April 2017, with the Excellence Award by the Dealey Plaza UK board. In Nov 2023 he presented the findings of his book at the Lancer Conference. I highly recommend watching his 2023 Lancer Prayer Man presentation: "JFK Assassination - Bart Kamp - Prayer Man - Lancer Conference Nov 19 2023" at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nd2lJ4Yef40
(Full disclosure: He cites me in his book and video for the identification work I did for him of the TSBD ladies in front of, and on, the steps.)
I previously attempted to respond to your inquiry regarding my mention of Hosty. I think somewhere along the line that the old rhetorical observation, how many angels can fit on the point of a pin, can be applied to the assassination. How many conspirators and cover-uppers can fit on the edge of a pin. Hosty may haver fulfilled his professional responsibilities regarding Oswald. Had the note left in the field office been as threatening as the secretary insinuated, I tend to feel Hosty and others would have begun on a serious investigation.
At this point in my viewpoint. the coverup of the assassination seems certain. The government insulates itself from criticism at the expense of truth. All governments probably always have and always will. I have backtracked in my accusations of rogue government agencies being responsible for the assassination and now feel other entities may likely be as responsible. But I absolve no one.
A lingering question to me is Ruth Paine's involvement because I do believe she had intelligence credentials. Was the site of the assassination (TSBD) selected before Oswald gained employment there or after? Paine could have been assisting the Oswald family but I've read that better employment offers were made for Oswald via Paine's phone but that Oswald was not alerted. I have assumed that Paine was more an observer of Oswald than a manipulator. She and her husband reportedly were recorded on the phone saying something to the effect "We both know who is behind it." I think Paine is more important than Hosty was.
I have attempted to reply to your Thanksgiving post from a half hour ago. Did it twice. I think there is a problem with the site. I can't tell if it went through but I doubt it.
There is the possibility that all you have pointed out again is 100% true. There is also a possibility it may be partially true but your work should be in the back of everyone's mind who is interested in the truth. Hosty may not be as complicit in anything as some students suggest.
Can you explain to me how Hosty may not be complicit in framing Oswald?
FYI something is a miss or a :"fowl", I mean it was Turkey day.
I can only get the most mundane comments to stick to the wall.
This results I assume from being on to something.
I'll take this as a backhanded compliment, I suppose.
Unlike the judiciary I'm not beholding to the National Security Complex.
Keep up the good fight and the good work, Jeff. Your efforts are much appreciated.
Yes indeed, I really recommend the class in Jan.
Great work, but I still do not believe Oswald was in Mexico City. Where are the photos and audio proof? Maybe he was being framed? I don't know, but until I see real evidence, I am not buying it.
One possibility is in Jeff's recent article on the whistleblower. There were at least 2 CIA officers who stated they had seen 2 pictures of LHO coming/going to the Soviet Embassy. Additional officials suspected they were kept in Win Scott's safe, which was confiscated by Angleton right after Scott's death. After Angleton's death, George Kalaris ordered 99% of Angleton's files destroyed. So the photos and tapes may have been destroyed. But the presence of surveillance during his visits is provable. Also, see Jeff's article on Andres Goyachenka (sp?) whose mother ran one of the Soviet surveillance cameras.
Something I never understood about Morley’s position on Goyachenka is that it presumes Goyachenka knew that the person she photographed was affirmatively Oswald. What if Goyachenka believed she photographed Oswald but in fact photographed someone else? And time had fuzzied her memory on what the person photographed looked like? So when she is saying she remembered photographing Oswald really just means she remembered photographing someone she believed was Oswald. Maybe I’m overestimating the potential for that, but I never found Goyachenka’s statement that she photographed Oswald as strong evidence that the person photographed was indeed Oswald.
If it were, then the reason for covering that up is either (a) fear that association between Oswald and the USSR about two months before assassination would heighten tensions between USA and USSR to dangerous levels (the innocuous explanation); (b) fear it would expose the CIA as failing to act on intelligence, undermining their ability to justify a big part of the entire reason the CIA exists; or (c) exposure of counterespionage operation.
I would say “disclosure of CIA covert op” as a fourth reason but the photo surveillance has been known for awhile now so it’s no longer a viable explanation. (a) is a shaky explanation because everything else we’ve done since shows deliberate intent to vilify USSR so Oswald’s connection therewith would support that vilifying objective. At this point (b) seems weak because we already know of many other CIA failures, although admittedly none as inflammatory as a failure leading to a U.S. president’s death. I’m enrolling in the class very interested in this. The main point I feel is regardless of the explanation we are so far removed at this point no explanation justifies continued secrecy.
Your analysis is similar to my own. I think there is more reason to think that Oswald wasn't there than he was. I would love to see Mr. Morley defend his acceptance of the Mexico trip. Perhaps he has done so already but I haven't been able to find that article.
One way to verify this is to track Oswald's movements after New Orleans.
Hoover told LBJ a day or so after the assassination he could not confirm photos or audio of LHO in Mexico City.
Really, I thought that was audio only. But even then that demonstrates something that is confirmed by other evidence, that SOMEONE was impersonating Oswald in multiple places at multiple times. ONLY an intelligence agency could or would do that.
Bottomline: I don't see much reason to believe Oswald was in Mexico. Indeed, I see more reasons to think he was not.
Great article Jeff. I enjoyed the class immensely. Hope to have more like it - more than just the Oswald File!!
Great summary of the course. Great course. I highly recommend. I found the LCIMPROVE cryptonym to be the most stunning point to come out of the work.
Its interesting to consider what's said in the last paragraph of this posting. Namely that the defenders of the Warren Report always have fallback positions when it comes to hard evidence that questions the official story. Its usually dismissed as incomplete, or misinterpreted, or just plain simple incompetence.
In other words, the Institution is given the benefit of the doubt, and their intentions are always considered honorable and benevolent.
This is not to say that there may have been incompetence or miscommunication regarding Oswald, but had this been the sole case, the Agency would have fessed up to it a long time ago. Indeed, the Intelligence establishment has in the past been quite forthcoming in revealing errors made during its history, some of which were quite embarrassing.
For example, the fake porn film mentioned in the article likely refers to a mid 1950s operation meant to incriminate visiting Indonesian President Sukarno, who himself had openly desired to meet and go to bed with Hollywood actress Marilyn Monroe. According to Bill Moyers in his 1980s documentary "The Secret Government", the Agency made a fake porn film with a Marilyn look alike and a male model made up to look like Sukarno. However, the quality of the film was amateurish and did not pass muster with the folks at CIA, so the project was shelved.
This is but one example of the numerous boo-boos that the Agency has made time and again, so much that my late Mother once said that CIA stands for "Clumsy Intelligence Agency". That said, while the Suits may be open about their mistakes, they will only rarely reveal their successes. Perhaps because the results are still with us today.
As always, great work Jeff. Your integrity, and intellectually probing approach to this national tragedy has been consistent and quite remarkable.
Good job Jeff! Is this class recorded? Happy to pay for it
one would assume that all of the most incriminating details of the event would have long since been destroyed (or at least "destroyed"), assuming such details were ever put to paper.
Some one offs!
-I’m struck how LHO is watched by both the CIA and the FBI. It leads me to wonder is there significant differences in the nature of surveillance, in each case, it feels like the CIAis is not sharing their direct surveillance but using the FBI like a babysitter role??
-this could be nothing but the police report in New Orleans does not note the I’d card related LHO and Defense industries but when arrested in Dallas he has it on him. What really is it, did this get him into places to be briefed by a handler or pick up messages. ?? Or work when he needs it. How does a Marxist , defector, pro Cuba kind of kid get one!,
On this day, 61 years later, my reflection turns to the class and the file.in my notes I refer to it as the active file and the”active kid”; there is in my mind no avoiding the overwhelming facts of serious CIA interest in LHO. This is no ordinary file, when I did regulatory oversite of major Canadian banks we watched for file like this to trace how far up the entities food chain went the interest. Here I’m very comfortable saying to the top echelons, right up to nov! The graph tells a lot combined with the numbers. A thought: for John, Margot, and Craig, (sorry if I missed anyone), have you thought of transactional analysis leading to a bubble chart. The many folks who signed for the file, each become a dot including who they report to, this can lead to a bubble, where’s the biggest bubble! JJ or—- I think there’s software that now does this
The file and class reminded me , we are still dealing with a twentyish old young man. He’s bright, he maybe on the edge of the spectrum, or it’s the dyslexic factor, but he’s capable of being in and out of the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War. Remarkable really. Learned fluent Russian, got into the Marines, read heavy books, it leads me to all that action around this file is how to use him effectively,he’s got a great trail to eventually infiltrate whatever, or become a patsy? He’s still a kid and proves it, all in the file-
Hints of a double life pros never make-
1.moscow embassy hints of deadheading combined with govt must get me out.
2.Nwe Orleans arrest- request for FBI, again hints of govt protection
3.no Markist wanting to impress whoever would have their pic taken in the back yard with The Daily Worker and socialist worker’s party magazine together! Ever! Oops
4.His behaviours re Marina combined with a Sal edgy nous would lead to how to get the most out of him without ever allowing him to fully join them.
Just some thoughts thanks
Bill
I wonder why the CIA would be so resolute in hiding their incompetence on this matter, but so forthcoming about crimes and incompetence during the Church hearings?
Once again, great work, Jeff, and to your intrepid students in the Oswald File class! I think the evident interest and/or monitoring of Oswald also
brings into relief my own recent research, which concerned the CIA connections of the men the Warren Commission contracted to work on both Oswald and Ruby's WC biographies. The latter speaks to the extent the CIA was involving itself (in a manner of speaking) in the official government response to the JFK assassination.
Check out the full story here at Substack:
https://open.substack.com/pub/kayej/p/cia-connected-dc-hospital-chief-advised?r=2t45z&utm_medium=ios
Dear Jefferson,
Your "What Jane Roman Said" colleague, John M. Newman (author of the 1995/2008 book "Oswald and the CIA"), has written in his 2022 book, "Uncovering Popov's Mole," that probable KGB "mole" Bruce Leonard Solie in the CIA's mole-hunting Office of Security not only sent (or duped his confidant, protégé, and mole-hunting subordinate, James Angleton, into sending) Oswald to Moscow in 1959 as an ostensible "dangle" in a planned-to-fail hunt for "Popov's Mole" (Solie) in the wrong part of the CIA, but arranged in advance for all incoming non-CIA cables on Oswald's defection to be routed to his office (the Security Research Staff -- where he was Deputy Chief) rather than to where they would normally go -- the Soviet Russia Division. Newman says Solie made those documents disappear into a "black hole" for at least six weeks (and some for years).
Newman's colleague, researcher Malcolm Blunt, says Solie tried to talk W. David Slawson into letting Yuri "The KGB Had Nothing To Do With Oswald In The USSR" Nosenko testify to the Warren Commission in April of 1964, just two months after the CIA had begun to seriously interrogate him, and that in the late 1970s Solie hid Office of Security files on Oswald from the Church Committee and the HSCA.
I think it's fascinating that you don't mention Solie in your article.
Why is that?
-- Tom
PS I forgot to mention that in a 10 September 2021 YouTube interview on the subject of "Yuri Nosenko and the JFK assassination," Blunt says Solie was "all over The Kennedy Investigation" and "all over Clay Shaw for Jim Garrison."
PPS I almost forgot -- Newman agrees with Tennent H. Bagley (who was Nosenko's primary case officer for five years and to whom Newman dedicated his book) that Solie "cleared" Nosenko in 1968 by giving him a bogus polygraph exam and writing a specious report.
Outstanding job Jeff. These are incredibly interesting times. The potential for getting at the truth in the near future is at least a possibility. The angle of covering up deep state incompetence is laughable. Sounds like a new misinformation/distraction effort. The exposure of such massive high level intelligence interest in LHO is stunning. Just how many citizens receive such attention? Just the chosen patsy? I believe Marina has backed away from the case after so long, but I wonder what she makes of the current situation and if anyone in the community has reached out to her. Or to Ruth Paine?